afd020023c30ff8bac40…

Let us indulge in this fantasy for the sake of argument. If your god were to control us directly then surely it would be God complaining about himself?

No matter: the mp3 is now available at Air America in case you’re curious.

I’m not. No traffic for Godless Air America.

Children away from parents. God away from families. Why this country is going to Hell in a handbasket.

Also, non-belief in a cosmic sized spook that watches everything people do, from slapping the bow-stick to watching Muslims fly planes into large buildings with “true” Christians in them, defines a single aspect of what makes up the whole individual.
FierceGuppy on October 13, 2007 at 9:45 PM

LOL wow, such angst. You forgot about the part where God created humans with free will. If He were to control us directly, you’d complain about being a puppet. You have to choose.

Face it, our capacity to understand everything in the universe is extremely limited, no matter what Hitchens tells you. God bless and good night!

No grown-up goes on and on about how much they believe in Santa. It’s a non issue.

Also, non-belief in a cosmic sized spook that watches everything people do, from slapping the bow-stick to watching Muslims fly planes into large buildings with “true” Christians in them, defines a single aspect of what makes up the whole individual. A person’s profile is not defined by by a single non belief but by the gamut of ideas he does accept which varies amongst atheists to an enormous extent.

The first anti-theist, in its popular sense, was probably the Greek pre-Socratic Xenophanes, notorious for saying that:

“The Ethiopians say their gods are snub-nosed and black, the Thracians that theirs have light blue eyes and red hair… But, if cattle and horses or lions had hands and were able to draw, cattle would draw cattle-gods, horses, horse-gods, and lions, gods that were like lions.”

Good point.

My interest was only to point out that discussions in philosophy of religion have been going on for a very long time.

Once you start seeing through the human elements, many of the lordly concepts start to crumble.

We hope that the heart of the Mystery is Love.

But “did He who made the Lamb make thee?” is still a Tyger in mix.

profitsbeard on October 13, 2007 at 8:41 PM

I am not entirely clear on the above, concerning “lordly concepts.”

“…atheism, has been around since Plato and Aristotle.”

The first anti-theist, in its popular sense, was probably the Greek pre-Socratic Xenophanes, notorious for saying that:

“The Ethiopians say their gods are snub-nosed and black, the Thracians that theirs have light blue eyes and red hair… But, if cattle and horses or lions had hands and were able to draw, cattle would draw cattle-gods, horses, horse-gods, and lions, gods that were like lions.”

Once you start seeing through the human elements, many of the lordly concepts start to crumble.

We hope that the heart of the Mystery is Love.

But “did He who made the Lamb make thee?” is still a Tyger in mix.

That’s my opinion and I’m stickin’ to it.

Rugged Individual on October 13, 2007 at 6:43 PM

And Mr. Hitchens would be the first to support that.

Original: “God bless us, everyone.”

Revised: “Wonderful times to us, everyone.”

Then again, they might consider Charles Dickens hate writing since he mentions only one diety, not many.

as if the nonbelief in God is a novel, enlightened one.
BKennedy on October 13, 2007 at 6:59 PM

Yes, I agree that I too am very surprised when atheists proclaim that the death of God is a “novel, enlightened one,” as if to suggest that atheism started with the Enlightenment project of modernity.

Or maybe they are suggesting that atheism is just the next step in a “truly enlightened culture” that is losing its past heritage of the Dark Ages.

This is simply not historically true. As my professor of ancient philosophy will say, “atheism has been around since Plato and Aristotle.”

Atheism is not at all a genuine development or novel creation of the 18-19th century Enlightenment.

Atheism, just like theism, and a lot of other “ISM”s were historically around a lot longer than that.

Sometimes the B-Sides are the best.
profitsbeard on October 13, 2007 at 6:17 PM

Agreed. “La Raza del Sol” was on the B-side of Journey’s “Stone in Love” 45 (I think) and it was great back in 1981 :D

I opened a thread for its debut last week when it was supposed to, but didn’t, air. No matter: the mp3 is now available at Air America in case you’re curious.

I was going to ask AP, how is Atheist Radio new when George Soros has been propping up Air anti-America for a while now? Aren’t those useless, boring, useless tools with nonviable programming off the air yet?

As to Hitchens? Big Surprise. No offense AP or other atheist posters, but I do believe Christopher Hitchens is an amalgam of every possible negative quality an atheist can possess. Smug, self-righteous, arrogant, and exceedingly amazed by his own faux brilliance, as if the nonbelief in God is a novel, enlightened one.

They actively believe in nothing.

Give me agnostics radio anyday.

Where they play both sides.

Like a good disc jockey should.

Sometimes the B-Sides are the best.

(”Darkness, Darknness“, by the Youngbloods, f’rinstance, flipside of the sappy “Get Together”.)

the … way … they … speak … is … putting … me … in … a … trance.

i had to stop. its mind numbing. but you know what it reminds me of?

snl’s schweatty balls skit with alec baldwin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D49ybF8rlFA

is that what they were going for?

I think you need a balance of belief and reason. If all you go on is belief and no intellect, you look foolish. However, you can reason yourself blind.

terryannonline on October 13, 2007 at 4:58 PM

Every comprehensive worldview has some sort or degree of “faith,” in the sense that there are unprovable presuppositions which the philosophical system itself depends on or rests on. Every philosophical worldview (even scientism) rests on “first principles,” or key assumptions that are not provable.

But atheism has a far more serious problem.

The issue is not that atheists themselves are dumb or stupid or militant. Indeed, many atheists have made huge contributions to philosophy.

The problem is that atheism cannot account for rationality and thus cannot justify their very usage of the laws of logic. Atheists themselves may be logical or not, but the system of atheism itself is anti-logical.

Thus, as a Christian theist, by the grace of God alone, I believe that atheism does not even have “reason” on its side. This is because atheism has “no philosophical room” at all in its worldview for the immaterial laws of logic.