Archive for the ‘Atheism’ Category
New York, May 2, 2007 – Actor Kirk Cameron and best-selling author Ray Comfort will square off with two atheists in New York on Saturday, May 5. ABC originally planned to stream the 90-minute debate LIVE on their website, but decided to reschedule the broadcast to capture a larger audience. They will broadcast the entire debate on ABC.com on Wednesday, May 9 at 1:00 p.m. EST.
Comfort-who claims he can prove the existence of God, scientifically, without mentioning faith or the Bible-stated, "The network originally offered me only four minutes to present my case. After speaking with Kirk and conferring with the atheists, they settled on 13 minutes. I'm ecstatic. I can prove the existence of God in that amount of time.
"We are very grateful to ABC for taking this courageous step," Comfort continued. "As far as we know, nothing like this has ever been done before. ABC's website is already the 7th most visited news site, with 19 million visitors every month. But with more than 177 million people in the U.S. who call themselves Christians, we are sure that it will draw an even larger viewing audience. Is there actually evidence for God? That's the most important question any of us will ever consider."
Cameron added, "We are excited that the network has decided to do this, because we have something very relevant to present. Most people think that belief in God is simply a matter of blind faith, and that His existence can't be proven. We will not only prove that God exists, but as an ex-atheist I'll show that the issue keeping so many people from believing in God-Darwinian evolution-is completely unscientific. It's a fairy-tale for grownups."
The debate came about after ABC ran a story in January about hundreds of atheists videotaping themselves blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
"But," Comfort continued, "there is something more sinister here than a few people not believing in God. Why would so many be so bitter against Christianity in particular? Why aren't they making videos that blaspheme Buddha or Mohammed or Ghandi? We made our own video clip and posted it on www.Hollywoodblasphemy.com to expose why.
As of May 2 there is still an opportunity for people to join in the debate, by submitting questions that will be passed on to the panelists. ABC will limit the live audience to 100 people, evenly divided between atheists and believers. The debate will be moderated by Martin Bashir, and on May 9 a shortened version of the debate will be aired on Nightline.
For further information, contact mark@livingwaters.com
by Thomas E. Brewton
Liberals' head-in-the-sand urge to pull troops out of Iraq is nothing new. Western democracies, entranced with liberal Progressivism, have failed repeatedly to preserve social and political stability.
In words that apply to public opinion today, Walter Lippmann, in The Public Philosophy (1954), described his dismay in the summer of 1938, when war in Europe seemed inevitable.
….there was no sure prospect that France and Great Britain would be able to withstand the [German] onslaught that was coming. They were unprepared, their people were divided and demoralized. The Americans were far away, were determined to be neutral, and were unarmed….. I began writing, impelled by the need to make more intelligible to myself the alarming failure of the Western liberal democracies to cope with the realities of [the 20th] century.
by Robert E. Meyer
It is quite possible that atheists as a group are more intelligent than the community of theists at large. I don't have statistical evidence to support this claim, but anecdotally, I can believe that it is quite likely. Many, who become atheists, probably arrive at a crisis, where there are points of tension in reconciling Christianity with their own constructs of logic and reason. The atheist may say that this migration occurs because intelligent people gravitate toward a worldview distilled from logic and reason, as opposed to one conjured from superstition and unquestioning acceptance. That seems a bit self-serving and laced with hubris, though. Based on my observations, both groups are intellectually stratified—ignorant theists, astute atheists, and vice-versa. You realize that apologists for theism are themselves intellectual giants, when the best are pitted in debate against their atheist counterparts.
The positive argument about intelligent people is easily reversed. I could conclude that greater levels of intelligence present a pitfall of conceit that the atheist steps into. High levels of intelligence can cause a belief of invulnerability and hubris–that humanity will solve all problems and eventually gain a comprehensive knowledge of the universe–thus God is, or will become, unneeded and unwanted. This is the faith (though they might call their faith claims "confidence based on experience," if that is a distinction with a difference) of naturalism. That "faith" is justified according to its devotees, in that once upon a time, empirical knowledge existed as a small corpus of information, yet today it has snowballed into a juggernaut. While is it true that empirical knowledge has grown exponentially, few are sagaciously differentiating between that which is presently unknown and that which is by definition unknowable (as theists might say, hidden in the mind of God).
by Robert E. Meyer
As a Christian believer, I am quite content to let the atheist believe what he or she wants. My rationale for this and other pieces on the subject of atheism is a response to the often hostile and aggressive charges made against Christianity as a system of thought.
Some time ago, I was contacted by the proprietor of some irreverently named atheist website. Apparently he took issue with a certain piece I had written months earlier regarding my conclusions about a biblical passage from Matthew chapter 6 (one can only wonder why an atheist would want to dispute about biblical exegesis). I responded to his inquiry thinking that was the end of the discussion. The next day, I got a wave of E-mails making rather disparaging remarks, which had little to do with the topic in question. Based on what I could glean from the responses, their apparent Modus Operandi , was to roast a selected individual in an attempt to solicit an angry visceral response. If that didn't work, they would bring in their "cleaner" to finish the job, as I discovered yet the following morning. Here was his "love letter."
"As an unrepentant blasphemer, you see me and those like me as damned. Good for you! Enjoy it, Bob. But what you need to know is that all atheists see you as a delusional, intellectually inferior, weak-willed, gullible sucker who's incapable of distinguishing between fantasy and reality, and we laugh at you because of it. I would never hire an evangelical Christian. They believe in nonsense and as such can't be trusted with things of importance. If I were a customer prospect, I'd never buy a thing from you. (I wouldn't trust your ability to support your customers in an effective and intelligent manner.) If I were a loan officer, I'd never put a dime in your hand. (I wouldn't trust your ability to manage your finances or maintain a job through which you could repay me.) If you were a daycare owner, I'd never leave my child with you. (If I couldn't trust you with money, how could I possibly trust you with my child?) In fact, I wouldn't even trust you for the time of day if I had to catch a plane. Your intellect, and that of people like you, is sorely compromised, and I'd never allow your kind to affect me personally in any way shape or form. If the rest of the "god-believing" world wants to trust your intellect, then good for you. You shall have their trust, their employ, their business, their money, and their respect. Kudos!
Enjoy your delusion."