"Attenborough reveals creationist hate mail for not crediting God"

Sir David Attenborough has revealed that he receives hate mail from viewers for failing to credit God in his documentaries. In an interview with this week’s Radio Times about his latest documentary, on Charles Darwin and natural selection, the broadcaster said: “They tell me to burn in hell and good riddance.”

Telling the magazine that he was asked why he did not give “credit” to God, Attenborough added: “They always mean beautiful things like hummingbirds. I always reply by saying that I think of a little child in east Africa with a worm burrowing through his eyeball. The worm cannot live in any other way, except by burrowing through eyeballs. I find that hard to reconcile with the notion of a divine and benevolent creator.”

Attenborough went further in his opposition to creationism, saying it was “terrible” when it was taught alongside evolution as an alternative perspective. “It’s like saying that two and two equals four, but if you wish to believe it, it could also be five … Evolution is not a theory; it is a fact, every bit as much as the historical fact that William the Conqueror landed in 1066.”

Attenborough, who attended the Wyggeston Grammar School for Boys in Leicester in the 1930s, said he was astonished at manifestations of Christian faith.

“It never really occurred to me to believe in God - and I had nothing to rebel against, my parents told me nothing whatsoever. But I do remember looking at my headmaster delivering a sermon, a classicist, extremely clever … and thinking, he can’t really believe all that, can he? How incredible!”

In 2002, Attenborough joined an effort by clerics and scientists to oppose the inclusion of creationism in the curriculum of state-funded independent schools receiving private sponsorship, such as the Emmanuel Schools Foundation.

Telling the magazine that he was asked why he did not give “credit” to God, Attenborough added: “They always mean beautiful things like hummingbirds. I always reply by saying that I think of a little child in east Africa with a worm burrowing through his eyeball. The worm cannot live in any other way, except by burrowing through eyeballs. I find that hard to reconcile with the notion of a divine and benevolent creator.”

What does he mean by this?

*He means that because there is evil in the world (a worm that by design burrows through a human eyeball to live) it implies that an infinitely good God does not exist.

In making this statement, he underscores his ignorance of the following colossal Christian truths:*

Man is sinful by nature due to his freewill choice to turn away from God.

Love must be a free will gift God does not compel it.

Through suffering we have an opportunity for merit and a chance to grow closer to our God, who suffered more than us and was more righteous and more innocent even than a poor child.

Suffering and how we deal with it is a personal experience between man and God, so sentimentality over another’s suffering is not sufficient for metaphysical analysis.

The doctrine of original sin and the fall of man is also evidenced throughout history constantly and continually. This event also implied by scripture distorted the physical world, too:

cursed is the earth in thy work; with labour and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the days of thy life. 18 Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herbs of the earth. 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return.

*We were made for love, yet the world is darwinian survival of the fittest. In a real sense it is a proof that there is more to reality than what we see; our hearts, our ability to selflessly love point to a higher reality than one described by nature or Nature the television program. :wink: *

A thought experiment: If all men followed Christ in their hearts, in their words and in their deeds throughout history, what disease would have prevailed, what child would have gone without comfort? Rather than blaming God or nature for suffering, we should look to ourselves collectively.

I heard him say that once during an interview. He meant that he doesn’t believe in God because bad things happen to innocent people, and in this case he’s referring to a worm that causes blindness. Not only does it cause blindness but it appears to have no other way of existing except in the eyeball. He contrasts such an evil to those things which are beautiful and good in creation and which lead some people to conclude that God is good.

As he indicated, he was raised without faith in God. He is adding, that the bad things he has seen have confirmed his inability to believe in a loving and good God, in a benevolent Creator.
If God, then why…? It’s basically another question about the problem of evil in the world.

And apparently a lot of people who object to his voiced opinions send him hate mail.

I’m a bit confused. Where exactly do they want him to “credit God”?

Lol but this is really funny though, because ID/Creationism propagators have been claiming over & over that “oh this isn’t about God! ID =/ creationism. It’s not about religion!” & now those people are sending complaints about God…

Go figure…:shrug:

The ‘‘worm burrowing into the child’s eye’’ is the result of an infectious disease spread by a black fly (Onchocerchiasis).

Now, why does the existence of a disease mean God cannot exist?

He doesn’t mention that God has since given man the wisdom to treat this disease, does he? Does he possibly think that the wonderful hummingbird is likely to have evolved from the same bacteria that man is supposed to have evolved from billions of years ago…(silly).

l think it is an athiest man’s pride that makes him more willing to believe that all this wonders of nature are a chance occurence which has been slowly modified over time, than to believe that a God could have had the ability to create it all, something man cannot do. Accepting something greater than himself is too difficult for an athiest.

The devil’s sin was also pride…

When athiest man brings calamity on himself (eg sexually transmitted diseases and poor-hygiene related diseases) he blames God.

Exactly, man was given dominion over the earth. But that means we are responsible for seeing to the welfare of our brothers who are afflicted by disease, hurricanes, starvation, etc. God expects us to care for one another.

Because he, like many others, expect God to snap His divine finger and make everything in the world perfect for everyone. Basically, he thinks God should be a sugar daddy.

To me, the fact that he was never taught about God speaks volumes. These things that he is saying is simply the natural outcome of one without hope and faith. It is very easy to turn around and walk away from that child in East Africa; it takes much more to do something for him.

The retort is simpler than that. Ask Attenborough and his kind, why we aren’t in Heaven already? We were cast out of Eden because we disobeyed in order to know good and evil. The knowing of evil is not so much to understand it as to experience it. The physical universe is a place where things crash into each other with some things being destroyed in the process. Eden seemed to be a protected place as long as we obeyed. We got our wish. Now the likes of Attenborough mock God and whine about worms in children’s eyes. It is the proud atheist like Marx who attempts to know good and evil as if they understand everything in their futile attempts it to build godless totalitarian Babel states that have come and gone since the beginning of civilization. Attenborough will have his wish for eternity if he doesn’t change. It is very common for atheists of this type to claim with prideful disdain that they saw the ‘truth’ when they were very young. Which begs the question, when does our moral culpability begin?

Yes, l agree. The pride of the godless is their pitfall, to believe that they could possibly understand the whole world in its entirety, and pass judgement.
lt has become all too common for ‘‘elitist’’ members of the academia, especially here in England (Attenborough, Dawkins etc)to give, as they believe they represent the highest echelon of knowledge, their two cents and claim God cannot exist, but if he did, then He would be to blame for the evil in the world.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.