login basecamp neonews page

Articles Tagged With 'atheism'

a brief infomercial on disbelief

PBS.ORG recently aired a 3-part infomercial on the virtues of the religion of atheism, which the producer calls “disbelief” because:

“I’m reluctant to use the word atheist to describe my disbelief, giving that conviction a special title which dignifies that which I deny… This series is a tribute to those who’ve won the right to stand up and be counted.”

He declares all this with the snobbish disdain of the English Gentry (hey, I can do that too). Without the pretentious airs and refined English accents, A Brief History of Disbelief is little more than another profane infomercial from “the Colonies”. (Does he snort Snuff?) In the spirit of such low-budget, late-night dramas, he surrounds himself with a self-congratulating, adoring cast noticeably absent of skeptics or naysayers. He then presumes to speak for Christianity, then dismantles his depictions with the erudite ease of a superior intellect. Ironically, he censures Christianity for censorship while he censors all Christian response.

A
A

He launched this series in response to 9/11, a tragedy which depicts “the danger inherently present in the world’s three monotheistic faiths: Judaism, Christianity and Islam,” he claims. But then he launches a three-hour diatribe exclusively against Christianity. How very droll, I daresay! How did we get here again? 9/11 suicide bombers and Christianity…? It is an odd connection.

[Read more →]

What NOT to Do!


From abcnews.com

I’m sorry I missed it, but apparently Kirk Cameron (child star in Growing Pains) and his evangelist friend Ray Comfort pledged to prove the existence of God, indisputably:

“We’d like to show you that the existence of God can be proven, 100 percent, absolutely, without the use of faith… the number one reason that people don’t believe in God is not a lack in evidence, but because of a theory that many scientists today believe to be a fairytale for grownups.” (see Does God Exist? The Nightline Face-Off)

Their evidence was the classical Teleological (argument-by-design) and a few other standard raps, which are decent arguments, and their presentation sounds reasonable enough, but it was more inductive logic, not deductive. You can’t claim 100% proof through inductive logic.

They also have a few (irrational) quirks:

[Read more →]

‘Atheist organization denounces Christian Freedom’

Imagine reading a headline like that in your local newspaper. Christians and non-Christians alike would be outraged. But upon reading the article, you discover that ‘Christian Freedom’ is the name of an organization engaged in a nation-wide smear campaign against atheists, and some atheist organization responded by denouncing the activities of the ‘Christian Freedom Organization’.

Now, read this headline which actually appeared in today’s BBC News:

‘Free Thought Takes on Organized Religion’

It sounds like “Freedom of thought stands up against organized repressors” at first glance, but actually it’s an organization called “Free Thought” which is engaged in a national ad campaign against faith. They’re putting up billboards that look like this:

wonder if it read ‘imagine a world without atheists’ …?
wonder if it read ‘imagine a world without atheists’ …?

What I find astonishing is not the billboard campaign (even though–sniff! sniff!–it’s about Columbus, my beloved hometown), but rather the reporter which gave this campaign a good publicity headline for what can only be described as a venomous attack against religious faith. ‘Free Thought’ is attacking, not being attacked!

The reporter (and his editor) made the amateurish mistake of reporting what the “Spin Doctors” at FFRF.ORG wanted reported. In Journalism school way back in the early ’80s they taught us that Public Relations people will often name their organization in such a way that provides free, good publicity whenever the press refers to the organization. The press fell for it! Headlines are especially vulnerable to this free publicity, because space is limited, and some editor, not having enough space for “Freedom From Religion Foundation” simply condensed the essence of the title to fit the space.

I just thought you’d be interested in what they teach you in journalism school.

Also, I wanted to blog this quickly before my good friend Joesnake blogged it, because it’s actually Joe’s discovery, and a good one at that. Thanks Joe! I love you, man!

Dawkins Gets Angry

In researching the popular Richard Dawkins crusade against (primarily) the Bible, I ran across this amazing video in which Dawkins displays a rather mean-spirited attack against some poor college girl for asking the question: “What if you’re wrong?”

YouTube Preview Image

Why didn’t he answer the question? I’ve asked myself if I’m wrong. Someone can ask me the same. Is it forbidden?

He displays the dogmatism of the Dark Ages: dare not ask if I might be wrong! Geesh. The Vatican dealt with Galileo this way.

The crowd’s reaction was scary: they loved his hatred! It was reminiscent of Adolf’s crowd-pleasing outbursts at Nuremberg. He degrades the girl (was she a Christian as he claimed?), and then he rails angrily against the “the joo-joo monster” and “flying spaghetti monster”, but it wasn’t scientific reasoning. It was an incoherent outburst against imaginary beasts. Hitler employed this tactic against Jewish people: lashing out against monsters he labeled “Jews” which don’t exist in the real world.

Just FYI: it’s called the “Straw Man Argument” which is an crude logical fallacy, but it’s also mean-spirited. He pretends the silly “joo-joo monster” is in the Bible, which is unreasonable. It is the classic language of racism.

Brokenness

I must share Ray Stedman’s excellent explanation of spiritual brokenness, which also touches on eternity.  Read the short biography of Ray’s life to appreciate the authenticity of his words. He really gets it.


“Our own personal death is the hard, harsh, square peg that refuses to fit into all the round holes we plan for our future; it is the sand in our oyster that irritates us and makes our spirits protest against it. Why should we learn all these great lessons of life and, just when we have learned them we must give them all up and there is no opportunity to exercise them? Something about that makes us protest.

“If we have been brought up to believe the universal lie of our day which is being flung at us all the time through the media that we deserve to live, then this constantly approaching termination of our life reminds us that that is not so. In the eyes of the God of the universe we do not deserve to live. If we are allowed life beyond death it is a gift of God’s grace, not something we have earned ourselves. Something in us deserves to die; that is what universal death declares.

“That fact is what makes everybody essentially religious. This is why man cannot live like an animal. Even those who claim atheism, and attempt to act and live as though there were no God, give evidence from time to time that they do not really believe that. Beyond death is something someone they do not know who or what waiting for them, so they cannot be comfortable with the idea of atheism. They have to find some answer to the problems of life, and death is what forces them to do that.”   Ray Stedman, November 28, 1982

in memory of a good brother
in memory of a good brother

Tag Cloud