I think that by "parable of doubting Thomas", Dawkins meant that Thomas was doing the doubting, not others. It's like the "parable of blogging Mariano". (Congrats, by the way--just 17 more posts and God gives you the toaster oven.) It's strange that you would nitpick his syntax, since it is clear from his other quote that he knows the story, even if you think he misinterpreted it.And it's too bad that C.S. Lewis mistakenly thought that he had to give up his requirement for evidence to appreciate the wisdom of the world's religions. They do have a lot of things figured out--just not that part about God.
re: nitpicking syntaxReally. Its strange to see how some people think this issue can be decided on syntax. What's next, prove the existence of god by the rules of English grammar?
Shalom aleikhem.Kuhlmann;If you read my post here in which I present a fuller quote you will see that this is not nitpicking syntax but that he has no comprehension of the story of Thomas and I would imagine that you do not either or else you would rightly and admirably criticize his lack of knowledge.aDios,Mariano