PDA

View Full Version : Today's Atheists are Shallow



RWGR
06-17-2013, 10:51 AM
I love the remark made by one Oxford don about another: ‘On the surface, he’s profound, but deep down, he’s superficial.’ That sentence has more than once come to mind when reading the new atheists.

Future intellectual historians will look back with wonder at the strange phenomenon of seemingly intelligent secularists in the 21st century believing that if they could show that the first chapters of Genesis are not literally true, that the universe is more than 6,000 years old and there might be other explanations for rainbows than as a sign of God’s covenant after the flood, the whole of humanity’s religious beliefs would come tumbling down like a house of cards and we would be left with a serene world of rational non-believers getting on famously with one another.

Whatever happened to the intellectual depth of the serious atheists, the forcefulness of Hobbes, the passion of Spinoza, the wit of Voltaire, the world-shattering profundity of Nietzsche? Where is there the remotest sense that they have grappled with the real issues, which have nothing to do with science and the literal meaning of scripture and everything to do with the meaningfulness or otherwise of human life, the existence or non-existence of an objective moral order, the truth or falsity of the idea of human freedom, and the ability or inability of society to survive without the rituals, narratives and shared practices that create and sustain the social bond?

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8932301/atheism-has-failed-only-religion-can-fight-the-barbarians/

dancingqueen
06-17-2013, 05:09 PM
Whatever happened to the intellectual depth of the serious atheists, the forcefulness of Hobbes, the passion of Spinoza, the wit of Voltaire, the world-shattering profundity of Nietzsche? Where is there the remotest sense that they have grappled with the real issues, which have nothing to do with science and the literal meaning of scripture and everything to do with the meaningfulness or otherwise of human life, the existence or non-existence of an objective moral order, the truth or falsity of the idea of human freedom, and the ability or inability of society to survive without the rituals, narratives and shared practices that create and sustain the social bond?

Yes, abstract concepts are wonderful things to discuss, they do force you to think if not for anyone else, but for oneself.
The concrete questions, however, seem to make many Christians uncomfortable... Could it be because tangible answers cannot be argued endlessly?
Just my perspective.

RWGR
06-17-2013, 05:24 PM
Yes, abstract concepts are wonderful things to discuss, they do force you to think if not for anyone else, but for oneself.
The concrete questions, however, seem to make many Christians uncomfortable... Could it be because tangible answers cannot be argued endlessly?
Just my perspective.

What is an example of a "concrete question"?

dancingqueen
06-17-2013, 05:27 PM
How old is the Earth?

RWGR
06-17-2013, 05:28 PM
How old is the Earth?

Not sure. A few billion years, maybe.

So how is that a "concrete" issue with Christianity?

dancingqueen
06-17-2013, 05:29 PM
It is a concrete issue with the Christians I know because they believe it is only a couple thousand years old.

RWGR
06-17-2013, 05:41 PM
It is a concrete issue with the Christians I know because they believe it is only a couple thousand years old.

You are taking about a very small percentage of Christians: Young Earth Fundamentalists. I would guess 10-15% of Christians subscribe to this view.

shall I judge all homosexuals by the actions of 15% of them?

dancingqueen
06-17-2013, 05:43 PM
I would need to see a source on that, it has been my experience a large percentage. I will gladly recant the specific example if you can show me this.

RWGR
06-17-2013, 05:48 PM
It is a sub-group within Evangelical Protestantism, just that fact alone points to the probability it is no more than 15%. Catholics are not Young Earth, and they are the largest Christian denomination. Just those two facts alone should be enough proof.

You want to paint all Christianity because of a few Christians you know. For a guy that claims to desire intellectual discussion, I'm sure you see the trouble here.

dancingqueen
06-17-2013, 06:01 PM
So it is just a sub group that believes dinosaurs never roamed the Earth and that humans where put on this Earth within days of the creation?
This honestly is news to me.
So, recanting that example, why don't we discuss the impossibility of one couple ultimately populating the world as we know it with little developmental disabilities. children having children with their mother? brothers and sisters?the chromosomal errors that would exist today would be astounding, yet the majority of us have no problems that would result from inbreeding.
While we are on the topic of inbreeding, cause I imagine you will bring up the "purity" of humans preventing this (or so I have heard) what about the animals from the ark? the same problems would exist.
Resurrection, under the apparent conditions, that is impossible, people cannot come back from the dead. If I remember correctly with no oxygen to the brain after like 5 minutes, you are dead, if you make it alive, you would be severely brain damaged as brain damage begins at something like 3 minutes of no oxygen to the brain.
Moses parting the sea.....
Mortal Jesus healing the ill....
all these are examples of things science has proven (concrete) to be impossible.

RWGR
06-17-2013, 06:17 PM
So it is just a sub group that believes dinosaurs never roamed the Earth and that humans where put on this Earth within days of the creation?
This honestly is news to me.

They have a name: Young Earth Creationists (YEC). Just that fact alone tells you they are a sub-group. Additionally, they are Protestant (a sub-group of Christianity), and they are a sub-group within Protestantism (Fundamentalists, as compared to Mainline). If you want to place them in their true place, they are a sub-group within a sub-group within a sub-group.

Hardly the mainstream view of Christianity.


So, recanting that example, why don't we discuss the impossibility of one couple ultimately populating the world as we know it with little developmental disabilities. children having children with their mother? brothers and sisters?the chromosomal errors that would exist today would be astounding, yet the majority of us have no problems that would result from inbreeding.

Again, you totally ignore the issue at hand, and go on attacking the view of a few YECers. Go on, attack away, I'd take up your side! You are flailing away against Fundies, and I have no dog in that fight.


While we are on the topic of inbreeding, cause I imagine you will bring up the "purity" of humans preventing this (or so I have heard) what about the animals from the ark? the same problems would exist.

So your defense against this article on the Evangelical response to homosexuality is to bring up the story of Noah??

DQ, slow down my friend, you are all over the place right now.

Resurrection, under the apparent conditions, that is impossible, people cannot come back from the dead. If I remember correctly with no oxygen to the brain after like 5 minutes, you are dead, if you make it alive, you would be severely brain damaged as brain damage begins at something like 3 minutes of no oxygen to the brain.

I agree. But if you know Christian beliefs, you know we do not believe Jesus nor God are subject to the rules of the natural world. As such, tryingto disprove something based on natural laws is not going to get us anywhere fast.


Moses parting the sea.....
Mortal Jesus healing the ill....
all these are examples of things science has proven (concrete) to be impossible

Correct, our limited understanding of the natural world has told us these things are impossible.

Which means absolutely nothing when discussing God - an entity not bound by the laws of our natural world.

Wow, dude, you are all over the map...slow down!!

dancingqueen
06-17-2013, 06:40 PM
This conversation has nothing to do with sexuality, It is in response to the link you posted about the decay of discussing abstract concepts and the increase of discussing concrete ideas.

KDawg
06-17-2013, 06:59 PM
So it is just a sub group that believes dinosaurs never roamed the Earth and that humans where put on this Earth within days of the creation?
This honestly is news to me.
I'm a YEC. There is nothing in the bible to suggest that humans didn't co-exist with dinosaurs.


So, recanting that example, why don't we discuss the impossibility of one couple ultimately populating the world as we know it with little developmental disabilities. children having children with their mother? brothers and sisters?the chromosomal errors that would exist today would be astounding, yet the majority of us have no problems that would result from inbreeding.
Adam and Eve were created perfect but they sinned. When sin entered the Garden of Eden, that's when biology started to go wrong...when we started to devolve. "Chromosomal errors" were not an issue in the early generations.

dancingqueen
06-17-2013, 08:52 PM
I'm a YEC. There is nothing in the bible to suggest that humans didn't co-exist with dinosaurs.


Adam and Eve were created perfect but they sinned. When sin entered the Garden of Eden, that's when biology started to go wrong...when we started to devolve. "Chromosomal errors" were not an issue in the early generations.

And this is why the concrete debates hold more ground.
How long did it take to "devolve"?
can humans "devolve"?
what about after the flood?
and not just the humans, genetic defects would have been evident in animals as well, where the animals perfect?

As for the dinosaur thing.... there is nothing that suggests in science that humans co-existed with dinosaurs....

RWGR
06-18-2013, 10:23 AM
When sin entered the Garden of Eden, that's when biology started to go wrong...when we started to devolve. "Chromosomal errors" were not an issue in the early generations.

Okay, you're a "bible only" guy...where in the Bible does it talk about humans devolving?

And do you believe the earth was created in six days?

Last, what of fossils that are dated tens of thousands of years old?

Bluesky
06-20-2013, 02:02 PM
I would need to see a source on that, it has been my experience a large percentage. I will gladly recant the specific example if you can show me this.
What does it matter? You said the question makes CHristians uncomfortable.
It obviously does not. In fact, people on both sides of that age-old question are quite bold and vociferous about it.

Bluesky
06-20-2013, 02:05 PM
all these are examples of things science has proven (concrete) to be impossible.

Absolute fallacy. They have not proven them to be impossible. In fact, many scientists do believe in miracles, the resurrection, etc. We have several scientists in our church. Neuro-physicists, pathologists, doctors, etc..

KDawg
06-23-2013, 05:08 PM
Okay, you're a "bible only" guy...where in the Bible does it talk about humans devolving?

And do you believe the earth was created in six days?

Last, what of fossils that are dated tens of thousands of years old?

For starters, read Genesis 5. Adam lived to be 930 years old, Seth lived to be 912, Enosh 905, Canain 910, Mahalalel 895, Jared 962, Methuselah 969, Lamech 777. Today it's a minor miracle if someone lives to be over 100 years of age.

And yeah, I believe the earth was created in six days...the bible says so explicitly.

The Left Sock
06-23-2013, 05:16 PM
The whole premise of this thread is ridiculous. The very essence of an atheist is that they 'don't believe' in God. So, what is there to get 'deep' about? How can you get deep about something, when you dismiss the existence of it?

RWGR
06-23-2013, 06:11 PM
And yeah, I believe the earth was created in six days...the bible says so explicitly


You do realize that the Bible uses the number 7 to show completeness, and 6 to show incompleteness, right?

RWGR
06-23-2013, 06:13 PM
The whole premise of this thread is ridiculous. The very essence of an atheist is that they 'don't believe' in God. So, what is there to get 'deep' about? How can you get deep about something, when you dismiss the existence of it?

That's what we Christians have been wondering for a long, long time. If God does not exist, why do people go so out of their way to argue against something that doesn't exist?

KDawg
06-23-2013, 06:31 PM
And yeah, I believe the earth was created in six days...the bible says so explicitly


You do realize that the Bible uses the number 7 to show completeness, and 6 to show incompleteness, right?
I was just responding to your question...what does that have to do with God creating the earth in six days?

The Left Sock
06-23-2013, 06:33 PM
"That's what we Christians have been wondering for a long, long time. If God does not exist, why do people go so out of their way to argue against something that doesn't exist?"

Well, because you take absurd assertions, and actively try to recruit others to buy into them, claim you are in sole possession of the truth, and then try to install a social order based on your fantastic thinking, which would have an impact on everyone, if you ever succeeded. So, people actively challenge you, so you don't get too big for your britches.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

RWGR
06-24-2013, 11:04 AM
I was just responding to your question...what does that have to do with God creating the earth in six days?

Created in six, rested on the seventh: 7 = completeness.

Most of the numbers in the Bible are not to be taken literally.

RWGR
06-24-2013, 11:06 AM
"That's what we Christians have been wondering for a long, long time. If God does not exist, why do people go so out of their way to argue against something that doesn't exist?"

Well, because you take absurd assertions, and actively try to recruit others to buy into them, claim you are in sole possession of the truth, and then try to install a social order based on your fantastic thinking, which would have an impact on everyone, if you ever succeeded. So, people actively challenge you, so you don't get too big for your britches.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Christianity provided the social order for the West for many centuries.

What happened when sociopolitical theories absent Christianity were tried? The 20th Century, the bloodiest century in human history.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

hobo
06-24-2013, 11:15 AM
So what happened on the 8th day?

RWGR
06-24-2013, 11:20 AM
So what happened on the 8th day?

The sky is fallin' an' the wheels of life
Are grindin' out a brand new beat
The streets are burnin' with the call of the wild
And I can feel the heat

They'll call you names an' spit in your face
But legends never die
Just pick up your guitar, on your knees an' pray
An' hold your head up high

An' on the 8th day God created rock n' roll
On the 8th day God created rock n' roll

Out of the ashes came the dawn
An' the shape of things to come
Never surrender, just carry on
Straight to kingdom come

You sold your soul an' virginity
Ya can't rape a heart of gold
Yes, you're born to rule, it's destiny
Now it can be told

And on the 8th day God created rock n' roll
And on the 8th day God created rock n' roll

On the 8th day God created rock n' roll
On the 8th day God created rock n' roll

Rock of ages carry the news
To the heart of a brave new world
Feel the noise in the name of rock
Let the heavens roar

And on the 8th day God created rock n' roll
On the 8th day God created rock n' roll
...

: KISS - AND ON THE 8TH DAY

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 12:29 PM
"What happened when sociopolitical theories absent Christianity were tried? The 20th Century, the bloodiest century in human history."

So, Christianity was socio-politically absent during World Wars I and II? That's news to me.

RWGR
06-24-2013, 12:33 PM
"What happened when sociopolitical theories absent Christianity were tried? The 20th Century, the bloodiest century in human history."

So, Christianity was socio-politically absent during World Wars I and II? That's news to me.

It was nowhere near the cultural force it was in previous centuries; also, the two sociopolitical theories I referenced were Communism and Fascism, and, yes,both are quite absent Christian values and the Christian worldview.

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 12:38 PM
"If we pursue this way, if we are decent, industrious, and honest, if we so loyally and truly fulfill our duty, then it is my conviction that in the future as in the past the Lord God will always help us. In the long run He never leaves decent folk in the lurch. Often He may test them, He may send trials upon them, but in the long run He always lets His sun shine upon them once more and at the end He gives them His blessing."

-Adolf Hitler, at the Harvest Thanksgiving Festival on the Buckeburg held on 3 Oct. 1937

RWGR
06-24-2013, 12:43 PM
"If we pursue this way, if we are decent, industrious, and honest, if we so loyally and truly fulfill our duty, then it is my conviction that in the future as in the past the Lord God will always help us. In the long run He never leaves decent folk in the lurch. Often He may test them, He may send trials upon them, but in the long run He always lets His sun shine upon them once more and at the end He gives them His blessing."

-Adolf Hitler, at the Harvest Thanksgiving Festival on the Buckeburg held on 3 Oct. 1937

Hitler was also elected in a democratic fashion. He said what he needed to say to get elected and keep power.

Now, I realize it is difficult for you to understand that one of the worst dictators in history would say one thing, yet do another, but that's what happened. Show me how Hitler's actions reflected Christian values.

Good luck!

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 12:51 PM
"Show me how Hitler's actions reflected Christian values."

Well, as a non-Christian, I am at somewhat of a disadvantage. Perhaps you could demonstrate for me, by showing how Bush's actions while President reflected Christian values?

RWGR
06-24-2013, 12:54 PM
White flag accepted!! :)

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 01:14 PM
That was presumptuous! I have no intention of accepting your white flag.

If you can't provide an example of something you ask for from others, then you were just bluffing, and trying to win a point under false pretenses.

RWGR
06-24-2013, 01:16 PM
That was presumptuous! I have no intention of accepting your white flag.

If you can't provide an example of something you ask for from others, then you were just bluffing, and trying to win a point under false pretenses.

Oh, look, another favorite Soc tactic: push the burden of proof on to the other person, even though the burden of proof belongs to him.

The fact is,you could not defend your previous statement, and are looking to turn the spotlight off of yourself. Too late, champ, you've been busted for, yet again, lying.

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 01:19 PM
In your fragile, eggshell mind, it might be okay to pose challenges to others that you yourself cannot accomplish, but out here in the real world, where the big kids play, you have to be able to demonstrate, 'lead by example' if you will, or lose all legitimacy.

I'll give you three guesses on where you are right now.

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 01:23 PM
Just to recap:

You tasked a non-Christian with demonstrating how Hitler's leadership reflected Christian values. I then asked you, an alleged Christian, to provide an example by demonstrating that with Bush, another alleged Christian, and you completely balked at the idea.

You look very, very silly right now.

RWGR
06-24-2013, 01:25 PM
Just to recap:

You tasked a non-Christian with demonstrating how Hitler's leadership reflected Christian values. I then asked you, an alleged Christian, to provide an example by demonstrating that with Bush, another alleged Christian, and you completely balked at the idea.

You look very, very silly right now.

You inferred Christian values were in the political and social ideals of Communism and Fascism. When asked for proof you were unable to give any. in order to save face (too late) you tried to turn the conversation into a debate on Bush's Christian values.

As anyone can see, you panicked, and look all the worst for it.

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 03:31 PM
"You inferred Christian values were in the political and social ideals of Communism and Fascism."

By deduction, you are inferring that Christian values are integral to the social and political ideals of democracy. You couldn't demonstrate that either, if you tried.

Christians are inherently monarchists.

RWGR
06-24-2013, 04:18 PM
By deduction, you are inferring that Christian values are integral to the social and political ideals of democracy. You couldn't demonstrate that either, if you tried.

I didn't set out to prove anything. You tried to deflect attention away from a point you previously made, a point you could not provide any basis for.

If you want to discuss the integral nature of Christian values in a democracy then make a new thread focused on that. Here, I won't let you do what you love to do: derail a thread in which you've been called out, and found lacking.

Christians are inherently monarchists

That is absurd. Soundy tried to 'prove' this, and the final result for him was not pretty.

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 05:00 PM
Christians have a King, and a lineage of Kings, and you are waiting for that same King to return. There is no voting on it, no questioning of authority, just absolute rule from a Royal Line.

If Christians are not monarchists, then they are nothing at all.

official soonet pu$$ycat
06-24-2013, 08:58 PM
Christians have a King, and a lineage of Kings, and you are waiting for that same King to return. There is no voting on it, no questioning of authority, just absolute rule from a Royal Line.

If Christians are not monarchists, then they are nothing at all.

You are a treat to read. Did you write all this with a straight face? There is no vote on it LOL.

The Left Sock
06-24-2013, 09:39 PM
Jesus showed up, and declared he was the heir to the throne, of the kingdom of God. There was no voting on it, either you believe it, or you don't, but you couldn't vote for anyone else. And the consequences of not believing, well... they are severe.

That's not a democracy. That's a monarchy.

Bluesky
06-25-2013, 02:44 PM
Christians do not have a lineage of Kings. And we are looking to the future for our Messiah/King to come to claim what was always his. In the meantime, we are not monarchists. When we talk about Jesus being our King presently, we are talking about a moral kingdom that informs us how to live in this earthly pilgrimage.

The Left Sock
06-25-2013, 07:28 PM
Well, there is the Father, then the Son. That is clearly lineage. Both are heirs to the Throne. The 'moral' kingdom you refer to has laws, rules, consequences, and absolute authority and judgment. That is a monarchy, in every sense of the word.

Bluesky
06-26-2013, 09:50 AM
Well, if that is the way you want to see it, then you live under a monarchy as well. The Kingdom of Sock. Has a nice ring to it, wouldn't you agree?

RWGR
06-26-2013, 12:45 PM
Christians have a King, and a lineage of Kings, and you are waiting for that same King to return. There is no voting on it, no questioning of authority, just absolute rule from a Royal Line.

If Christians are not monarchists, then they are nothing at all.

You are using two different issues to try and make a coherent point, as if two diametrically opposed realities are not at work here: a losing proposition.

God's kingdom is not of this world, we are told that numerous times; therefore, the Bible is totally mute on if monarchy is the political structure of choice for humanity. The Bible offers no guidance as to what type of government is preferred, though it offers examples as to what that type of government should imbue in its structural and theoretical organization. It's up to humans to decide what form of governance that would be, and history shows at times we get it more right than wrong, and often get it more wrong than right.

lynys
06-26-2013, 06:20 PM
Well, there is the Father, then the Son. That is clearly lineage. Both are heirs to the Throne.

And both are the same being, so how does that work for lineage?

The Left Sock
06-26-2013, 06:34 PM
"And both are the same being, so how does that work for lineage?"

The same way Cinderella got to the ball, I guess. Magic.

RWGR
06-26-2013, 07:29 PM
Soc shot down by his own absurdity!! LOL

His unintended comedic effect was sorely missed.

The Left Sock
06-26-2013, 07:37 PM
Oh, so you want to talk about absurdity, huh? Glad to oblige!

If God and Jesus are one and the same being, then who, may I ask, was Jesus pleading with while dying on the cross?

"Father, why have you forsaken me?" Who was he talking to, himself?

What, did he just cry out with that, for dramatic effect to impress the crowd? Perhaps he was addressing the Great and Powerful Oz?

You might as well chalk the whole thing up to magic, because rational thought will not do the job.

RWGR
06-27-2013, 10:56 AM
Oh, so you want to talk about absurdity, huh? Glad to oblige!

If God and Jesus are one and the same being, then who, may I ask, was Jesus pleading with while dying on the cross?

"Father, why have you forsaken me?" Who was he talking to, himself?

What, did he just cry out with that, for dramatic effect to impress the crowd? Perhaps he was addressing the Great and Powerful Oz?

You might as well chalk the whole thing up to magic, because rational thought will not do the job.

"Rational thought will need do the job"

So, God is diminished to this: someone who fits within our rational thinking. That implies human reasoning is the pinnacle of all, and there can be nothing higher. Review human history and tell me you believe that.

Jesus was God, in human form. He took on human qualities here on earth, and some of those qualities are fear, and anxiety. Satan would never try to tempt God, but he always tries to tempt humans, and that is why he tempted Jesus, right up to the last minute. Satan loses the game if Jesus goes through with God's sacrificial plan to redeem mankind, so he tried one last time to divert Jesus from his earthly mission.

I agree the 'Jesus was God and man' idea is not an easy one to swallow, not at all. But I also believe it is the height of human egotism to believe if we can't totally comprehend something, then that something must be false.

God is not of this world, He is not hemmed in by our natural laws.

The Voice
06-27-2013, 12:46 PM
Oh, so you want to talk about absurdity, huh? Glad to oblige!

If God and Jesus are one and the same being, then who, may I ask, was Jesus pleading with while dying on the cross?

"Father, why have you forsaken me?" Who was he talking to, himself?

What, did he just cry out with that, for dramatic effect to impress the crowd? Perhaps he was addressing the Great and Powerful Oz?

You might as well chalk the whole thing up to magic, because rational thought will not do the job.

#1 your not an atheist?

#2 tell us how your religion is a much more plausible magic act again?

The Voice
06-27-2013, 12:48 PM
"Rational thought will need do the job"

So, God is diminished to this: someone who fits within our rational thinking. That implies human reasoning is the pinnacle of all, and there can be nothing higher. Review human history and tell me you believe that.

Jesus was God, in human form. He took on human qualities here on earth, and some of those qualities are fear, and anxiety. Satan would never try to tempt God, but he always tries to tempt humans, and that is why he tempted Jesus, right up to the last minute. Satan loses the game if Jesus goes through with God's sacrificial plan to redeem mankind, so he tried one last time to divert Jesus from his earthly mission.

I agree the 'Jesus was God and man' idea is not an easy one to swallow, not at all. But I also believe it is the height of human egotism to believe if we can't totally comprehend something, then that something must be false.

God is not of this world, He is not hemmed in by our natural laws.

Translation: Do not question the authority of the church.

Bluesky
06-27-2013, 05:06 PM
The nature of God's existence has to do with what the Biblical text actually teaches. Not with what some human asserts. The Bible teaches that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are of the same essence or nature, but are distinct persons. So the Son is not the Father, the Father is not the Spirit, the Spirit is not the Son, etc. Yet, each Person of the Trinity is God. The fact that Jesus cried out to the Father while on the cross is therefore not incoherent. Jesus is a distinct person from the Father. And as a human, he has two natures - human AND divine.

RWGR
06-27-2013, 06:25 PM
Translation: Do not question the authority of the church.

If that comes from the authority of The Church, then it looks like Protestants are back in the fold! Welcome back!! :)