Atheist Holiday

An atheist complained to his Christian acquaintance, “It’s not fair; there are no atheist holidays! Christians get two Federal holidays, and there is even one holiday named for a Baptist preacher! What gives. We atheists have no recognized national holidays. It’s unfair. It’s discrimination.”

His acquaintance responded, “Well, that’s not exactly so. You all do have a day.”

“What?” questioned the atheist, “no we don’t. What do you mean?”

Replied the Christian, “Of course you do. It’s today, April Fool’s Day!”

“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” Psalm 14:1.

Outgrowing Atheism

Below is a taste of Outgrowing Atheism: it’s time for Richard Dawkins to grow up by David Robertson.

Serious Scholar?

Here you need to grasp how Dawkins uses language. “Serious scholar” means ‘someone who agrees with me’. If they don’t they obviously can be neither serious nor a scholar. Which is why he can dismiss, if he even knows about, Professor Richard Bauckham of the University of St Andrews, whose serious scholarly work Jesus and the Eyewitness is an authoritative piece of academic research.

Likewise when Dawkins confidently asserts that no “educated theologian” believes that Adam and Eve, or Noah is history. But I’m educated (two degrees) and I’m a theologian, and I believe they are history. I may be wrong. But Dawkins’ simplistic Emperor’s clothes attitude – ‘any intelligent person will see that the Emperor is wearing the finest clothes’ – is easily exposed.

It is especially encouraging to read Robertson state, “...I have met more people who were converted to Christ through Dawkins, than have been converted to atheism.”

“Now that’s funny”

Original Hondo Welcome Sign

Last summer the city of Hondo, Texas came under scrunity for their welcome signs. The signs on either end of town on Highway 90 advise drivers “Welcome: This is God’s Country. Please don’t drive through it like Hell. Hondo, Texas.”

The comedian called Larry The Cable Guy is known for the phrase “Now that’s funny. I don’t care who you are.” It seems that would apply to the Hondo “Welcome” signs. Not so. Apparently any public mention of God draws the ire of the angry atheists in the Freedom From Religion Foundation. Apparently humorless heathens and stodgy skeptics are thoroughly damaged by the sign – permanently wounded with a scar that will never heal! That’s why the FFRF demands that the city of Hondo remove the signs. Standing by their theme, Hondo Mayor James Danner asserted, “There’s no way in hell we’re going to take those signs down.”

There are legitimate reasons to be angry and offended. This isn’t one of them. It is much easier to get through life with a little sense of humor. So, all you atheists out there – and any theists who might be offended by their “close to cursing” use of “hell” – just take a deep breath. Now, repeat after me, “Now that’s funny. I don’t care who you are.”

Current Hondo Welcome Sign

Isaac Newton

Isaac Newton in A short Schem of the true Religion

Opposite to the first is Atheism in profession & Idolatry in practise. Atheism is so senseless & odious to mankind that it never had many professors. Can it be by accident that all birds beasts & men have their right side & left side alike shaped (except in their bowells) & just two eyes & no more on either side the face & just two ears on either side the head & a nose with two holes & no more between the eyes & one mouth under the nose & either two fore leggs or two wings or two arms on the sholders & two leggs on the hipps one on either side & no more? Whence arises this uniformity in all their outward shapes but from the counsel & contrivance of an Author? Whence is it that the eyes of all sorts of living creatures are transparent to the very bottom & the only transparent members in the body, having on the outside an hard transparent skin, & within transparent juyces with a crystalline Lens in the middle & a pupil before the Lens all of them so truly shaped & fitted for vision, that no Artist can mend them? Did blind chance know that there was light & what was its refraction & fit the eys of all creatures after the most curious manner to make use of it? These & such like considerations always have & ever will prevail with man kind to beleive that there is a being who made all things & has all things in his power & who is therfore to be feared.Opposite to [Godliness] is atheism in profession, and idolatry in practise. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors. Can it be by accident that all birds, beasts, and men have their right side and left side alike shaped (except in their bowels), and just two eyes and no more on either side of the face, and just two ears on either side of the head, and a nose with two holes and no more between the eyes, and one mouth under the nose, and either two fore legs or two wings or two arms on the sholders and two legs on the hips, one on either side and no more? Whence arises this uniformity in all their outward shapes but from the counsel and contrivance of an author? Whence is it that the eyes of all sorts of living creatures are transparent to the very bottom and the only transparent members in the body, having on the outside an hard transparent skin, and within transparent juices with a crystalline lens in the middle and a pupil before the lens, all of them so truly shaped and fitted for vision that no artist can mend them? Did blind chance know that there was light and what was its refraction, and fit the eyes of all creatures after the most curious manner to make use of it? These and such like considerations always have and ever will prevail with mankind to believe that there is a being who made all things and has all things in his power, and who is therefore to be feared.

Go figure

Today I saw a sign that said:

  "There's probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

I want a lot more assurance than probably to be comfortable enough to "stop worrying"!

Philpot on Practical atheists

"...practical atheists we daily prove ourselves to be. For instance, we profess to believe that God sees everything, and yet we are plotting and planning as though he saw nothing; we profess to know that God can do everything, and yet we are always cutting out schemes, and carving out contrivances, as though he were like the gods of the heathen, looking on and taking no notice; we profess to believe that God is everywhere present to relieve every difficulty and bring his people out of every trial, and yet when we get into the difficulty and into the trial, we speak, think, and act as though there were no such omnipresent God, who knows the circumstances of the case, and can stretch forth his hand to bring us out of it." -- J. C. Philpot

Biological gene replicators

"...atheism believes humans are merely biological, gene replicators trying their hardest to pass their genes on to the next generation in order to survive. What's with all the moral outrage over a female gene replicator being told to reproduce exclusively with an exceptionally aggressive male gene replicator? These two individuals are just a couple of highly evolved hominids. Do atheists get morally outraged with alpha male primates that 'rape' young female primates and add them to the 'harem' as it were?"

Fred Butler

DeBaptismal Certificate

The atheists and freethinkers at the Freedom From Religion Foundation can't seem to think too well apart from religion. If there is no God and baptism means nothing, why would someone would want to be "debaptized"? Yet, that's just what they're "doing".

If Baptists would stick to their dogma -- consensual baptism of believers -- there would be little of the certificate to which they could object. Language such as "before reaching an age of consent" and "baby...must be cleansed of [Original Sin] by baptism" belongs to the paedobaptists. Usually Baptists will gladly, with freethought and reason, "exclude from any claims of religious affiliation" those who deny their faith and practice. The certificate includes several items important to the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with the motto “Freedom depends upon freethinkers” at the bottom.

We are proponents of freedom and religion (which includes from religion for those who wish it) -- but it's a mite scary if “Freedom depends upon [the freethinking of the] freethinkers [at the Freedom from Religion Foundation].” 

At least they're having fun with it, and I suppose you can't fault them for that.

Find a link to the language and PDF of the DeBaptismal Certificate HERE.

 [Note: "Annie Laurie, by the way, is one of the lucky 18% of FFRF members who grew up in a freethinking home and was spared baptism by water, fire or Sunday school." I noticed this little blurb on the "debaptism" page. I wonder if the atheists and freethinkers at FFRF subject their children to atheism and freethinking in their homes "before reaching an age of consent"? Or maybe they teach religion to them?? Oh, the quandry!]

Stop the Insanity!

Seems like back yonder somewhere I remember a media star or personality who would shout "Stop the Insanity!" Where are they now?

The Freedom From Religion Foundation -- from their sarcastic DeBaptismal Certificate to protests where they have no legal standing (and where the people they are supposedly standing for often have no interest) -- now has a wonderful new target -- a Star of David on a Holocaust memorial! Seriously?

The Freedom From Religion Foundation claims that the Star of David represents Judaism in the same way the cross represents Christianity. They simply have that wrong. In fact, many Orthodox Jews reject this symbol. It is associated with Judaism in a sense because Judaism and national Jews are so intertwined and inseparable (even when the Jews themselves are not religious, or even atheist). There is no evidence that this symbol originates out of the Hebrew Bible, or that as a symbol of the Jews it has anything more than a semi-modern origin (17th century). It was chosen by the Zionist movement as their symbol in 1897.

The Star of David has a particularly significant and poignant connection to the holocaust. This emblem was used by the Nazis as a way of identifying Jews. Yes, others were victims of the holocaust as well, including Romani and Christians. About 2/3 of the nine million Jews residing in Europe before the Holocaust were killed during this period.

Even if the Star of David represented Judaism in the same way the cross does Christianity, no one will be surprised or traumatized to see a Star of David at a Holocaust Memorial, even one on state property. No one except the Freedom From Religion Foundation, who choose to traumatize themselves for reasons unknown to average folks.

Stop the Insanity!

Read and/or View
Atheist Group Battles Planned Holocaust Memorial's Inclusion of the Star of David
Statehouse Holocaust Memorial Causes Protest

A Theist commends An Atheist Defends Religion

An Atheist Defends Religion: Why Humanity is Better Off with Religion than without It, Bruce Sheiman. New York: Alpha/Penguin Group, 2009, 239 pages. ISBN 9781592578542, $14.95.

This book is a welcome relief from anti-religious diatribes such as The God Delusion by atheist Richard Dawkins. Unlike those books, An Atheist Defends Religion is written by an atheist who sees religion as a valuable asset to society even though he does not embrace it. Unlike those atheists who want, when they have reached the top of the hill, to push the prophet and the priest down to their demise, Sheiman believes the world is a better place because of religion (pp. ix-x).

The back cover describes the author as "an atheist who wants to believe in God." After reading the book, I would describe Bruce Sheiman as "an atheist who does not want to believe in a random chaotic world without purpose."

The book is designed to reach "the 'moderate majority' of religious America: people who are not militant atheists or literalist believers; people who accept that science and religion are essential for a fulfilling life (p. vi)."

Sheiman is a committed atheist who accepts the prevailing theories of science, big bang evolution, and so forth. He does not defend any particular religion, though it is clear that he believes the enlightenment of the present world arrives mostly through the progress of Christianity.

There are a few defects in the book, but they do not greatly obstruct its usefulness. An Atheist Defends Religion has neither index nor footnotes/endnotes. Both would be helpful. After defining fundamentalism as a form of extremism (chapter 6), I was disappointed that Sheiman throws all theists who believe in a literal creation into the "fundamentalist theism" pot (pp. 145, 148) -- a pot of crackpots, radicals and extremists -- even though there is great diversity of belief and action within this group.

The end of the book reveals a slightly different view and conclusion than one might expect from the title. This work is not only a defense of religion, but an attempt to move the fringes toward a compromised middle where science and religion co-exist -- "a Third Way, a compromise path between two polar opposites (p. 219)." In Sheiman's Third Way equation, there is no room for militant atheists like Richard Dawkins or fundamentalist Bible believers who will not believe the evolutionary origins of science. It may forecast a milquetoast world toward which we move -- one in which freedom of speech is jettisoned for the tolerance of toleration and the fringes are repudiated as hate-speakers and incarcerated as evil-doers. This is not the author's intent, but could be an adverse side effect of such as vision.

I cannot accept his proposal, though I enjoyed the book and consider it worth reading. It will make you think. It is also a conversation the brightest conservative Christian thinkers need to engage.