Saturday, August 26, 2006

Absurdity of Atheism (Rabbit trail)

On the previous post on Sola Gratia, atheist Richard Dawkins (not the real one) has chimed in and made numerous postulations against religion in general and Christianity in particular. To be brief I have pointed out the fallacy of begging the question which Mr. Dawkins has committed numerous times. For instance Mr.Dawkins wants to be outraged about the crusades and the supposed immorality of Christianity, yet he has failed to give a reply for what he basis his moral judgments upon. I don't think he really can give a response that will not be arbitrary (such as morality is based upon consensus).

Anyway, my main point here is to just reiterate what the Bible says about rejecting God. Men reject God because they are fallen and at enmity with Him by nature, not because it is truly reasonable (although it may be in the atheists eyes). One such instance is how John Loftus from the "Debunking Christianity" blog argues against God's existence in a rather ridiculous manner. Loftus argues that if God exists, and God is good then we should have wings so we wont fall down. In logical form it would look something like this:

1) Falling hurts people and is bad
2) Wings would remedy this problem
3) If God exists and is good He would have created us with wings so we wont fall.
.:4) Therefore, a good God does not exist

Pretty heavy duty challenge huh? Well the guys at Unchained Radio put up a picture to show what we should look like if a "good" God exists in Loftus' view (with a few other modifications as well):

Well the improvements are undeniable, tusks, butterfly tastebuds on fingers and wings of course. This is total nonesense but Loftus is serious, the point is that this sort of irrational thinking is what happens to the heart that is in rebellion to its maker striving to be autonomous. God is the source of all true knowledge thus to reject Him is to become a fool:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them...For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools." (Rom 1:18-22)


natamllc said...

Now now now Bobby,

We are to respect what is right in the sight of all men.

He did not say that what all men respect is right.

Pro 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
Pro 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

Mr. Dawkins may just be a steep incline. But I know how to climb em', you?

Winston Churchill chose to say this to the woman who came up to him and chided him for being drunk:





This same man, Winston Churchill, had his funeral service conducted in a most enlightening way, care Mr. Dawkins could say?

He first had taps blown at the beginning of the service and then the speeches and eulogies.

At his gravesite he had revelly blown as they laid him to rest.

Now he too knew what we all know that Know.

If you don't Know Peace, you will not no peace.


Richard Dawkins said...

This is palpable tosh, apropos of nothing whatever; I fail to recall a reference to the Crusades possibly because of the lack of allusion. Please refrain from inventing happenstance in the style of your thoroughly-dishonest acolytes, and parishioners. It only underlines the tawdry nature of the fictitious doctrine you subscribe to. As Bob Dylan stated, "you ain't worth the blood that runs in your veins".

Bob said...

I merely gave an examplt the real Mr.Dawkins has himself harped upon when condemning the mmorality of Christians. My point is that you atheists have no basis for morality thus when you whine about "bad" things done in the name of religion it is arbitrary and foundationless. You need to provide a reasonable answer for what you base your morality upon, you have failed to do so though I have asked you several times. Prose and eloquence do not make arguments valid sir.

My point is that when you criticize "bad" things done in the name of Christianity you are invoking principals (an objective moral standard binding upon all men) which your worldview simply can not rationally give an account. Thus, your quibles are nonesense. And that has been my point, when man rejects God his thinking becomes futile and irrational. So for the fifth time Mr. Dawkins you need to provide a basis for where morality comes from in your worldview before you can start to criticize (objectively) the behaviour of anybody else.

Christianity gives me a foundation for morality, namely it is based upon the character of God which He has revealed in His word. You might not like it but I have an answer, whereas morality based upon atheism cannot be anything but arbitrary conventions we just make up.

natamllc said...

Mr. Dawkins

here here!

or Hear? Hear?

Here's a Steven Barney quote:

"Baptism and Communion are God's pledge to you.

But these sacraments are more than a pledge, they bestow gifts on those who believe the Words. Through them God provides relief precisely where I'm at a loss.

I can't do anything about my loss or my gain for that matter even when I deliberately can afford too.

I need everything, my loss and gain interupted by an outside Word and a word that intervenes from the outside, a message that doesn't originate from my reason or is flowing from my condemnation, that doesn't even issue from my need that I might know redemption, that redemption is drawing near."

Our Originator provides us relief precisely where we cannot, even if we deliberately try to provide the relief ourself.

It takes the "ALIEN WORD".

You have an "alien word". We all agree on that. It's just that your alien word is not the only True "ALIEN WORD" that is not of our choosing. And it is precisely this "ALIEN WORD" that Satan rebelled against also! hmmmmm

And to quote Bob Dylan, wasn't he the one who sang YOU ARE GONNA BE A SLAVE TO SOMEONE?


natamllc said...

Mr Dawkins

God has your number. He is dialing it now. Can you hear the Church bells ring?

I posted to you earlier and then left with my two sons to go buy them a camp tent for two.

Oh my! What fun! Oh dungheep! Those two boys can no more stay in a room the sides of Buckingham Palace as spend the night in a two man pup tent!

Oh my! What fun! Oh dungheep!

We will see if the Alien Word takes? hmmmmmm.

But to the apropos and not a tosh,

as I was driving with those two adversaries I thought, hmmmmm, Bobby is sure stirred up by you!
Hell, you are very stirred as well.

I commend you for that.

What more concerns me, you, is that God has not let me ly down with dogs and rise up with fleas.


It then came to me, EUREKA! I found it. God has you right between the cross hairs of society.

You are betwixt and between if you were indeed courageous enough to admit it?

God cares for you. Fool, don't you get it?

Oh, a fool now, well in one sort of way seeing you are very brillant with prose and can bloody a good nose I suppose, as the saying goes!

We care for you because God has done His alien work in our lives, Bobby, Lisa and me.

And there are many who come to read these things between us who also accent to that, the sweet exchange we know, but you will soon enough know it as we, me.

I know it Mr. Dawkins.

My only prayer is "Alien Work, hurry up!!!" I know that I know that I know this Mr. Dawkins.

How do I know? I experience the Alien every day now. He first loved me while I was afar off and His enemy.

You are no match for me or My God.

You come at us with words read and understood.

We come at you with an Alien Word.

Mr. Burke

Richard Dawkins said...

Bob, you request I provide some form of basis or framework for means by which I make moral, or ethical decisions. It is based, as all religious viewpoints, are on man-made precepts. Religion's monopoly in the field of ethics has made it extremely difficult to communicate the emotional meaning and connotations of a rational view of life. Just as religion has preempted the field of ethics, turning morality against man, so it has usurped the highest moral concepts of our language, placing them outside this earth and beyond man's reach.

It is the highest level of man's emotions that has to be redeemed from the murk of mysticism and re-directed at its proper object:man. Don't confuse "man-worship" with the many attempts, not to free morality from religion into the realm of reason, but to substitue a secular meaning for the worst, the most profoundly irrational elements of religion. For example, there are all the variants of modern collectivism(communist,fascist,Nazi etc) which preserve the religious-altruist ethics in full and merely paraphrase "society" for God as the beneficiary of man's self-immolation.

Humanists, in my sense of the term, are those who see humankind's highest potential and strive to actualise it. The alternative is man-haters who regard man as a helpless, depraved, and contemptible creature and struggle never to let him discover otherwise. Essentially, the important factor to bear in mind is that the only direct, introspective knowledge of man anyone possesses is of themselves.

Bob said...


Nice statements yet you still don't give any foundation for morality in an atheistic universe. Again from the very outset you reject religion as "man-made". Now I am not here to defend religion in general but rather the truth of Christianity. Now, my very point is that because you reject God you are left to only make irrational stipulations when it comes to ethics. You have some notion that we need to be atheists to be "free" ethically, I challange that again by asking you to give me a foundation for why we even should talk about ethics at all in an atheistic universe?

Where does morality come from in your worldview Mr.Dawkins, you speak of some freedom from theism yet I don't think you can give an answer as to the following:
a)where did morality come from?
b)how do we know what is moral?
c)Why should we accept your standard of morality. (If morality is a convention that man stipulates why shouldn't I go make up my own arbitrary stipulation, make my own rules?

Again Mr.Dawkins you can talk all you want about needing to be freed from theism and how stupid it is but your worldview simply can not account for many of the things you believe in and assume every day (ethics, laws of logic, uniformity of nature).