| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"tisdawg" |
| Date: |
21 Apr 2004 02:06:27 PM |
| Object: |
Comments on "Does atheism require more faith?" rubbish? |
The stuff that makes it to print always amazes me. So far, I've found
the following on three conservative news websites. I laugh at this
kind of stuff, but I know that others are taking this stuff seriously.
And that's scary.
Don't the errors in logic and judgement just jump out? Any comments
on this rubbish?
I'm thinking I might write to him, but in the light of his new book
"Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging Political War Against
Christianity," I don't think he would even bother to read a liberal
atheist's viewpoint/comments.
-----/-----/-----/-----
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/dl20040420.shtml
Does atheism require more faith?
David Limbaugh
April 20, 2004
I want to tell you about an important new book I hope will be widely
disseminated. Though its subject is the truth of Christianity, it
needs to be read by far more than just "the choir."
I didn't come to faith in Christ effortlessly. I began my adult
spiritual journey as a skeptic seeking answers for life's ultimate
questions. In the process I did a great deal of reading on Christian
theology and apologetics (defense of the faith).
I discovered, to my initial surprise, that there is an extensive body
of evidence supporting Christianity's exclusive truth claims.
Knowledge of this evidence doesn't automatically lead one to faith,
but it certainly helps to remove obstacles we sometimes unwittingly
use as excuses for neglecting our spiritual "business" or flat out
rejecting the truth.
Some Christians seem threatened by the very idea of marshaling
evidence in support of their faith. But the Bible itself tells us that
we should "always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks
you to give the reason for the hope that you have" (1 Peter 3:15).
It is healthy to have doubts and work through resolving them, which
only fortifies your faith and better positions you to withstand
challenges you may encounter along the way.
Christianity has nothing to fear from a thorough investigation of the
evidence. That's why I was fascinated when I happened onto a column by
Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. a few weeks ago, wherein
Dionne discussed a recent article he'd enjoyed in the New Republic by
Leon Wieseltier.
In the article, Wieseltier "praises atheists for taking the question
of God's existence so seriously that they force believers to do the
same … There is no greater insult to religion than to expel strictness
of thought from it."
I certainly agree that a Christian's faith must hold up to
intellectual scrutiny. But do atheists actually take the question of
God's existence as seriously as Wieseltier and Dionne suggest? I have
my doubts.
Indeed, widely respected Christian apologists Norman Geisler and Frank
Turek dispute that notion in their new book, "I Don't Have Enough
Faith to Be an Atheist." Geisler and Turek confront the conventional
wisdom that Christians are an unthinking lot whose faith is devoid of
intellect and that atheists need no faith to sustain their belief
system.
The authors show that Christian faith and reason are not mutually
exclusive, but complementary and that there is an abundance of
evidence for the truth of Christianity. Conversely, they show that it
is impossible to be an atheist without a substantial amount of faith.
They note, for example, that naturalistic biologists claim "that life
generated spontaneously from nonliving chemicals by natural laws
without any intelligent intervention."
These scientists believe that a "one-celled animal known as an amoeba
(or something like it) came together by spontaneous generation…" But
we now know there is incredible complexity in "the message found in
the DNA of a one-celled amoeba (a creature so small, several hundred
could be lined up in an inch)."
"The message found in just the cell nucleus of a tiny amoeba is more
than all 30 volumes of the Encyclopedia Britannica combined, and the
entire amoeba has as much information in its DNA as 1,000 complete
sets of the Encyclopedia Britannica." And "we must emphasize that
these 1,000 encyclopedias do not consist of random letters but of
letters in a very specific order -- just like real encyclopedias."
You get the point: Atheists have to have enormous faith to believe
that such complex messages exist in the absence of intelligent design.
But when you closely examine the evidence supporting many Christian
claims, you'll find that they "are certain beyond reasonable doubt."
As such, "it's not faith in Christianity that's difficult but faith in
atheism or any other religion. That is, once one looks at the
evidence, we think it takes more faith to be a non-Christian than it
does to be a Christian."
The authors admit there are obstacles to a belief in Christianity. In
the course of the book, they systematically address the perceived
intellectual objections, emotional obstacles and volitional reasons to
reject Christianity. The authors' treatment of these issues is
compelling.
I felt so strongly about the value of "I Don't Have Enough Faith …"
that when the authors honored me with a request to write the foreword
for it I readily agreed. This is the ideal all-in-one book for you to
share with your doubting friends and to bolster your faith in Truth.
You owe yourself a read.
©2004 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/dl20040420.shtml
-----/-----/-----/-----
.
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Comments on "Does atheism require more faith?" rubbish? |
21 Apr 2004 09:35:32 PM |
|
|
In article <qtfd809kaiv5b9qmp3ibh1ro1uto01756j@4ax.com>,
tisdawg@san.rr.com says...
Does atheism require more faith?
As usual, a severe double standard applies. On the one hand theists
tell you that faith is a virtue. But when they want to attack atheists
they call it a religion and say it requires "too much faith". Gee, the
worst thing that they can say about atheists seems to be the allegation
that it is a "religion" which would make no worse than them and that we
believe our own position with as little evidence as they have for their
own superstitions.
I won't comment too much on the content of what David Limbaugh wrote.
But I would point out that it's enough to know that the book to which
he's referring was written by consummate moron and lying hypocritic
Norman Geisler.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Comments on "Does atheism require more faith?" rubbish? |
21 Apr 2004 05:04:21 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 19:06:27 GMT, tisdawg <tisdawg@san.rr.com> wrote:
The stuff that makes it to print always amazes me. So far, I've found
the following on three conservative news websites. I laugh at this
kind of stuff, but I know that others are taking this stuff seriously.
And that's scary.
I know. I saw it too.
The people who say that are either lying or stupid. There is no other
answer.
And they compound it in "debate" by imagining we're "arguing by
insult".
Don't the errors in logic and judgement just jump out? Any comments
on this rubbish?
I'm thinking I might write to him, but in the light of his new book
"Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging Political War Against
Christianity," I don't think he would even bother to read a liberal
atheist's viewpoint/comments.
-----/-----/-----/-----
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/dl20040420.shtml
Does atheism require more faith?
David Limbaugh
Say no more.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
