I too believe that all humans understand we are spirit. Even during my athiest days, I knew I was a spiritual being. The problem I had then was that I figured that if God ever got ahold of me, I was finished. I’ve since outgrown that.

Athiests just don’t want to be held accountable for what they do. Pure and simple.

unamused on April 2, 2007 at 10:10 AM

I find that logic grossly insulting and presumptuous

Why Allah? Do you kow how many men have sought to disprove the bible only to convert themselves to Christianity? It is almost a cliche. Josh McDowell for one, his story is interesting. So you better stay incurious to the inner workings and history of Christianity. Holy Spirit might getcha!

Theworldisnotenough on April 2, 2007 at 10:12 AM

HARRIS: You can feel yourself to be one with the universe.

Pantheism. Wrong answer.

WARREN: You’re more spiritual than you think.

Um, no, he isn’t. Basic theology which is the study or science of God, as I understand it. Pantheism is not theism.

Not a fan of Rick Warren, I am.

CrimsonFisted on April 2, 2007 at 10:15 AM

So you better stay incurious to the inner workings and history of Christianity. Holy Spirit might getcha!

I’m not incurious. I was raised Catholic and went to a Jesuit high school. I just find it insulting that because someone knocks religion, it means they’re denying their “true feelings” or whatever. By that logic you’re all closet Muslims.

Allahpundit on April 2, 2007 at 10:17 AM

This is a debate that I often have with my Christian friend who also clains I will find religion one day. I belive my morality, or what makes me a good person, comes from within myself. My christian friend believes it comes from a supreme being.

Ann on April 2, 2007 at 10:18 AM

PS sorry for the typos, busy day in the middle of tax season!

Ann on April 2, 2007 at 10:20 AM

Okay Allah how is this:

A Christian friend of mine insists Harris is going to find religion someday because his interest in the subject supposedly betrays a yearning to believe that he won’t be able to resist forever. I find that logic grossly insulting and presumptuous

The same as this:

I’m not incurious. I was raised Catholic and went to a Jesuit high school. I just find it insulting that because someone knocks religion, it means they’re denying their “true feelings” or whatever. By that logic you’re all closet Muslims

Interest=knocking?

That is not exactly the same. Your friend is noting the atheists interest in a subject that should be far removed from his thought process or priorities in life. To add a muslim dynamic to that situation, would look like a Catholic priest that spends and inordinate amount of time studying Islam, asking seeking questions. Just to you know “find out about it.”

I’m pretty sure people that knock Islam have zero interest in finding out about it or much less debating it.

*See this is going to make me late…*

Theworldisnotenough on April 2, 2007 at 10:28 AM

However, Christians believe that God respects those who are either “hot” or “cold” which is often interpretted as being against or for God, rather than being complacent. Because of this, the thinking atheist and the religious scholar are equally likely to have a relationship with God as neither are complacent about God, neither let the question just drift by them without a thought.

I much prefer a thinking atheist than a warm and gooey “I’m spirtual, not religious” type person. There’s been many a thinking atheist who thinks himself into theism. Google Edith Stein for one.

Ellen on April 2, 2007 at 10:34 AM

I’m just never going to be able to understand why “atheists” spend such vast amounts of time thinking about and debating something they are certain does not exist.

It makes no sense. None.

Thus, however offended you may be, it’s not very surprising that people suggest the obvious - that a lot atheists may not be atheists at all. If you apply Occam’s Razor to the behavior, it’s the obvious conclusion.*

Me, I don’t believe in atheists. I don’t think they exist. Not one. Now as an atheist-denier, if I were to act like most “atheists,” I would now embark on a quest to endlessly argue their non-existence. I’d debate, I’d argue, I’d ponder, I’d write lengthy prose on the subject.

But that would be silly. If you folks want to pretend atheists exist, if it makes you feel better, have fun. What do I care? (This, of course, would be how actual atheists would act … if they existed).

* Note: this same logical paradigm establishes that many of you do, in fact, worship Rosie O’Donnell. Talk about disturbing.

Professor Blather on April 2, 2007 at 11:02 AM

I’m just never going to be able to understand why “atheists” spend such vast amounts of time thinking about and debating something they are certain does not exist.

I gave you a poll the other day that shows 96% of the country believes in some God or another. I’ve given you multiple posts lately about James Dobson hinting that his millions of followers might have a problem voting for this or that candidate depending on how vociferously Christian they are. We’re at the beginning of a war with religious fanatics who enjoy the moral support of significant numbers of non-fanatic members of their religion. And you can’t grasp why atheists might find this subject worth talking about? Even apart from simple intellectual curiosity?

Allahpundit on April 2, 2007 at 11:07 AM

Professor Blather on April 2, 2007 at 11:02 AM

And what did that latest poll say, somthing like only 3% of Americans will say they are Atheists???

Heck, you could probably get that many Americans to say they are UFO abductees….

Now… Agnosticism is a bit different… or Theism… ie somthings out there but non of the major religions have it right…

Romeo13 on April 2, 2007 at 11:10 AM

The problem with Atheism is that it would only take one example of a miracle that cannot be explained away, and Atheism becomes shot. It’s one reason various scriptural accounts are dismissed as made up, or “credulous” or stuff–because if we DID see someone come back from the dead like Lazarus did, it would be hard to explain (note, that’s one reason why Lazarus was raised three days after he died, so it would be hard to claim that he was just ill or something).

An athiest friend of mine has more faith than I do, because she can find any “they weren’t really dead! Something happened!” excuse possible. Now, what’s really different between “God brought them back” versus “there’s some really unknown paralystic state that only affects some people and thus they are not really dead, though they haven’t been able to breathe for ten hours….” Neither side can provide a rational explanation for the event, or repeat it.

Vanceone on April 2, 2007 at 11:17 AM

Here’s the money quote:

HARRIS: What in your experience is making you someone who is not a Muslim? I presume that you are not losing sleep every night wondering whether to convert to Islam. And if you’re not, it is because when the Muslims say, “We have a book that’s the perfect word of the creator of the universe, it’s the Qur’an, it was dictated to Muhammad in his cave by the archangel Gabriel,” you see a variety of claims there that aren’t backed up by sufficient evidence. If the evidence were sufficient, you would be compelled to be Muslim.

If it’s so easy to understand that Muslims are wrong about God, why not ask yourself why Christians aren’t wrong as well?

Atheismland: We know how to have a good time!

Enrique on April 2, 2007 at 11:24 AM

I’m always amazed at the number of people that teeter on the brink of spending an eternity in hell or a mansion in the sky who have never actually read the bible short of the watered down messages they receive on Sunday. Darn if those sermons never include Numbers 31:17. Kill the babies and rape the virgins. If someone can reconcile that in their heart of hearts I would sure like to know how. Actually nevermind, I wouldn’t.

Esthier, when God hardened Pharoahs heart in Exodus did he take away his free will?

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 11:30 AM

I’m just pointing out that human logic has its limits, especially if one assumes our brains evolved to keep us alive long enough to pass on our DNA. Humans trying to understand the universe might be analagous to an ant trying to understand the internet.

mikeyboss on April 2, 2007 at 11:19 AM

check this out about “logic”, a short film being turned into a feature length.
http://www.godawa.com/cruellogic.htm

What people beleive and what their actions really say they beleive are often two very very different things. Little things like Human Nature which continually fly over college professors heads..

jp on April 2, 2007 at 11:34 AM

weighing in here: the most telling argument for the existence of God is the existence of the nation of Israel. Driven from its land 1900 years ago in judgment for apostasy, the Old Testament foretold the fate of the nation - from dispersal to regathering - and that even though polls show that the majority of Israeli’s are largely secular. These prophecies were written hundreds of years before the events in question happened as predicted. Being outside of time, knowing the end from the beginning is one of God’s attributes. There are hundreds of prophecies about Israel - including that the whole world would be arrayed against her in the “last days” and that Jerusalem would be a “cup of trembling” for the whole world. Pretty accurate stuff from a supposed non-entity.

aqvik on April 2, 2007 at 11:41 AM

of course to believe that aqvik requires you to believe that all the anonymous books of the bible were written when they said they were and not after the fact to prove a prophecy true. Unfortunately God didn’t see fit to leave us with the originals so we are forced to imply inspired books are written by authors who amazingly enough were able to write of their own deaths.

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 11:50 AM

Atheismland: We know how to have a good time!

Enrique on April 2, 2007 at 11:24 AM

Says you. Most atheists that I’ve come in contact with are the most bitter, hateful, obnoxious, miserable zealots that I’ve ever seen, heard or met, most of them are hardcore Marxists too. Most of those assclowns are even more faithful to leftism than the most devout religious.

It takes a bigger leap of faith to believe the utter garbage of Marxism and its various leftist hellspawn than an invisible magical force that created existence.

And for those that aren’t Marxists, they’re usually just insufferable pricks who feel the need to fire a gun into the air, jump onto a table and declare their atheism as loud as possible, piss in everyones beer and throw up their middle fingers at the most benign passing mention of God or religion.

Except Allah, he’s not too bad…he’s one of the better atheists I’ve run into.

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 11:54 AM

work of Grace

jp on April 2, 2007 at 12:03 PM

Heh.

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 12:09 PM

“… they’re usually just insufferable pricks who feel the need to fire a gun into the air, jump onto a table and declare their atheism as loud as possible, piss in everyones beer…”

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 11:54 AM

Odd that. If you substitute “atheism” with “evangelical christianity” it works about the same.

Pot meet kettle.

nosliwelyk on April 2, 2007 at 12:11 PM

Esthier, when God hardened Pharoahs heart in Exodus did he take away his free will?

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 11:30 AM

Did God harden Pharoah’s heart, or was Pharoah’s heart already there?

Exodus 7:13
Yet [Ex 4:21; 7:3, 22; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:7, 12, 34, 35; 10:1, 20, 27] Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he did not listen to them, as the LORD had said.

Exodus 7:22
[Ex 7:11; 8:7] But the magicians of Egypt did the same with their secret arts; and Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he did not listen to them, as the LORD had said.

Exodus 8:15
But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and [Ex 7:4] did not listen to them, as the LORD had said.

Exodus 8:19
Then the magicians said to Pharaoh, ” [Ex 7:5; 10:7; Ps 8:3; Luke 11:20] This is the finger of God.” But Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he did not listen to them, as the LORD had said.

Exodus 8:32
But Pharaoh hardened his heart this time also, and [Ex 4:21; 8:8, 15] he did not let the people go.

Exodus 9:7
Pharaoh sent, and behold, there was not even one of the livestock of Israel dead. But [Ex 7:14; 8:32] the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people go.

Exodus 9:12
And [Ex 4:21; 10:1, 20; 14:8; Josh 11:20; John 12:40] the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he did not listen to them, just as the LORD had spoken to Moses.

Exodus 9:34
But when Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunder had ceased, he sinned again and hardened his heart, he and his servants.

Exodus 9:35
Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he did not let the sons of Israel go, just as the [Ex 4:21] LORD had spoken through Moses.

We’re not talking about a heart that was willing to be anything other than calloused against God. To say that God controlled Pharoah by making his heart hard enough to chase after the Israelites is to say that Pharoah was otherwise just fine with allowing his slaves to leave, and that simply does not line up with anything else.

The same paradox is seen in Isaiah 6:

9 He said, “Go and tell this people:
” ‘Be ever hearing, but never understanding;
be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’

10 Make the heart of this people calloused;
make their ears dull
and close their eyes. [a]
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts,
and turn and be healed.”

It sounds as though Isaiah is being told that God will make His own people turn from Him, lest they be healed.

But other versions say this instead:

‘You will be ever hearing, but never understanding; / you will be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’ / 10 This people’s heart has become calloused; / they hardly hear with their ears, / and they have closed their eyes

This follows with what is said of the pharoah. He would never listen to God and therefore became calloused towards God.

But I should appologize. You said you didn’t actually want a response.

Esthier on April 2, 2007 at 12:25 PM

I’m not incurious. I was raised Catholic and went to a Jesuit high school. I just find it insulting that because someone knocks religion, it means they’re denying their “true feelings” or whatever. By that logic you’re all closet Muslims.

Allahpundit on April 2, 2007 at 10:17 AM

The Jesuits are excellent at producing atheists. My atheist colleague went to an Jesuit high school..

AP,
If you’re interested in hearing a real debate between an atheist and a Christian, listen to the Bahnsen-Stein debate that jp referenced above. Since Warren can’t get Christianity right, there’s no reason to listen to him debate an atheist. It’s pure hackery.

PRCalDude on April 2, 2007 at 12:31 PM

of course to believe that aqvik requires you to believe that all the anonymous books of the bible were written when they said they were and not after the fact to prove a prophecy true. Unfortunately God didn’t see fit to leave us with the originals so we are forced to imply inspired books are written by authors who amazingly enough were able to write of their own deaths.

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 11:50 AM

We don’t have the original Homer epic, yet somehow we’ve come to terms with when it was spoken.

Even still, the Bible has also foretold reletively modern things, things that have happened since even the King James version was written.

Esthier on April 2, 2007 at 12:29 PM

Yeah, what Esthier said. Plus, unless there’s been some additional books of the Bible written since 1948 of which I am unaware, how do you explain the various Old Testament prophecies about regathering the nation after 1900 years of exile? And anonymous books? Most of the Bible was written by named individuals. You could argue from here till doomsday about side issues, but my major point remains: Israel is the most blatant evidence that God exists, that He has written large chunks of history beforehand, and is not shy about intervening in the affairs of mankind. From a sheer logical and material viewpoint, Israel should not ever have incorporated, and once incorporated, she should never have survived all the attempts to annihilate her within the last 60 years. God has said she would exist and she does. He also says she will go through great tribulation, and she has and will. But He promises never to make a full end of her, and He hasn’t and won’t. Arguing the existence or nonexistence of God is a little like a colony of worms debating about the existence of concrete.

aqvik on April 2, 2007 at 12:46 PM

Yeah, what Esthier said. Plus, unless there’s been some additional books of the Bible written since 1948 of which I am unaware, how do you explain the various Old Testament prophecies about regathering the nation after 1900 years of exile?

You explain it possibly by Romans 11. Many dispensational premillenialists on this blog, I see?

PRCalDude on April 2, 2007 at 12:58 PM

I have taken Richard Dawkins as my personal saviour.

*ducks*

JayHaw Phrenzie on April 2, 2007 at 12:59 PM

Esthier, don’t leave out Exodus 4:21, which happens before the verses you mentioned. As well, even Pharaoh “hardening his heart” doesn’t prove that it was his “free will” to do it. It’s merely a statement that it happened, and using God’s own statements on the subject it could hardly be argued that he hardened his own heart against God’s will. In fact God says his heart will be hard, and it is.

Orange Man on April 2, 2007 at 12:42 PM

Let’s go even before verse 21 then.

8 Then the LORD said, “If they do not believe you or pay attention to the first miraculous sign, they may believe the second. 9 But if they do not believe these two signs or listen to you, take some water from the Nile and pour it on the dry ground. The water you take from the river will become blood on the ground.”

Why would God say this if He was always going to harden Pharoah’s heart against these signs in the first place? Why even bother with the first 9 plagues?

Esthier on April 2, 2007 at 1:08 PM

I have taken Richard Dawkins as my personal saviour.

*ducks*

JayHaw Phrenzie on April 2, 2007 at 12:59 PM

Burn ‘im at the stake!!!!!!!!!!

*grabs torch*

Get ‘im!!!!!!!

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 1:17 PM

You explain it possibly by Romans 11. Many dispensational premillenialists on this blog, I see?

PRCalDude on April 2, 2007 at 12:58 PM

A non sequitur if I ever heard one. Blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in? Or God has provided mercy to the Gentiles so Israel can be persuaded? At the risk of beating a dead horse - Israel is an indisputable, inarguable, un-ignorable beacon to the whole world that God is… Premillennial dispensationalism has NOTHING to do with it.

Y’all can agree with the logic or not, but the logic exists regardless. And I’ll go even further - Israel will outlast her enemies, and God help any nation who attempts her destruction or division. Look at Britain, as soon as the UK betrayed Israel after the Balfour Declaration by preventing Jewish emigrees from entering, Britain’s decline as a world empire was assured. Even Iran has figured that out.

aqvik on April 2, 2007 at 1:22 PM

aqvik you base your assumptions on a group of books by anonymous authors from which there is no original texts, that a group of MEN decided were inspired. Were those MEN inspired? Were the translators inspired? There are several other books that were originally included in the bible that didn’t make the final cut that a group of MEN decided would be the final product. Have you read those books? Do you trust those MEN? Do you even know who those MEN were? Do you know when the canonization took place? If you don’t perhaps you need to explore your faith and make honest judgements rather than relying on the interpretations made by other MEN.

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 1:32 PM

Says you. Most atheists that I’ve come in contact with are the most bitter, hateful, obnoxious, miserable zealots that I’ve ever seen, heard or met, most of them are hardcore Marxists too. Most of those assclowns are even more faithful to leftism than the most devout religious.

It takes a bigger leap of faith to believe the utter garbage of Marxism and its various leftist hellspawn than an invisible magical force that created existence.

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 11:54 AM

Well you’re half way there. You bring up the usual fallacy posted over and over again on this board. We’ll see how this fits on for size. God≠Ethics. Atheism≠Philosophy. It is simply non belief in a God who resides a different metaphysical dimension than reality. Hence, Atheism≠Marxism. That’s why atheists are all different sorts and colors. This is why you see a decent number of us “conservative” atheists here at HA.
So you’re right about the “mystics of the muscle” who call themselves Marxists, yet you are a “mystic of the spirit” so it really is like “nosliwelyk” said: pot meet kettle. So just because one chooses not to derive his morals from an invisible flying friend, doesn’t mean that person doesn’t have morals. Marxists choose to fill the vacuum with Marxist philosophy, but that doesn’t mean that just because a person doesn’t believe in God they will choose Marxism for their philosophy and ethics. See the fallacy?

And for those that aren’t Marxists, they’re usually just insufferable pricks who feel the need to fire a gun into the air, jump onto a table and declare their atheism as loud as possible, piss in everyones beer and throw up their middle fingers at the most benign passing mention of God or religion.

Ah yes, the lovely Christian martyr complex. What was it Allah? Oh yeah 96%. I thought you guys were supposed to love your neighbor and do good unto others?

I’ve come to believe in God thru my own experience, which I think is stronger than logic. (For example, if I am in pain, I know that with a certainty greater than that which I know that 2+2=4)

mikeyboss on April 2, 2007 at 11:19 AM

Put the God down. Just put the God down. Don’t worry, it won’t bite. Just put the God down. I think Descartes knocked out afferent (motor) and efferent (sensory) neural pathways a few hundred years ago. No need to invoke God into your pain, when there’s a perfectly logical and scientifically valid reason why, where, and how your pain occurs.

Roark on April 2, 2007 at 1:37 PM

My advice is to ignore both Warren and Harris. The single best defense of atheism is The Miracle of Theism by J. L. Mackie. The single best defense of Christianity is Scaling the Secular City by J. P. Moreland. The latter in particular has an excellent bibliography for further reading, both for and against Christianity.

Bill Ramey on April 2, 2007 at 1:43 PM

Why would God say this if He was always going to harden Pharoah’s heart against these signs in the first place? Why even bother with the first 9 plagues?

Esthier on April 2, 2007 at 1:08 PM

God tells you exactly why he hardened pharoah’s heart. He wanted to show the Egyptians who worshipped other gods just how great he was. Unfortunately, a righteous God reveals his righteousness by killing the innocent. I can imagine 1001 different ways God could have revealed himself without killing children.
Doesn’t really flow well with the do unto others and turn the other cheek credos we preach but rarely practice.

If a man puts a gun to your head and says give me your wallet when you give him your wallet are you doing it of your own free will or out of fear?

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 1:45 PM

Whoa. Please don’t ever run for political office. It’s people like you who scare the bejezus out of Sam Harris, AllahP, me, and other atheists. Please no “endtime” war games you crazy, lovable guys you. Please!

Roark on April 2, 2007 at 1:43 PM

Don’t worry. Most Christians don’t believe that.

PRCalDude on April 2, 2007 at 1:50 PM

Hey Esthier and aqvik just for fun run a google on Sargon of Akkad. Its an ancient Sumerian text that predates Exodus. Fascinating really. Notice any similarities?

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 1:57 PM

Except that God in the Old Testament and Jesus are one in the same per the trinity and yet if you read the bible can you draw that conclusion.

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 1:51 PM

To be fair, the Trinity wasn’t clear from the OT alone.

PRCalDude on April 2, 2007 at 1:57 PM

Hey Esthier and aqvik just for fun run a google on Sargon of Akkad. Its an ancient Sumerian text that predates Exodus. Fascinating really. Notice any similarities?

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 1:57 PM

Ah, frreal, I finally understand your presuppositions. The ancient Sumerians weren’t monotheists. That’s the rather glaring point you’ve overlooked.

As far as canonicity goes, well here you go:
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/otcanon.html
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/ntcanon.html
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/canonout.html
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/dumbdad2.html

PRCalDude on April 2, 2007 at 2:02 PM

So you’re right about the “mystics of the muscle” who call themselves Marxists, yet you are a “mystic of the spirit” so it really is like “nosliwelyk” said: pot meet kettle. So just because one chooses not to derive his morals from an invisible flying friend, doesn’t mean that person doesn’t have morals. Marxists choose to fill the vacuum with Marxist philosophy, but that doesn’t mean that just because a person doesn’t believe in God they will choose Marxism for their philosophy and ethics. See the fallacy?

Of course, correlation != causation. But if you aren’t gonna admit a strong trend, you’re lying to yourself. I never said atheists lack morals by nature, some have, I didn’t, so dont put words in my mouth. Some have plenty of morals, some even more than devout religious, that said, most are Marxists, and the ones that aren’t Marxists are insufferable pricks, which is all I said, and which you and enrique do everyhting possible to prove. So thanks for working so hard to prove my point.

Ah yes, the lovely Christian martyr complex. What was it Allah? Oh yeah 96%. I thought you guys were supposed to love your neighbor and do good unto others?

What Christian martyr complex? I’m not crying persecution, just pointing out what most of you assclowns do, which is what you did here. Who’s got the persecution complex now?

And I’m all for loving my neighbor, until they piss me off. I’m a Christian, though probably not a good one, I’ve always preferred the curbstompings and beatdowns offered up by the Old Testament. Maybe I should be a Jew? Nah, I’d miss bacon too much…

My point still stands, most atheists are Marxists (and we agree correlation
!=causation), and most of the rests are hypersensitive dicks, which you’ve proven my argument clearly…

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 2:12 PM

Lots of crazy talk here. Jesus the true Israel? Sheesh. End time war games and scaring people? Ain’t my Bible-believin’ gang that’s out to destroy anybody so don’t know what’s up with that. And profound generalizations that “most Christians” don’t believe this or that - don’t know what’s in your Kool-aid. Trusting the interpretations of MEN? What has interpretation got to do with anything here? Israel is a fact. It’s destruction and regathering are facts. It being the topic of stress in the Middle East and therefore the world is fact. Its re-incorporation as a nation in 1948 against all odds is fact. That these events are spelled out in the Bible beforehand is fact. I don’t know - maybe I’m not nuanced enough for the high-falutin’ pedantic gyrations of this blog.

Look, the point of this thread is arguments for and against atheism, right? Does God exist or not? Can we know? Seems to me that’s all been asked and answered. The only remaining issue is what do YOU want to do about it?

aqvik on April 2, 2007 at 2:14 PM

Since Warren can’t get Christianity right…

Just curious…. which of the five purposes he cites for the church do you actually have a problem with?

psrch on April 2, 2007 at 2:25 PM

My opinion is that God wanted man to know just how serious sin was. It was not something to be taken lightly and if someone wanted to have a right relationship with Him it would take sacrifice. That is the beauty of what Christ did for us on the cross and why it means so much to believers. No, it is not always easy to understand why God did things the way He did but the book of Hebrews attempts to explain some of it.

Rose on April 2, 2007 at 2:26 PM

“most atheists are Marxists”

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 2:12 PM

Documentation please. At this point all you’ve done is name-call and stereotype with a VERY broad brush.

Ask yourself, What Would Jesus Do?

nosliwelyk on April 2, 2007 at 2:29 PM

Levitical sacrifices were meant to picture the holiness of God and the horribleness of sin. To emphasize that God is very particular about how He is approached and worshiped. That sin is monstrous and has monstrous effects, and that prior to Jesus’ sacrifice on the Cross, which took away sin, the temporary covering of sin could only come about by an ocean of innocent animal blood. Did God know from the beginning? Of course! He’s God - That Than Which No Greater Can Be Conceived. What did the detailed sacrificial rituals portray? All those things and more. God declared the penalty for sin - the shedding of blood - and then sent His Son to pay the price on our helpless and hopeless behalf. Jesus’ death was the final and utter propitiation of sin. That’s why Christ being the savior is GOOD NEWS. He paid the price that we couldn’t, so now we don’t have to. Seems pretty simple if you ask me. And all that you gotta do is accept the free gift of salvation. No swords. No threats. No nothing, except believing. Once that happens, God works in your life, changes your priorities, your world-view, and you become ridiculed and mocked as a Christian. But when you die, you get eternal life. Seems like a good deal to me.

aqvik on April 2, 2007 at 2:32 PM

I’ve given you multiple posts lately about James Dobson hinting that his millions of followers might have a problem voting for this or that candidate depending on how vociferously Christian they are.

I get what you’re saying about why this is worth talking about. I don’t disagree or think it makes you “latent” to do so. Still, “followers” is a bit loaded.

It’s the same as saying Sam Harris — whose book was a big bestseller, after all — has hundreds of thousands of followers. There may be a weak sense in which that’s true, but most of them aren’t taking direction from him so much as rallying to him because of his profile. Dobson has fans, not followers.

Also we aren’t at war with “religious fanatics” we’re at war with Islamic fanatics. No need to generalize. Speaking of which, did you see this?

John on April 2, 2007 at 2:37 PM

“most atheists are Marxists”

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 2:12 PM

Documentation please. At this point all you’ve done is name-call and stereotype with a VERY broad brush.

Ask yourself, What Would Jesus Do?

nosliwelyk on April 2, 2007 at 2:29 PM

As I said in my first post, from what I’VE SEEN. That said, go to Fark, any lefty site or college. That’s a good bit of where I’ve learned about atheists. They hate christians and most are hardcore leftists and pricks.

Maybe you’ll accept this. http://hotair.com/archives/2007/03/27/pew-poll-america-trending-democratic-secular/

Again, I’m going on personal experience which I said in the first post, not some well doc’d thing, so I’m sure this becomes the Gotcha, OH SEE SEE NO PROOF NO PROOF, HUH FUNDIE!?!!?!!? quote, right (even thoughi’m not a fundie)?

As for what Jesus would do. I don’t care. The ‘love your neighbor/WWJD’ post at the end of yer post is like every moronic lib that writes ‘mission accomplished’ after every post, trying to be clever and ironic. Its dumb.

Bad Candy on April 2, 2007 at 2:45 PM

“followers” is a bit loaded.

John on April 2, 2007 at 2:37 PM

Your post was very polite. I’d state it even stronger, “followers” is VERY loaded and is deliberately chosen as a word to arouse suspicions of mindlessness. What you said was right, Dobson has fans, not followers. Poeple who read him and buy his books attend their own churches and worship in their own communities. He is one of many authors that Christians read and consider, with varying degrees of agreement.
I have no interest in trying to convince an atheist that God exists. I will however defend Christianity against false statements. If one choses to be an atheist, that’s his or her business, which may or may not be changed over time, but an atheist should not twist the Judeo-Christian record into an unrecognizable pretzel to defend his or her choice.

naliaka on April 2, 2007 at 2:53 PM

One of the best Newsweek articles I’ve read in a long time.

Sure wish someone would bring Deism back!

Oxybeles on April 2, 2007 at 2:56 PM

I think the reason for the debate is fear. Atheists fear that Christians are trying to take over the government and Christians fear the atheists are trying to take over the government. It is the atheists who are trying to take Christianity out of public life where it has been since the beginning of the country. So I think it is the Christians who have the most to fear. We are merely trying to keep the freedom to exercise our faith that our founding fathers gave us.

Rose on April 2, 2007 at 3:07 PM

Yes, Yes Esthier but all those verses you gave occur AFTER the fact that God hardened his heart in 7:3 which is specifically stated as well as his purpose for it being that God could show his awesome powers and prove his Godhood culminating of course, in the death of all the Egyptian first born babies.

No, it’s not after God hardened Pharoah’s heart. God said, “But I will harden his heart.” This would mean that He hadn’t YET hardened Pharoah’s heart but that He was going to. It isn’t until much after chapter 7 that the Bible says that God actually did what He said in chapter 4 that He was going to do.

It doesn’t say in verse 3 Pharoahs heart will be hardened now does it. It says… I will harden. So your verses are just a reiteration of what God already said he was going to do. Pharaoh had about as much chance of resisting as did all those Egyptian babies did at the climax of the plagues.

First born doesn’t mean “just born.” Moses himself was a firstborn who would have perished had he not trusted in God. But really, in this day and age are we actually going to discuss dead babies? How about the millions of abortions? Those babies didn’t get a chance.

Pharoah’s heart was hardened long before God got ahold of it. Through plagues 1-9, Pharoah had a chance, but yes, at a certain point, he lost that chance. The same thing happened to everyone. You have a chance your entire life to seek God, but if you consistently refuse to do so, eventually you will lose that chance. That’s justice. It’s Grace that ANYONE finds God, not justice.

For God to say that He would harden Pharoah’s heart is only proof that God already knew Pharoah would not be receptive to the first 9 plagues. He knew that at a certain point, Pharoah would already have choosen his course. At that point, God’s design was to show Himself to everyone else though something miraculous.

Isn’t that what a lot of atheists complain about anyway? Aren’t many annoyed that God would dare to exist and yet not show Himself?

Actually the verse I was hoping you would respond to and you seemed to skip over was Numbers 31:17. Perhaps you can reconcile that for me.

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 1:21 PM

No, actually you said:

If someone can reconcile that in their heart of hearts I would sure like to know how. Actually nevermind, I wouldn’t.

So which is it?

Esthier on April 2, 2007 at 3:24 PM

God tells you exactly why he hardened pharoah’s heart. He wanted to show the Egyptians who worshipped other gods just

how great he was. Unfortunately, a righteous God reveals his righteousness by killing the innocent. I can imagine 1001 different ways God could have revealed himself without killing children.
Doesn’t really flow well with the do unto others and turn the other cheek credos we preach but rarely practice.

frreal on April 2, 2007 at 1:45 PM

Seriously this obession with dead children is unhealthy. Not all first born are children. I am my mother’s first born, but I’m hardly a child. Also, “innocent” is a subjective term.

“For the wages of sin is death.” This applies to all. It is mercy that give us life and grace that allows us to fellowship with God. Anything less is justice, no more no less.

Esthier on April 2, 2007 at 3:28 PM