A part of human nature is the mockery of those with whom we disagree, particularly when we find that disagreement especially distasteful. We call each other silly names, we make childish jokes, we even cuss each other out. Sadly, Christians are not immune to this particular sin. As I like to say, we do not immediately become Jesus upon conversion. It's a growing process. Thus, we, too, mock those we disagree with.
Of course, there is a time and a place for mockery in the Christian faith. But there is a major difference between, for example, a comedic example of reductio ad absurdum designed to show the folly of a particular idea, and the gratifying degradation of another fellow image bearer. The former has purpose, making the mockery entirely appropriate. But tell me, what purpose is there on turning "Richard Dawkins" into "Dick Dorkins"? Or, as I used to say, "Dr. Dicky Dawk"?
When I was young in body, mind, and faith, I had no difficulty mocking atheists. If you were an atheist, everything was fair game. If you were to pull up my social media comments from those days, I would hang my head in shame. But one day, I came across a screenshot of a tweet by Richard Dawkins. Directed at The New York Times, Dawkins had one simple request: "please stop calling me dick dorkins".
I have always felt convicted by that. My whole life, I have dealt with bullies. They've called me names, pushed me around, robbed me, even physically harmed me. But as I read that tweet, I realised actually, I had become the bully. I looked at this man and did not see a man, created in the image of God, but a fool who denied Him. The stupid names I called him did not serve any other purpose than to puff up my ego, as if I'd never believed similar things to him, and to tear him down, as if doing so would somehow make my own folly any better.
But seeing the tweet, I realised something I should have already known. He has feelings. And I contributed to hurting them. He has dignity, and I helped rob him of it. He has value, and by my actions, I denied it. I was a bully. The very thing I despised about school, and college after that, I had become outside, not only in the real world, but even far across it, for the internet can be accessed near enough everywhere.
Internally, I'd like to believe I have grown past that. I don't like to make fun of people's names anymore, and the only time I say something like Dicky Dawk is in the same context of this article. But though I have repented internally, I believe it might be beneficial to apologise publicly. Not that I believe Richard Dawkins ever even heard me, in particular, mock him, or that he will ever read this article. Nevertheless, I hope this article may encourage other Christians to repent, and refine their outreach strategies.
And so I say, to Richard Dawkins, I sincerely apologise for contributing to what is effectively bullying. I disagree with your beliefs, but I recognise your value as an individual, and it was wrong of me to detract from that. And to all atheists, whom in the past I may have offended with similar childishness, I sincerely apologise. To the Christians influenced by me, in person and online, I sincerely apologise for setting you a bad example. I sincerely, and publicly, apologise for using the most carnal weapon of all: The tongue.
"See how great a forest a little fire kindles! And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity. The tongue is so set among our members that it defiles the whole body, and sets on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire by hell. For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and creature of the sea, is tamed and has been tamed by mankind. But no man can tame the tongue. It is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so."
- James 3:5-10