Hitler.

[Gofer Blue]

First of all, atheists don't have Messiahs. That is simply a contradiction in terms. Those who are interested in science (and which means truth) do not seek to follow a deity or human being as being the source of all truth and knowledge. In fact, any scientist worth his salt enjoys being wrong about something - as it meas that his or her knowledge expands. It's the total opposite of clinging onto unproven myths from thousand of years ago and which can never be proven or corroborated to a satisfactory degree for most people.
As for Dawkins stating that he is a 'cultural Christian' I think you need to listen to his explanation rather than perceive it as 'a delightful irony'. I am an atheist but can appreciate some of the cultural aspects of Christianity that surrounds us i.e. churches, various hymns, religious paintings etc - and it's all very familiar to me. Some non-Christians even go to Midnight Mass at Christmas purely for the enjoyment of it.

Similarly, I have hosted numerous Japanese people (both at home and regarding my work) who visit both a Shinto shrine and Buddhist temple every New Year's Eve (and who exchange presents at Christmas time). They have not been believers but they enjoy the cultural backcloth of their country and history.

Dawkins is an intelligent chap and probably brighter than those who misinterpret what he is saying.

The irony is that he effectively wishes that Christianity had been strangled at birth. If he had had his way there would be no churches, cathedrals, hymns, Christmas, Easter, or religious paintings for him (or you) to appreciate! Also what kind of society would we be living in now - something along the lines of the Roman empire perhaps. Uhm, not too appealing that!

Clearly Dawkins is a very intelligent chap but I do question whether he has seriously investigated the circumstances of the resurrection or if he has, perhaps dare not even alolow himself to think that it really might have happened? As he presumably would reject any narratives from the New Testament, then he would say that there is no evidence -end of discussion.

BTW I am a PhD scientist, and yes, during my career I have found that new scientific evidence has overturned my previous conclusions and I agree this is how scientific achievement develops of course. I came to faith through investigation into the resurrection of Jesus and I started off as a complete skeptic along the lines of Lee Strobel or Frank Morrison. I do not reject the New Testament as evidence because I always have to come back to the question - why? Why would anyone write accounts of such an event other than their lives were completely turned around as a result, and indeed they risked their very own lives when trying to share the news with others. Many were martyred. Would they really do this based on a fantasy?