Actually, yes, since Richard Dawkins and you clearly do NOT know the Bible or the God of the Bible. Please, if you are going to quote someone, at least quote someone who has a clue what they are talking about.
The God of the Bible is the same yesterday, today and forever. God's mercy and grace as well as His judgement and authority are clearly seen throughout creation as the Old and New Covenant Scriptures.
I was largely leaving this alone until I saw that.
So you support a god who endorses slavery and genocide (I could go on, but I will just use the two really easy examples)? Because if he is indeed the same then that is what he supported in the old testament. However if you want to play the "New Covenant" argument then that invalidates the same yesterday today and forever statement. You can't have it both ways, so which is it?
Or we can agree that the bible like most religious texts are nothing more than a work of man and as a whole inaccurate and generally worthless. Want to have faith in a spiritual diety? Sure I am good with that, but you might want to know just "what" you are believing in. This is why I said earlier that faith is fine, but using the bible as any form of factual reference isn't an acceptable argument. It has been translated too many times, too much stuff left out and generally is a completely contradictory mess that makes me wonder how anyone who has actually "Read" it could believe a word in it.