Author Topic: Atheists vs. Grace  (Read 2623 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Richpo64

  • Guest
Atheists vs. Grace
« on: December 13, 2007, 03:37:45 PM »
Atheists vs. Grace
By Marvin Olasky
Thursday, December 13, 2007


On the roller coaster of history, we're seeing a hands-in-the-air moment as atheistic books soar onto best-seller lists. Some Christians are alarmed at the furious flurry, but there's no need to be: This, too, shall pass.

Atheistic authors see themselves as avant-garde, but they merely are echoing the riffs of 19th-century scoffers who predicted the imminent demise of Christianity. Gilded Age orator Robert Ingersoll, for example, said that when Christians dominate schools and media, it is hard to mount an attack on concepts of revelation and miracles, but "now that religion's monopoly has been broken, it is within the compass of any human being to see those evidences and proofs as the feeble-minded inventions that they are."

So what happened? Why are many churches in the U.S. booming? Why is Christianity expanding so rapidly in Africa and China? To begin to answer that, we should let our imaginations run wild: What if in the 20th century, in the biggest country by land area and also in the biggest country by population, leaders had required the teaching of atheism in all schools? Freed of "feeble-minded inventions," wouldn't the world be a better place?

Oh, you say we don't have to imagine? You say the Soviet Union and China did establish atheism and the results were not pretty? Atheists regularly write about the ravages of the Inquisition. Sure: It appears that the Inquisition over the centuries killed 5,000 people, which in my view is 5,000 too many. But Stalin and Mao killed not 5,000 or 50,000 or 500,000 or 5 million, but at least 50 million. Torturing and killing innocent people is a human phenomenon, not a religious one. There's plenty of sin to go around.

Keeping that Soviet and Chinese experience in mind, it's remarkable that Christopher Hitchens, author of "God Is Not Great," claims his fellow atheists "may differ on many things, but what we respect is free inquiry, openmindedness, and pursuit of ideas for their own sake." Who is "we"? Hitchens writes that atheists who disagree on a question "resolve it by evidence and reasoning and not by mutual excommunication." But the 20th century was a century of atheists resolving their disputes not by excommunication, but by murdering each other.

Hitchens argues that biblical commands lead Christians to two conclusions: either "a continual scourging and mortification of the flesh," along with confessions of guilt and denunciation of others, or "organized hypocrisy," with churchgoers paying the religious authorities to give them a break. He offers two alternatives: a "spiritual police state" or a "spiritual banana republic."

But the advent of Christmas offers a third alternative: grace. John Newton, the author of the hymn "Amazing Grace," had been a slave trader. He became a Christian, finally realized the evil he had done and could fight with confidence against slavery, despite his past, because he knew his sins were forgiven.

The atheistic best-sellers often lump together all religions, but Christianity differs from other religions in its emphasis on grace. Lots of religions are bargaining opportunities: "I'll do this for you, Allah, or Vishnu, and you'll do something or me." As we saw on Sept. 11, bargaining religions can cause big trouble sometimes: Fly an airplane into a building, and you get a big reward. Christianity, though, is about grace. We can't buy God off. We can't trade with him. Some folks never understand this, but those who do find it's enormously liberating.

Grace means that when a prodigal son returns, his past is not held against him. Some people keep close records of wrongs and hate the idea of brand-new beginnings, but Christmas celebrates liberation from the past. "He rules the world with truth and grace," the old carol tells us, and the beauty of Christian belief is that truth and grace go together in displaying the "wonders of His love."

Let heaven and nature sing.


Marvin Olasky is editor-in-chief of World, vice president for academic affairs of The King's College and a professor at The University of Texas. For additional commentary by Marvin Olasky throughout the week, go to www.worldmagblog.com.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2007, 04:36:07 PM »
There will always be atheists, just as there will always be agnostics and believers.

As a rule, people tend to be believers when indoctrinated as very young children.

The basic beliefs of Christianity are that we are all sinful because the first woman, created from the first man's rib, took poor dietary advice from a talking snake. There is nothing we can do about this: it doomed us forever.

Except that God, reincarnated as his son, managed to return for a short spell after being brutalized as a sort of zombie and spread the word that if we ritualistically drank his blood and ate his flesh, this special cannibalism (Deophagy?) would save us from the bad luck our distant ancestor had with the talking snake. But only if we really believe.

But if we learned this as wee tykes, it still makes sense to some of us.



"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2007, 05:35:40 PM »

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2007, 05:40:19 PM »
The basic beliefs of Christianity are that we are all sinful because the first woman, created from the first man's rib, took poor dietary advice from a talking snake. There is nothing we can do about this: it doomed us forever.






Observation seems to confirm that human beings are sinfull, what explanation for this makes sense to you?

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2007, 06:11:44 PM »
this is why people leave
A friend of mine was told children of divorce parents are all going to hell.
so he got up and left since he saw no reason to bother and stay there anymore.
painting an image of no redemption is a tough sell for religions

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2007, 07:15:04 PM »
I got up and left after the pastor told us who to vote for in 2000.

Never been sorry. 
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2007, 08:19:47 PM »
I remember a museum tour about japanese budhism
at one time it require 6 years to become budhist.
then after years of low memberships it got changed to just say budha 6 times and your in.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2007, 08:12:57 AM »

Observation seems to confirm that human beings are sinfull, what explanation for this makes sense to you?

=======================================================================
I don't think people are of necessity sinful. Much of the time, they act to preserve their lives and lifestyle, not to deliberately harm others.

If I concede that people ARE sinful, however, isn't it extremely silly to blame it on a tale involving talking snakes persuading an uneducated couple to ingest a forbidden fruit?

Perhaps they were born sinful.

My thesis is that life evolved, and not to a degree of perfection, just to the degree required for survival of the species to the point at which the species can reproduce.

God did not create a perfect world, and then have stupid disobedient mankind screw it up. The truth is, the world has never been perfect, and will never be perfect to any definition of perfection that we might come up with. We can, however, improve on what we have by using our minds and cooperating with another to make it better.

This is not as pretty a tale as waiting for Jesus to come down and make it all a paradise again, but it has the advantage of being more believable as well as more logical.

We would all be better off if wqe would just give up the entire concept of any sort of Messiah.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2007, 06:29:15 PM »
You make your case well.

I am not going to agree , but I can see the cogence in your writing.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #9 on: December 14, 2007, 11:26:50 PM »
It might well be that a creator God caused the world to be created, and the method by which the species developed was evolution. It is entirely possible that the Creator God was NOT a perfect being, just a being powerful enough to put things in motion.

I do not dispute the fact that it is every bit as difficult to disprove the existence of a Creator than it is to prove his (or her, or its) existence.

It is an entirely different thing to declare that this particular creator God is/ was a perfect, omnipotent, all knowing being that is omniscient (everywhere at once) and exists outside of time, and was into creating angels, talking snakes and all that other schlock that accompanies the Christian religion.

There is some logic is assuming a merely powerful being that put things into motion, and something entirely different to declare that the talking snakes, forbidden fruit, humongeous boat with a pair of every critter in Creation in it, and a Son o' God who can die and save people who have not only not sinned yet, but will not exist for 1900 years or more. That is just silly. Sorry if it offends, but it is.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2007, 12:10:17 AM »
even though I`m baptist I alkways though god had too much involvement in our live and it kinda seem he doing damage control
if he got it right the 1st time why bother with the flood.
if he new the tower of babylon was being made why get upset?
hmmm
I`m trouble again ain`t I

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2007, 01:32:55 AM »
The Old Testament:
God Micromanages.

Interesting concept!

The story of Job has always really bothered me.  Someone told me, "Oh, he got an even better wife and children than before!1!"
Pfft.
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #12 on: December 15, 2007, 03:37:30 AM »
It might well be that a creator God caused the world to be created, and the method by which the species developed was evolution. It is entirely possible that the Creator God was NOT a perfect being, just a being powerful enough to put things in motion.

I do not dispute the fact that it is every bit as difficult to disprove the existence of a Creator than it is to prove his (or her, or its) existence.

It is an entirely different thing to declare that this particular creator God is/ was a perfect, omnipotent, all knowing being that is omniscient (everywhere at once) and exists outside of time, and was into creating angels, talking snakes and all that other schlock that accompanies the Christian religion.

There is some logic is assuming a merely powerful being that put things into motion, and something entirely different to declare that the talking snakes, forbidden fruit, humongeous boat with a pair of every critter in Creation in it, and a Son o' God who can die and save people who have not only not sinned yet, but will not exist for 1900 years or more. That is just silly. Sorry if it offends, but it is.



So if there were a Creator , we would understand him quite easily?
Certainly he would never do anythinghard for us to understand.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #13 on: December 15, 2007, 03:51:24 AM »
The Old Testament:
God Micromanages.

Interesting concept!

The story of Job has always really bothered me.  Someone told me, "Oh, he got an even better wife and children than before!1!"
Pfft.


There may be some compression in time , although God does a lot of diffrent things in the Old Testiment , the time it took to do was several centurys so he might have been no more busy then than now.

Job might have been real person or an allegorical story, I woud not know the diffrence , what is the point of the story to you?

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Atheists vs. Grace
« Reply #14 on: December 15, 2007, 10:14:09 AM »
There may be some compression in time , although God does a lot of diffrent things in the Old Testiment , the time it took to do was several centurys so he might have been no more busy then than now.

Job might have been real person or an allegorical story, I woud not know the diffrence , what is the point of the story to you?
=========================================================================================

If God is omnipotent, eternal, and exists outside time (whatever that means), then the term "busy" does not apply, as he can do everything at once.
He could have created the Universe in less than a millisecond.

The point of Book of Job is that the priests who made it up thought of God as a deeply disturbed father figure who rewarded love, respect and loyalty with cruelty so he could win a stupid bet, which, if he really were omnipotent, he knew he could win from the git-go. God knows he can beat the Devil, and the Devil knows this, too. God, it is said, can also see into the future, so there was absolutely no need to diddle poor Job for any reason. The Devil will not be improved by the knowledge that he can't win, and God cannot learn more than he already knows, because he knows everything already.

A God that would treat Job as described in this asinine tale would routinely kick puppies just to hear them yelp. No one needs such a deity. That is why we don't leave offerings to Zeus, Ares, Hermes and such anymore. Because they suck.



The story also emphasizes that God cannot be understood: he does whatever the poo he wishes and you wil never be able to understand why. This is why you need us priests, and why we deserve more money. Fork it over.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."