 |
|
|
The glory! The glory! If I don't release it, I'll blow up. If I don't release the anointing, I'll blow up. I got to release it on somebody. The demon must bow to the name of the master Jesus ... Yes Lord I'll do it! I place a curse on every man and woman that will stretch his hand against this anointing. I curse that man who dares to speak a word against this ministry.
-- Benny Hinn, TBN, Denver CO
|
|
| |
News: Battle of the New Atheism
Posted on Tuesday, October 24 @ 07:07:43 PDT by John |
|
The cover story for the latest issue of the Wired magazine is dealing with Atheism and is even suggesting that Atheism is making a big comeback in the form of "New Atheism." The New Atheists will not let us off the hook simply because we are not doctrinaire believers. They condemn not just belief in God but respect for belief in God. Religion is not only wrong; it's evil.
Click here to read the Wired cover story on New Atheism
|
| |
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: Battle of the New Atheism (Score: 1)
 by Virgil on Tuesday, October 24 @ 07:19:09 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I got this edition in a few days ago and I read about half of the article - the proposition that Atheists should no longer respect anyone who has faith in a creator is laughable, mostly because they (atheists) are the ones who've been crying for acceptance and respect for decades. Not only that, but Christians have never demanded or asked for their approval and respect - in essence, I do not care really about this.
Also, there is one thing they got right: Religion is not only wrong; it's evil. Many Christians are trying to escape the a religious Christianity and transform their faith into a genuine relationship that recognizes a real and present Creator that doesn't demand or force his creation to worship him, and rather longs for the willing hearts of mankind. Now that is not the picture Atheists paint when they talk about Christianity, so it seems to me that they are just as self-serving as those whom they criticize.
Interesting read though - the magazine article has even more information in it that this online version. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
Re: Battle of the New Atheism (Score: 1)
 by shaggy_flasko (nobody@nobody.com) on Tuesday, October 24 @ 17:46:02 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | i was kind of intersted in reading more about that debate between Dawkins and the geneticist and neurosurgeon.
"It's one thing to say people should be free to believe whatever they like, but should they be free to impose their beliefs on their children? Is there something to be said for society stepping in? What about bringing up children to believe manifest falsehoods?"
Page 2 seems to delve into his tendency toward facism. Society controlling the beliefs of the children? exterminating harmful memes? It's ridiculous.
My "stroll down logic lane" leads me toward individualism, personal freedom and peaceful persuation. If Dawkins wishes to use the government to forcefully exterminate religious thought from this nation, he's in for a surprise. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Wednesday, October 25 @ 19:19:46 PDT
Re: Battle of the New Atheism (Score: 1)
 by Ozark on Tuesday, October 24 @ 19:49:49 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I found it interesting how fellows like Dawkins are so entrenched in the modern paradigm. They don’t point to an up and coming mindset but to one that is slowly slipping away. I wonder how many people in these atheist clubs are over forty? The majority I would imagine. It was also interesting how the article’s author rejected Dawkins’ conclusions for somewhat postmodern sounding reasons.
Also, the way I understand it, rationalism is not gaining steam but declining. The pendulum is swinging back towards supernaturalism.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Wednesday, October 25 @ 19:21:38 PDT
Re: Battle of the New Atheism (Score: 1)
by williamprice (brobillprice@gmail.com) on Wednesday, October 25 @ 05:34:14 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | | I would not want to be them when they leave this mortal coil. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by FireByNite on Wednesday, October 25 @ 09:21:58 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, October 25 @ 19:16:50 PDT
Re: Battle of the New Atheism (Score: 1)
 by Windpressor (Giddi_one) on Thursday, October 26 @ 02:28:27 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | ***********
I'm not sure which is worse;
Neo-Atheism and the church of "Brights"
OR
nonsense that passes for a semblance of Christian faith.
Bogus zealotry is observable cause for alarm by believers and non.
Recollecting a reference that the "early Christians were called atheists", I GOOGLED to find some interesting reads :::
*A blog -- Why I’m an Atheist
**A page from a large subject archive -- BELIEVE Religious Information Collection ==
Atheism:
"The Greeks used "atheism" in three senses: (1) impious or godless; (2) without supernatural help; (3) not believing in any god or the Greek conception of god. Because Christians denied the popular gods of the day, they were often accused of atheism by the pagans. Protestants at times have been called atheists because of their refusal to deify Mary and to worship saints. More and more in speculative circles the term came to mean a denial of God or the negation of the spiritual idea."
AND;
***A scholarly-scofferly article purporting to demonstrate that Nazareth, Bethany and other such places are fictive. According to Frank R. Zindler of American Atheist the locations are as fictional as the Emerald City of Oz so the history and character of Jesus is as mythical as the Wizard of Oz. --
[nothing about Christians being "called atheists" but "called" has a high word count in the article]
Where Jesus Never Walked:
"Before the second or third century C.E. -- going back to the Middle Bronze Age -- the site now occupied by Nazareth was a necropolis, a city of the dead. The hillside underlying part of the present city is riddled with tombs and natural caves which for over a thousand years were used for burials. Since Jewish law prohibited cemeteries from being in the midst of inhabited sites, we can be quite sure that there was no Jewish city at the present site in the days when a supposedly Jewish Jesus is supposed to have been running loose there."
I have seen other arguments from atheist sites that are obviously crude, superficial or based on dubious information. When I get back to some more browsing, I will look for a refutation. Links anyone?
G1
......................
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
Re: Battle of the New Atheism (Score: 1)
by philmute on Thursday, October 26 @ 09:19:57 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Yes indeed it's always the same old story. People so in love with their own intelligence they see any who disagree as mere Peasants who need to be controlled by the wise, it's as old as Plato's Republic. Law and religion were instituted by God as a response to the violence and horror that will always flourish when Man assumes his own unaided reason is a sufficient guide on how to live. One of the commentators on the Wired site refers to the barbarism of the commandment to stone the newly-wed discovered with a broken hymen and yet this person apparently doesn't see the 'logic' here, which is that no-one pays the bills to service another's motor car even less so another's child. Of course DNA testing has proven just how many Men have been deceived into doing so.
Likewise when adultery is permitted and no-fault divorces the rule of law the reality is a society dissolving under the weight of its own uncertainties. This ridiculous presumption which would blasphemously judge God by our standards of compassion when we have no idea of the consequences of our arrogance, a mere 100 years of material and technological benefits and the world's rushing towards nuclear catastrophe. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
| 
|
