Quote of the day
posted at 10:06 pm on January 26, 2007 by Allahpundit
“Atheism is in trouble. Bestselling atheist spokespeople have gotten bad reviews in the New York Times and the London Review of Books. Why? Because their arguments are intellectually weak and intolerant. Where they once were just condescending, they are now hostile and vaguely hysterical. They are atheist fundamentalists. Just as scary — and unconvincing — as the religious fundamentalists who preach the fire and brimstone.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
“The slow boat to the center-right” is right on schedule.
Kid from Brooklyn on January 26, 2007 at 10:09 PM
why wont you let me post the ascii kp?
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 10:13 PM
I don’t know any practicing atheists.
bloggless on January 26, 2007 at 10:23 PM
Kinda sounds like college students.
joeswampy on January 26, 2007 at 10:24 PM
or aging hippies.
Speaking of KP, well not really, but whatever happened to RealVerse?
reaganaut on January 26, 2007 at 10:26 PM
Ahem.
Allahpundit on January 26, 2007 at 10:27 PM
that gets a response. a direct inquiry gets nothing. i don’t need a picture drawn for me.
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 10:30 PM
I am an Athiest because God told me to be one.
JayHaw Phrenzie on January 26, 2007 at 10:33 PM
if you were to draw a picture for me, i’d crumple it up and toss it right in your face. and snort derisively.
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 10:34 PM
There’s atheist and antitheist.
The latter are annoying.
harrison on January 26, 2007 at 10:34 PM
i’m a teethist, which is different from dentistry. i swear.
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 10:37 PM
Only in America.
We are such a religious country that even our atheists possess dogmatic fervor.
billy on January 26, 2007 at 10:40 PM
What ever happened to just plain old agnosticism? Can’t I sit on the fence and just shrug my shoulders and put my hands up and not feel like an alien?
thelinyguy on January 26, 2007 at 10:40 PM
i’m a teethist, which is different from dentistry. i swear.
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 10:37 PM
Does that mean your Antidentite!
sonnyspats1 on January 26, 2007 at 10:42 PM
Sounds exactly like the Democratic party.
Gregor on January 26, 2007 at 10:46 PM
Atheism’s not in trouble.
Alex K on January 26, 2007 at 10:48 PM
“I don’t know any practicing atheists.”
I thought that was the point of atheism … you know, not practicing … anything.
darwin on January 26, 2007 at 10:48 PM
Seriously. She thinks our arguments are weak and intolerant?
Allahpundit on January 26, 2007 at 10:49 PM
I thought that was the point of atheism … you know, not practicing … anything.
darwin on January 26, 2007 at 10:48 PM
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 10:51 PM
…AGE INNAPROPRIATE ENJOYMENT OF ANIMATED SHORTS, BIZZARRE RITUALS WITH HALVED TWO-LITER SODA BOTTLES AND SINKFULLS OF WATER…
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 10:55 PM
Allahpundit, who exactly are you? I am relatively new to this board and have seen your name bantered about. I have yet to figure out your connection to this board. I assume you practice atheism.
bloggless on January 26, 2007 at 10:55 PM
Just think of me as sort of a super-commenter.
Allahpundit on January 26, 2007 at 10:57 PM
Okay, who drew the short straw, and has to break the news to Enrique?
ReubenJCogburn on January 26, 2007 at 10:57 PM
i used to think you were super.
used to.
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 10:58 PM
Seriously. She thinks our arguments are weak and intolerant?
Allahpundit on January 26, 2007 at 10:49 PM
Allah , I’m curious are a crowbar or ball bat man? I’m a faith man myself. I was told I only need to know one thing about God, I ain’t him!
sonnyspats1 on January 26, 2007 at 10:59 PM
are you the God of Atheism?
bloggless on January 26, 2007 at 11:02 PM
AllahP and Bryan must have, or had, some interesting conversations about religion. Being that Bryan was raised Baptist and is a believer, and AllahP has always obviously not been since way back when I’d been reading AP’s blog before HotAir & since he came to HotAir, I wonder what those conversations were/are like.
SilverStar830 on January 26, 2007 at 11:03 PM
No such animal.
Kid from Brooklyn on January 26, 2007 at 11:03 PM
“yea there is.”
“no there isn’t.”
“yea there is.”
“no there isn’t.”
“yea there is.”
“no there isn’t.”
“when a tree falls in the woods does it make a sound?”
“totally.”
(handshake)
jummy on January 26, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Every atheist I’ve argued with acts like they’ve got this obtrusive containment agenda, where those on the fence have to hear why we’re so backward and intolerant. For those of us solidly religious, any positive mention of religion to those on the fence and we’re cast as evil missionaries attemtping to convert.
Free Constitution on January 26, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Isn’t atheism its own religion, its god being godlessness? With apologies to Muhammad Ali, no atheist ever tried to chop my head off.
Kid from Brooklyn on January 26, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Actually, Bryan and I have only met a couple of times. When we do chat, it’s usually work related.
Religious debates are pointless, especially with friends. No one’s going to persuade anyone, so why bother?
We have had some interesting chats about his time in Japan, though. I should prod him to write about it.
Allahpundit on January 26, 2007 at 11:06 PM
Because there is no such thing as a true atheist; everybody practices something.
Whatever one values the most is what they worship; whatever one places their faith in defines their religion. It may be a religion of one. Maybe one person placing their faith in themselves, or money, or politics, or law, or a tree in their back yard.
The fact that atheist dogma is intellectually weak and intolerant is well known. Just hasn’t been PC to say so in the public forum. The fact that the NYT and London Review are acknowledging such just shows that the atheist phenomenon is finally running its course.
Lawrence on January 26, 2007 at 11:09 PM
If Bryan was stationed at Kadena, I can only imagine. :P
Kid from Brooklyn on January 26, 2007 at 11:09 PM
AP is one of those atheist types? Well no wonder.
The pro-North American Union stance…
It all makes sense
Also, completely off topic, it is Australia Day:
Enjoy: LINK
billy on January 26, 2007 at 11:13 PM
Heh. So this was an ironic quote-of-the-day? We’ve all grown up so much since the “mission accomplished” days…
Alex K on January 26, 2007 at 11:18 PM
Unless your real name is Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris, she didn’t say a thing about any of *your* arguments, AP.
Don’t worry, though–some atheists are still merely condescending.
Anwyn on January 26, 2007 at 11:19 PM
Christianity and atheism can co-exist. I myself went from Christian to athiest to Christian (if that makes any sense). Democracy and fascism cannot co-exist for any long period of time ever. This war is really a continuation of World War II and the Cold War. Totalitarianism must be constantly fought until it is eliminated completely.
aengus on January 26, 2007 at 11:23 PM
No kidding. You haven’t lived until you’ve seen an underendowed sailor get laughed off the stage at the Mercury Lounge by 400 drunken GIs of all makes and services.
Kid from Brooklyn on January 26, 2007 at 11:29 PM
Besides, Alex K, she’s saying atheism is in trouble for convincing people that it’s true. I doubt she means atheists are converting right and left.
Anwyn on January 26, 2007 at 11:29 PM
No, no irony. Her point about shrill, evangelical atheists is well taken. They annoy me, too. In much the same way as libertarians, actually: they have the better of the argument, but they’re so personally obnoxious that I hate having to agree with them.
I tossed this one up because she’s taking a bit of a risk as a leftist going after the orthodoxy on her side and deserves some encouragement for it. Plus, I do enough good-natured tweaking of Christians around here that you guys deserve an atheist-bashing thread now and then.
Allahpundit on January 26, 2007 at 11:30 PM
Allah’s good-natured?
Anwyn on January 26, 2007 at 11:34 PM
:)
Anwyn on January 26, 2007 at 11:35 PM
Indeed!
Lawrence on January 26, 2007 at 11:39 PM
Commenters around here are good at making the thread bash what they want. Every time you go all contrary we can expect a tide of comments the other way.
Incidentally, libertarians, as opposed to conservatives, have the better argument in the magical world where all people are disposed and indepentent enough to be libertarians. In the real world, people need authority and boundaries and groups and such. Unlike atheism, libertarianism is in trouble.
Alex K on January 26, 2007 at 11:40 PM
So what would one call an intolerent, evangelical atheist actively working to impose his beliefs on others? Atheistas?
I’m sure Sam Harris would know.
JaHerer22 on January 26, 2007 at 11:47 PM
blogless,
AllahPundit — AP — is the driving force behind this web site, and moderates our shrill, intolerant Christianist comments, having no fear of God.
Heh.
Jaibones on January 27, 2007 at 12:03 AM
Did you hear they are making a holiday movie for atheists?
It’s called “The Coincidence on 34th Street.” /rimshot
that’s the only atheist joke I know…
Mallard T. Drake on January 27, 2007 at 12:06 AM
No point in bashing atheists AP, we just gotta pray for ‘em. Guess I’ll add a couple more to my list…
serenity on January 27, 2007 at 12:07 AM
A poster read: “God is dead” – Nietzsche. The graffiti underneath read: “Nietzsche is dead” – God.
EnochCain on January 27, 2007 at 12:10 AM
Happenstance.
Alex K on January 27, 2007 at 12:10 AM
So if AllahPundit keeps practicing atheism, will he eventually get any better at it? And if he gets better at it, does that mean he’ll be like Marx, or Lenin, or Stalin, or Mao? Or will he simply end-up like Enrique?
(Please don’t ban me.)
CyberCipher on January 27, 2007 at 12:10 AM
>no atheist ever tried to chop my head off.
Apparently you never lived in the Soviet Union, Communist China, Cambodia, Vietnam, Cuba…
Doghouse on January 27, 2007 at 12:16 AM
Is anyone really an atheist anymore? I mean, since Darwin gave us Blind Random Chance as the great creative power on Earth, shouldn’t anyone who both denies the existence of God and believes in Evolution be called a “chance-ist” or “probablist”?
Just a thought…
Lancer on January 27, 2007 at 12:18 AM
I don’t know if I’d call her a “leftist” – she tends to lean right on many issues. Sometimes I wonder if she’s a conservative spy in libland.
Rick on January 27, 2007 at 12:26 AM
Those are fighting words, AP.
Rick on January 27, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Mallard, thank you for the joke!
Here’s a quote from Malcom Muggerige:
“There is no new news-just old news happening to new people.”
Doug on January 27, 2007 at 1:41 AM
HA staff is so diverse, effective and liberal, in the true sense of the word – the State Dept. could use the group with help in the Middle East and other complex world hot-spots.
Would provide better communication too.
Entelechy on January 27, 2007 at 1:42 AM
OK, AP, that’s it. If you’re going to go all good-natured on all of us Christofascists, I’m quitting.
I come here for the abuse, dammit. ;-)
Misha I on January 27, 2007 at 3:22 AM
Best to be a wishy-washy agnostic. They’re as scary as cold porridge.
shaken on January 27, 2007 at 4:43 AM
I find zero value in bashing those whom I pity. At least now I know why you keep Soothsayer around.
Sign outside an atheist’s funeral:
All dressed up and nowhere to go.
Freelancer on January 27, 2007 at 6:54 AM
I am a dyslexic, insomniac, agnostic so I stay awake all night wondering if there really is a dog!
LonelyMassRepublican on January 27, 2007 at 7:33 AM
atheist = one who is absolutely certain of the non-existence of the absolute.
mbredmond on January 27, 2007 at 7:59 AM
Woah-boy…now we’ve mixed politics and religion…
I’m just glad that as a conservative movement we are far more tolerant of people, both Christian and Non, than the left.
Viewtifulgare on January 27, 2007 at 9:04 AM
It does not take a genius to recognize the places in the world with at least a historical rooting in the judeo-christian value system function at a much higher level than those that do not. I guess Jesus was such a smart guy, he came up with the best formula for humanity all on his own.
I have an athiest friend who says he’d believe if God came here and showed himself to him. I say he already did once. He doesn’t have to make a special trip for you. You have to make a special trip for Him….called life.
Buck Turgidson on January 27, 2007 at 9:34 AM
Atheist to G-d: I don’t believe in you!
G-d to atheist: That’s ok, I don’t believe in you either :)
Lord Nazh on January 27, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Hehehehe…reminded me of this…extremely hillarious
lsutiger on January 27, 2007 at 11:06 AM
Buck,
It appears that people do not see that through before making such a specious comment about Judeo-Christian influence being the most influential agent in human rights, prosperity, etc.
Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Argentina, Russia, Hungary, Poland, and on and on and on, currently, and historically, have been Christian, yet the people live or lived in poverty, oppression, and under abuse.
Throughout history people lived in squalor and were submissive to intolerance and submission and a large portion of those areas are influenced by Judeo-Christian thought.
The United States and Great Britain are about the sole remaining bastions of Judeo-Christian influence which actually enjoy civil liberties, respect for all, and prosperity, but Great Britain is going the way of Eurabia, which is a predominantly secularist society now, with empty churches, many of which have been converted into Mosques, as Islam is replacing the vacuum left by secular society and values (Values? Secular society has values? Not!) and a dearth of the value in marriage, children, and the family is leaving Europe without a replacement society and hence immigrants are replacing European, one time Judeo-Christian society with Islam, both by physically immigrating to Europe, replacing Europe’s own population, and also by out reproducing Europeans, who are having less than replacement reproductive rates.
Many of the societies which show the most devout Christian populace are governed by oppressive, dishonest governments. Venezuela is another prime example in which Hugo Chavez, a crazy, loud mouthed Communist and agitator, has been reelected. Cuba is another. The list goes on and on of those countries and societies in which the people are very religious but are living under oppression, poverty, lack of prosperity, and so on, all Judeo-Christian societies.
Buck,
I do not find your argument convincing at all.
Jesus did not show himself to your athiest friend. Your friend has a good point. It would be helpful if God revealed Himself.
Nevertheless, if Jesus was God incarnate, then you can see from history itself that Jesus was largely ignored. People were interested in his miracles and healing themselves of their children, but not in following Him. It was after Jesus was here that the religion of Christianity flourished to the extent that it did, and the disagreement as to what Jesus wanted also flourished, as He was not here to correct his “followers” when they misunderstood or when they made up their own ideas.
If God was here as Jesus and people still did not recognize Him, how can you fault people alive today for not having strong faith when they have to believe stories and what others tell them, but they have not met Jesus face to face, or God face to face?
Also, the default position that Chrisitans perpetuate is that all have sinned and are, by default, damned to eternal damnation of the burning flames and torments of hell, never to be with God for all eternity unless they accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior, who bought our salvation by His blood.
That’s nice, don’t you think?
And people are supposed to be expected to love God and think of God, and Jesus, as merciful, loving, and caring for his creation, and His pinacle of creation, human beings when they are automatically going to hell as the default position and for choosing what was behind door number 2, or door number 3, instead of door number 1?
William
William2006 on January 27, 2007 at 11:15 AM
William, you’re right. We live in a fallen world. Jesus never promised utopia in this life. Concepts of sinfulness and redemption & why they exist are hard to understand for most people including myself. You and I did not get to create the world in a way that makes sense to us. If you had created heaven and earth, your opinion would carry more weight with me. Your argument implies the need for more Christianity, not less. I’d love to go on but I have to prepare 10 pieces of worship music for a couple hundred people who choose not to ignore Jesus message this weekend. You are free to believe and say what you want. I’ll say a prayer for you.
Buck Turgidson on January 27, 2007 at 12:26 PM
What it is, is perfectly fair to every single individual of any “race”, creed, religion on earth. No one has an advantage over the next,no one has more value in God’s eyes than another. A poor person has the equal opportunity as a rich person, a foreigner equal to a native, a woman equal to a man. A free gift has been offered, it is up to the free will of the individual to accept it or not. The alternative is indeed mentioned, to alert the individual that sin has brutal consequences – that one cannot go on and on and not expect to be held accountable some day. The message is very clear, too. God wants fellowship with his people, and desires that no one be cast into the fire to be away from Him. That is why He went through all the trouble, the pain and the death to make a payment for all, but it is up to the individual to choose. The free choice is cosmically important – for example, which is better, an army of conscripts who do not want to be there or an army of volunteers, who understand the stakes?
Examine all other religions – not a one is as equally open to all seekers. Is it a surprise that say, many out of the Untouchables caste of India found dignity and worth as Christians, when they were made worthless, and all their generations, to be despised by their neighbors? Can you imagine being born into a family who are spurned, and often violently by all of society – stuck to be the offal cleaners – your own clothes that cover you would be burned if they were to touch another upper caste, and that person would have to be ritually cleansed for days to wipe your touch off him? The emphasis on American “self-esteem” is a pathetic joke compared to what is done against these people’s spirits every day.
America has become very easy for many people – there is no cowering in your shack, fearful of invading hordes, being dragged away in the middle of the night, being part of a procession to bring offerings to the idol, having fear that if you said the wrong word at the wrong time that the capricious spirits will bring ruin on your head. How many people in America have a knock on the door and are informed by their neighbors that if you don’t pay up, they will get the witch to caste a spell on your sweet innocent baby?
These things are going on right now – and worse. A little brute exposure to man’s inhumanity to man makes one appreciate much more profoundly that Christianity is not the mush on the TV, but a wildly radical and liberating thing. The Ten Commandments are universal – every single man and woman on the planet of any culture understands the truth and sense of them. Can you read them and quibble? They are summed up in the two: Love God and love your neighbor as your yourself. Even the aethiests depend on the commandmants to get through the day, every day, without wanting to accept from Whom they came.
naliaka on January 27, 2007 at 12:54 PM
Aw c’mon, name one person.
Enrique on January 27, 2007 at 1:00 PM
Most atheists that I know don’t disbelieve the existence of God. They know God exists, and they hate His guts.
spmat on January 27, 2007 at 1:31 PM
William, I understand exactly where you are coming from and had ALL of these same questions myself before becoming a Christian. I believe that if we truly in our hearts want to find God, he will reveal himself:
I also believe that a lot of people “seeking God” are really seeking for a version of God that is acceptable to them and who will not cramp their lifestyle. When their search comes up short (because in reality they are searching for a version of God that does not exist) they say there is not God or that God can not be known. The truth is that creation itself is evidence of God:
Also keep in mind the following verse:
God is not some kind of spiritual rapist who will force himself on you. Every one has the choice to accept him or reject him and he will honor your decision. Can you imagine hating God all your life and being FORCED to worship him forever?
Per my comment above, he will show the correct door to those who sincerely want to find him. You are fortunate to live in a country where you have access to the Gospel anytime. You have all the resources that everyone else has. In other countries, people die for this knowledge.
Wow, this is getting a bit long and the above is just an abbreviation of the answers out there. If you are sincerly interested in having your questions answered, I would recommend two books by Lee Strobel: “The Case for Christ” and “The Case for Faith”
jman on January 27, 2007 at 1:31 PM
An honest question to all of the Atheists:
Where does morality come from and what purpose does it serve if this life is all there is? How does morality fit in with “survival of the fittest”?
jman on January 27, 2007 at 1:40 PM
Sure you can sit on the fence, but you lose rationality.
To say that you know that you do not know is irrational. The Law of the Excluded Middle applies to both soft agnostics and hard agnostics.
Tim Burton on January 27, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Are you confusing Theology and Atheism with Darwinism and the Theories (Yes, theories, spelled T-h-e-o-r-i-e-s) of evolution-evolutionism?
Don’t forget, Christians believe in the Darwinism-evolutionism. Darwinism-evolutionism is not the sole turf of Atheists, and it is not confirmed that all Atheists believe in Darwinism-evolutionism.
Regarding the question of “where does morality come from.” That is a good question.
Christianity is founded on Judaism. The old Testament is rife with harsh treatment of people under the religious law. If some of those harsh treatments were carried out today in our society, who would not condemn those treatments as excessively harsh and who would not claim that the treatment is immoral?
Here is a list of questions that you must answer for yourself:
1) Is abortion moral or immoral? Why? Does it condemn abortion in Christian scripture?
2) Is homosexual behavior moral or immoral? Why?
3) Is prostitution immoral? Why?
4) Is setting up an artificial “balance” so that certain persons in society are given special preferences and special treatment over others, as in affirmative action programs, welfare programs, special consideration toward college admissions based on the color of one’s skin or one’s claimed racial ancestry, or one’s sex, or preferences for college grants to those of certain races or skin color moral?
5) Is use of drugs or alcohol moral or immoral?
6) What is the difference between moral and legal, vs immoral and illegal?
7) Christians quote Matthew’s gospel to teach that if a man lusts after a woman, then in his heart he has committed adultery. How can the human race follow the command to “be fruitful and multiply” if men and women do not feel sexual attraction and sexual urges to for the opposite sex and how is it a sin for a man to want to have sex with a woman?
8) Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Jains, Ba’hais, and others, have been dominated, coerced, and butchered by Muslims yet many Christians condemn war against Muslim Jihadis and actually interfere with US security by harboring illegal invaders-immigrants, and by siding with Muslims claiming that Islam is a religion of peace and we must all show love, thus putting the rest of the population in grave danger. Is this moral or immoral?
9) Christians like to rebuke those who think and find it difficult to buy that God is merciful when Christians tell that all are going to hell unless they believe in Jesus and follow the religion of Christianity. Hindus, Jains, Ba’hais, Jews, Sikhs, and others, such as those who follow the teachings of Gurus, Yogis, etc., all have deep faith in God and great love for God and experience great joy in their lives.
The Christian scripture teaches that one must not judge lest they be judged. Do Christians really believe that God, who is all merciful and all loving, has sent these people here with the default direction of going to hell right at birth, but that He ignores their deep love and devotion to Him merely because they don’t call themselves Christians? Do people think such a belief by Christians, judging those who love God but not via Christian dogma, thus judging, against Christian scriptural tenets, is moral or immoral?
Just a few questions.
William
William2006 on January 27, 2007 at 2:07 PM
William,
I just wanted to briefly address one of your points:
I think this is because there was a concerted effort made by many citizens to actually inculcate principles of Scripture regarding justice (because right and wrong apply to all: lex rex, the law is king–see Samuel Rutherford’s work–a Christian, BTW, rather than rex lex, the king is the law) and the worth of each individual (because each was made in God’s image) into the political and social fabric of the countries.
By way of example I give you William Wilberforce, a devout Christian, who worked for almost 50 years to get the slave trade and then slavery itself abolished. His Christian faith gave him both the vision and the perseverance for this long and arduous work.
BTW, when looking at Wikipedia to doublecheck my memory for the length of time of his efforts, I also just learned that he was a founding member of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (now the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals). Another example of how a Christian committed to living out God’s ways is a benefactor to all.
INC on January 27, 2007 at 2:24 PM
“jaman,”
Have you not thought this through?
Do you not see the lack of logic in your statement?
God IS forcing himself on each and every one of us. In fact, this “merciful” and “loving” God has put everyone here on earth with the default position of being sinners (even babies!) and headed directly for Hell.
Can’t you see how crappy that is, right form the start?
To believe that a loving father condemns his children to eternal suffering and separation for all eternity as the default position, as a “birthday present” is creepy and does not make one willing to get down on your knees and be grateful except to avoid further punishment, and except out of terrible fear of a powerful tyrant who can tinker with your life and hurt you anytime he wishes, and who already condemns those he “Loves” to Hell!
Although men and woman have been known to marry a person sight unseen, and with little to no introduction, you’ve got to admit that it is rather unfair to expect people to believe in God if they don’t experience Him for themselves.
What Christian dogma expects of people is that they just believe, sight unseen, for no other reason than that they are already going to hell, but default of birth.
People did not do anything to become condemned other than being born, and if they don’t “believe” in a really far fetched story, one never experienced directly by us of a phenomenon of a person we never met being tortured to death then rising from the dead, and that is supposed to prove everything, then they are going continue their trip to Hell, a trip they never really asked for.
When a man and a woman meet, they get a chance to know one another, to feel something for one another. When friends meet, before they are friends, they get a chance to meet, to know each other, to become friends with one another. You say that without meeting God, without knowing God, people are supposed to blindly accept dogmatic, scriptural based precepts, and those which the believers disagree with themselves, otherwise they have blown it.
Don’t you think that God is more fair than that, or do you think that God is the harsh, fire and brimstone, ruthless bully so often exhibited in the Old Testament?
William
William2006 on January 27, 2007 at 2:24 PM
William,
I was writing my comment above and only just saw your latest when I posted mine. I must run now, but I may add some things later to your questions if I am able and others have not already answered, although it was not addressed to me.
INC on January 27, 2007 at 2:29 PM
William, my question was an honest one and applies BOTH to Darwinism AND atheism. I did not mean to assert that all atheist believe in evolution and no Christians do. The fact that neither of atheism or evolution could adequately explain morality was a major factor in causing me to research and choose Christianity.
You need to read the Old Testament in context of the new.
Regarding all of the questions you posed, I can say that God is our Father and his rules are meant to instruct and protect us. The answer to questions 1,2,3 and 5 is that all of these are immoral. Any human parent would not want these things for their children, so why would God want them for his?
I used to believe that all paths lead to heaven and that the truth could not be known. I also thought the Christians were arrogant in saying theirs was the only way.
Since then I have realized that I was the one who was being illogical and arrogant.
1. How can all paths lead to heaven? Some say there is a heaven, some say we are reborn and others that we are snuffed out. How can all be true? They can all be wrong, but all be true.
2. By me saying that the truth can not be known and that all paths lead to heaven, I was doing the very thing that I accused the Christians of. I was making a “Truth Statement” and essentially saying tha all Christians were wrong and my truth was right. What is the difference? The difference was that I based my truth on ignorence and what I wanted to believe was true instead of searching for the it.
Sencerity of belief does not equal truth. 2+2=4. If someone says it is 3, no matter how much they believe it is 3, they are still incorrect.
jman on January 27, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Where does the bible say babies go to hell?
This is exactly what a relationship with god is. It grows over time.
I would not suggest believing in anything blindly.
The Old Testament can not be taken independently of the new.
jman on January 27, 2007 at 3:05 PM
William, may I ask if you are an atheist? You posts tend to focus on the fault you find in Christianity, but if you are an Atheist I would be interested in knowing why what you believe is true. I’m not being judgemental, but am sincerely interested in how people can substantiate that there is no god.
jman on January 27, 2007 at 3:12 PM
William,
It’s easy to differentiate between those who claim they are Christians who are truly living with God’s spirit and those who are posturing. In fact, it’s one of the Biblical instructions – to test the preachings against the Word and make sure they are in harmony. Life is heaps of phony interpretations by opportunists, the individual must read and understand what is written so one isn’t fooled.
You’ve listed quite a few things, which are all questions which can be answered, and quite a few will try to help you, but for brevity, let’s look at one:
Regarding hell and punishment, you must consider for a moment the amount of time devote Hindus and Buddhists or say, African spiritists, spend DAILY on preparing and giving offerings to their idols. These offerings are payments for sin. These people have very high awareness of the concept of sin, that they are imperfect and fall short of God and salvation. They feel it keenly, are frightened by it and are moved to present payments that they hope will to pay for the hope of salvation. This is very serious business, people will kill if they believe an offering was defiled in some way. Their salvation is at stake.
In this case, a bit of travel is useful, to really understand how people really worship, not the glitzed up, fuzzy, dumbed down versions presented here in the States. For example much of Buddhism’s striving for a transcendental state is to block out the disturbing reality of strife and sin. So, the concept of hell and punishment and redemption is not at all a subject or interpretation limited to Christianity. It’s universal. What Christianity offers is peace – an unshaking redemption based on a gift, not a series of works, unending levels of offerings, uncertainty of salvation based on social level. People the world over have a deep-seated uneasiness that their works, their duties, their offerings are never quite enough to save themselves.
As far as who God saves? He is a just God, as in justice. Pure justice. If we say, “Why did God not save that one?” and then God were to show us what was in that man’s heart, we would all say, “Ah. Now we understand.” The same would be for those He keeps. We may say, “How did that loser get in?” C.S. Lewis said once that the cranky personality of one fellow may be simply from a liver ailment, whereas a well-considered person was generous without ever being inconvenienced,and never showed to the world how stingy he would be if he’d had to make a real sacrifice. Liberal Humanism is the odd-ball in the world, denying sin and offering psychoanlysis to help the people struggling with the “guilt”.
naliaka on January 27, 2007 at 3:18 PM
BTW
This is superficially correct. The underlying truth is that pagan idol worship and spiritism runs people’s daily lives, with a thin veneer of Christianity over it. When push comes to shove, these people get the sacrificial offerings. They have not made the profound conversion that is asked of them and continue to practice witchcraft and spiritism secretly.
naliaka on January 27, 2007 at 3:42 PM
Superb responses by both naliaka and jman to William’s questions. I applaud you both. I’d just like to remind William of a few of additional things:
1) God doesn’t SEND people to hell, people CHOOSE to go there of their own free will. And I am astonished at how many are DETERMINED to go there. Jesus reminds us that the path to salvation is a “narrow gate” — and few people find it.
2) From a period of time nearly 1000 years before Jesus appeared on the scene, the Bible has taught us that God judges people on the truth that they HAVE (and what they do with that truth during their lifetimes). I can show you passages in the writings of Soloman and elsewhere in the Old Testament that indicate or suggest this. I reject your notion that God is somehow unfair.
3) Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would lead (not everyone, but) his followers into ALL truth. I offer western civilization (the scientific/technical progress of western Europe and the U.S.) as a small portion of this truth (that Jesus spoke of) that might be acceptable as evidence (at least to a secular individual) that His words ring true. In my mind, there are spiritual truths that are vastly MORE important than the business of harnessing and subduing nature (the progress that I have mentioned), but secular people usually dismiss spiritual truths at the outset as unverifiable. Since William seems to be fond of rhetorical questions (which seem to have no right answer), answer me this: “Why is it that the scientific progress of ALL of the other regions/cultures in the world (besides western Europe and the U.S.) COMPLETELY and UTTERLY pale in significance compared to the progress that has been brought about by the industrial revolution and western civilization?” No doubt, you will argue that Christianity had nothing to do with this. You’d be wrong (again). I am enough of a student of history to know what I am talking about here.
3) William presents a long numerical list of “moral dilemmas” that are frequently cited by atheists, agnostics, and other secular people as “proof” of the “unreasonableness” of God’s position. And, of course, admittedly, even Christians themselves (collectively) do not all agree on what the correct answers are to some of these questions. Which, of course, proves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
William I enjoy your comments/posts, and without a doubt you are probably more well read and better informed on matters of the current events and the geo-political state of affairs around the world than I am. No matter. I have not spent my lifetime training in these matters. I AM, however, something of an expert in the technical disciplines. I can throw up mathemetical puzzles for you that would completely baffle the vast majority of the readship here at HotAir. Better than 95% of our participants here would not be able to deliver the correct answer to my mathematical challenges. If we were to take a vote, the answer that would come back from our electorate would overwhemingly indicate that either 1) there is no correct answer to CyberCipher’s challenge (it is unsolvable), or 2) that are many viable solutions to CyberCipher’s mathematical challenge. This second “many solutions” position is the doctrine of “shades of grey” morality that is SO pervasive in our society, and that is continually “pedaled” by the atheists and their ilk. (I am talking about moral relativism and situation ethics here.) But, of course, 95% (or more) of the people would be EXACTLY WRONG. Because, there IS, of course, one and only one correct answer to my mathematical challenge. Just because the majority of people do not know the correct answer to a moral dilemma, THAT does NOT mean that there is NO correct answer. This is why we have to be carefull about the whole concept of democracy. Democracy and/or representave government is NOT a panacea. The “will of the people” can just as easily bring on calamity for all of us, as it can solve problems. History is repleat with examples of this.
I could go on-and-on mercilessly (ad nauseum) on this topic, but this is probably neither the place or the time. The are many Christian folk here among the readership that can refer you to good literature. jman cited an excellent text. ALL of Lee Strobel’s stuff is good material for someone interested in Christian apologetics.
CyberCipher on January 27, 2007 at 3:48 PM
What is even funnier is that atheists seem intent on disproving something they supposedly don’t believe in.
Why try so hard to do that?
also,
If you think about it really hard, this could also apply to most of the so-called civilized modern world as well.
After all, it is said that nam cannot serve two masters, but most try to serve at least that many.
Emmett J. on January 27, 2007 at 3:53 PM
CyberCipher
Thanks. Apart from all the other good points you made, you rebutted the concept that God made us sinners. Seconding that: That’s right. He did not. When the world was made, there was no sin. It was all good. Sin entered after, the act of disobedience. Death was the penalty. So death entered after as well, on the heels of sin. Humanism teaches that death is a normal part of life, but the Judeo-Christian teaching is that death is the enemy of life. That so many billions of people through history and today, have trouble accepting death should be a broad hint that maybe it isn’t as natural as we are being conditioned to believe.
Emmett J. A pastor once said that every church is made up of a small group of committed Christians, a larger group of nominal Christians and the rest of the congregation are just happy pagans. That’s the church, but it’s true for the world as a whole. I tell this frequently to the kids to remind them that people, even in the church can fail us, so they shouldn’t be devastated if it happens. They can always rely on the Word, it transcends the mortal sinners we are and must deal with every day.
naliaka on January 27, 2007 at 4:18 PM
I think this point is worth expanding on. One recurring argument soften used to “rebut Christianity” is that people go to hell for “merely” rejecting Christ. Let’s put that in perspective:
God sent his only son, Jesus, to earth and on our behalf he willingly took every sin, no matter how filthy or despicable, ever committed upon himself and received the full judgment that we deserved and died in our place. He practiced what he preached:
To say that God is somehow unfair or wrong to say that salvation comes through his Son minimizes the sacrifice he made on our behalf. To say that Jesus’ sacrifice made on your behalf was unworthy and that you deserve better is no better than spitting in Gods face.
God did not merely give an option – he gave the best he had.
jman on January 27, 2007 at 4:41 PM
When in doubt, choose option “C” – it worked for my SATs :)
jman on January 27, 2007 at 4:48 PM
Thank you – very insightful and spot on. I think most we are in agreement that:
Best of wishes to you both for a great and blessed day
Emmett J. on January 27, 2007 at 4:50 PM
Who said that “God made us sinners?”
Where is that stated on this forum?
I addressed the concept that we are sent here with the default position that all are going to hell, that all – including infants and children, have sinned and fall short of the glory of good, and are all headed to hell, again, as the default position.
The only way you are supposed to prevent ending up in hell is to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior, a guy who, if he lived at all, lived 2000 years ago, who we never met, who has no direct interaction with us, as we interact with our friends, family, coworkers, etc., and who we only know about by hearsay, and by reading a scripture.
All this is supposed to be the final say, no second chance, even though many live in areas where they don’t hear about Jesus, or they don’t have much to go on and what they hear does not turn them on. Nevertheless, they are supposed to Love Jesus, and Love God even if they don’t feel it, AND they are supposed to believe that their default position of being headed for hell is somehow nothing to do with God who created everything, but it is all supposed to be our fault and we deserve it, especially if we do not accept the dogma of Christianity and accept that Jesus is our Lord and Savior so that we can all be “saved.”
William
William2006 on January 27, 2007 at 5:07 PM
Correction to the postWilliam2006 on January 27, 2007 at 5:07 PM listed above:
I addressed the concept that we are sent here with the default position that all are going to hell, that all – including infants and children, have sinned and fall short of the glory of
goodGod, and are all headed to hell, again, as the default position.William2006 on January 27, 2007 at 5:09 PM
With all due respect William, you sound like a lot of disgruntled former Catholics I know. Sorry If you had a bad experience at one point. I don’t know.
Just a guess.
Buck Turgidson on January 27, 2007 at 5:37 PM
The only way you are supposed to prevent ending up in hell is to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior, a guy who, if he lived at all, lived 2000 years ago, who we never met, who has no direct interaction with us, as we interact with our friends, family, coworkers, etc., and who we only know about by hearsay, and by reading a scripture.
William
Just as an aside to your quest for answers, I took the liberty to interject here. There a couple of points I thought might interest you. The Bible teaches that God has three persons called The Trinity, The Father, Son, The Holy Spirit. The Father, who is the creator of Heaven and Earth is a perfect being, in whose presence sin cannot dwell. Jeaus isGod incarnet sent out of love for a sacrafice to atone for the sins of all mankind. The Holy Spirit is also known as The Comforter. At the last supper Jeaus promised to send the Comforter and came down above the Apostles heads in the form of toungs of fire,as proof. This are the rudamentary precepts one must know and beleive before they accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior. The Trinity equals the three persons of God Almighty. One last factoid. The process of beleiving in something unseen is called Faith. Without Faith it is difficult to see God. God makes his presence known, also in people and circumstance. I hope you will attain the Faith to SEE. The Biblical definition of Faith is that Faith is the substance of things Hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. Another name for Jasus is The Prince of Peace
sonnyspats1 on January 27, 2007 at 6:05 PM
William, you repeat yourself. You have already made the objection that God has not “shown up” or “manifest” Himself in a real or tangible way for people in our present age. You did so in your earlier post (before this one). I can see that you simply INSIST on a response. I am NOT necessarily the best one here to give you one (a response), but I’ll give it a shot.
Others here have already pointed out that God DID show up in the person of Jesus of Nazerath some 2000 years ago. You seem to have issues that Jesus hasn’t “appeared” to you personally (or to your friends) in more contemporary times. And somehow, you feel that this is unfair. Jesus Himself pointed to the exact same argument when he told the parable about the poor man (named Lazerus) that died and went to be “in the bosom of Abraham.” The rich man in the story, who ended up in hell, appealed to have “messengers” sent back to the temporal world to warn his family and friends about the awfullness of hell. Jesus says that the response that the rich man got was that his family and friends that were still alive had the words of Moses and the other prophets, so they have no excuse at all. Apparently, God does not feel obligated to fulfill YOUR whims to have Him visit you. He has already made the judgement call that the words of Moses, the prophets, and of Jesus are sufficient for you.
Jesus said that it is a wicked generation that requires a sign in order to believe in God. Let me remind you that not only did Jesus perform MANY miracles, but the Old Testament prophets (like Moses) presided over some real doozies (like the plagues on Egypt). Remarkably, virtually each and every time this sort of thing happened, the vast majority of the people clamored for more, more, more. And when they didn’t get what they wanted, they turned away from God.
I can only conclude a few things:
First of all, you seem to VASTLY underestimate the fickleness of human nature. No matter how many miracles God performs, it’s never enough. People ALWAYS clamor for more. If God responded to all of the demands, He’d turn Himself into a Barnum and Bailey side-show. I, for one, sure wouldn’t respect Him if He did that.
Second, you clearly place your will and your agenda ABOVE God’s will and God’s agenda. This is the oldest human sin in existence. It the same sin committed by Adam and Eve. When Jesus arrived on the scene, He had God’s agenda in mind. He told His followers over-and-over again that He was not there to pander to their every whim. He was there to go about the business of completing God’s work of salvation. He was following God’s agenda, not His disciples’ agenda, and not even His own agenda. He expects all of the rest of us to do exactly the same, viz. to seek the truth, discover God’s agenda, and then faithfully conform to God’s agenda through our obedience. This theme runs throughout historical accounts recorded the Bible, over-and-over again.
Third, you seem to think that God is somehow obligated to fulfill you agenda. I assure you that He is not. He OWNS you and me. We are His property. He created us. His rights to us VASTLY outstrip and overshadow any “demands” that you or I might make of Him. (The clay does not say to the potter “Why did you make me this way?”) Perhaps you have “issues” with the nature of God. Admittedly, He DOES seem to be the reclusive, quiet type. I can only speculate that this has something to do with the fall of man (the sinful human condition), and the fact that God is a righteous and holy God. God tells Moses that no man could bear to see the face of God and live to tell about it. THAT’s how righteous and holy He is.
In summary, I think that you see the glass as half-empty. I am the opposite and I see the glass as half full. Judging by my experiences in life, and the caliber of the vast majority of the human beings that I must work with and live around from day-to-day, I am both astonished and overwhelmingly delighted that Jesus showed-up 2000 years ago AT ALL. Only a God of limitless Love could carry out the work of salvation that Jesus did 2000 years ago.
CyberCipher on January 27, 2007 at 6:06 PM
I see what you’re asking. The “default position” would be described Biblically as being born with the sin passed through Adam, which predisposes us to sin on our own, which we do. Yeh, it’s a dreary and horrible concept all right, which would require some drastic and profound correction to make right again. Humanistic thinking is that we are all born good and are good. This sounds appealing, and a lot less miserable sounding than the Biblical stance, but what we discover when we raise those apparently good kids is that they are naturally selfish and uncaring of others. They have to be taught to share, taught to be considerate, taught that lying is bad, taught not to steal … there’s a lot, and even darling little kids resent being corrected when they’re caught doing something that would be hurtful to others. One of the purposes of the Ten Commandments, apart from setting the foundation for a civil society, was to establish a conscience in people. To establish the concepts of right and wrong. For example: the concept of do not steal is not universal. People justify stealing all the time. Some people are taught it’s wrong to steal from their immediate family or from their tribe, but okay to rip everyone else off. Do not steal from anyone, no caveats, is exclusively Judeo-Christian.
Historically, people fretted so much about the little babies dying before they were old enough to make a conscious choice that they began adding infant baptism in the hopes that their children would be saved. It makes sense when you consider the infant mortality of the old days – and the horrors of say, the Plague that devastated Europe. In this case, we must go with faith – that God is a just God and that if a baby is to be saved, the child will be. Consider that to our eyes, we see only a baby, but God would see a complete human being, fully formed, and know the character of his or her spirit, things we cannot know. We don’t have to twist ourselves into knots about it, it’s God’s business, not ours. He’ll do what’s good and right. Remember, Hilter himself was once a cute little infant. There is no way for us to know what’s inside those squirmy little children -they all look equally adorable; we do not have the ability to look inside a child’s heart to see what’s there. Grieving parents need to be comforted upon the death of a child, not kicked in the teeth. All babies have original sin, but haven’t sinned on their own. God will always do what right by them.
naliaka on January 27, 2007 at 6:16 PM
I completely agree with nalika on this, but I’d like to suggest one more thing about the Ten Commandments and the Law of Moses that many people have not considered.
The Law not only clearly deliniates the WHAT of good and evil (what is right? and what is wrong?) It also clearly “draws a line in the sand” that segregates ALL humans into one of two camps. The Law of Moses clearly identifies every single human that has ever existed (before, then, after, or now) as a sinner. How do I know this? Because NO ONE can say that they have kept ALL of the Law ALL of their life in ALL situations and circumstances. The Law CLEARLY identifies WHO we are. We are sinners. There has only been ONE exception to this in ALL of human history. Jesus was the only human EVER to have lived a sinless life. So the Law clearly identifies WHO Jesus is. He is NOT like the rest of us. He is not a sinner. The camp of Jesus is a lonely camp. He is the only member.
CyberCipher on January 27, 2007 at 6:35 PM
A practicing atheist, isn’t that a jumbo shrimp or a baby grand? Maybe a little studied indifference? An oxy-moron, that’s it. Atheists are becoming intolerant and their arguments are weak? Sounds like a liberal to me……
ritethinker on January 27, 2007 at 7:06 PM
The problem with Atheism is by what standard or rules do they live by? What is the criteria for right and wrong? It would seem that each individual would have a different concept of the acceptable boundries, so there is no one standard code by which to live. Yet, I would guess that most Americans who call themselves Atheists actually adhere willingly to the boundaries as laid out in the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commnadments are universal – everyone who reads them, recognizes the simple rightness of them. Don’t murder, don’t steal, don’t bear false witness…don’t want anything of your neighbor’s, his wife, his possessions, nothing, etc. With that as their basic structure, self-described atheists can operate comfortably in most societies. Curiously, the Ten Commandments tell us all to behave differently than what our natural inclinations desire, so where did they come from?
naliaka on January 27, 2007 at 7:34 PM
This is an interesting topic.
The comments are addeing up, and many of them, somewhat to my surprise, are responses to my comments.
As they are becoming numerous, and containt a lot to deal with, I will comment in general to several, and in particular to a few.
1) “William, may I ask if you are an atheist? – jman on January 27, 2007 at 3:12 PM
“jman,”
Yes, you may ask.
2) “You posts tend to focus on the fault you find in Christianity, but if you are an Atheist I would be interested in knowing why what you believe is true.”
The focus I emphasized is the assumption that everyone is, by default, condemned to hell, and the follow up contradiction that God is a loving, merciful God who cares about us.
What is the answer to that condemned to hell as default? That God the Father sent his only begotten son to suffer and die for our sins, and only by believing in Jesus, and accepting him as our Lord and Savior, can we be saved and not end up in eternal damnation to the suffering and separation from God which is hell.
Instead of trying to quote scriptures or try to dance around this problem, the best answer would have been, and is, I see your point. You are right and I do not have an answer, nor do I understand it myself.”
That point regarding God condemning everyone to hell by default upon birth carries over into those who are not Christians but who have a great deal of love, devotion, and dedication to God. Christians claim that they are damned to hell, for, no matter what, they did not accept Jesus as their Savior and therefore they lose. That is both cruel and a sick joke.
Then some here try to reach into unseen territory and cliam that we don’t know what is inside a child’s heart or a grown up who believes in God but is not a Christian and has not claimed Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior, mainly due to accident of birth and events that occured during their lives which led those people to the relationship they have with God, a relationship which Christians discount as non-existent because those people are just plain wrong, hence, they are all going to hell, no matter how much they Love the Lord, no matter how much they worship God, no matter how devoted they are. Too bad for them.
“I’m not being judgemental, but am sincerely interested in how people can substantiate that there is no god.” — jman on January 27, 2007 at 3:12 PM
jman,
Perhaps you are not being judgemental, but I will say that many people, Christians, left wingers, fifth column hate America obsessed, liberals, secular progressives, and so on, often begin their talk with “I am not being judgemental” and then they proceed to be … judgemental.
To get back to your question, “are you an atheist?”
No, I am not an atheist.
3) “With all due respect William, you sound like a lot of disgruntled former Catholics I know. Sorry If you had a bad experience at one point. I don’t know.
Just a guess.
Buck Turgidson on January 27, 2007 at 5:37 PM”
Buck,
Sorry to disappoint you. I am not a disgruntled Catholic and I did not have bad experiences to speak of in my life regarding spirituality, religion, and so on.
The subject I raised on this thread is an important one and it is something that those who consider themselves to be “Christians” could benefit from understanding. The dogma is that all have sinned, even babies, and that all are going to hell, yet Christians who propagate this concept expect people to see God as nice, loveable, caring, merciful, etc. The fact that Christians claim that Jesus was sent to suffer and die for our sins and hence if we accept him as our Personal Savior and are washed in the Blood of his sacrifice, then we will be saved and not go to hell.
Don’t you see how that can be a tough sell? God created everything and then, when Adam and Eve, after being tempted, disobey, and God is so pissed off at them that he banishes them from the Garden of Eden, from Paradise, then he also curses them with death, AND He curses all of the rest of humanity, and animals, and everything with not only death, but with eternal damnation.
William
William2006 on January 27, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »