Atheism Culture

Atheist TV is a bust, and no wonder

Spread the love

It can’t even wow Salon:

And yet after watching four hours of its programming and even despite my own lack of religious belief, I find it hard to imagine that even a casual nonbeliever would tune in, let alone someone on the fence about the existence of a higher power. AtheistTV adheres to nasty stereotypes about atheism — smugness, gleeful disregard for others’ beliefs — to a degree that’s close to unwatchable.

See, atheism is not interesting. Once you say there is no God (or cosmic order), people reasonably give up the topic of religion.

So of course atheist TV tanks IF it needs a broad audience.

Who wants to sit there and listen to someone in a  weird shirt detracting other people’s ideas?

Skinny: Most of us have at least one Uncle “Oh please, DON’T get him started on ….” in our own circles anyway. We weren’t asking for more of that, and for sure are not asking for how to pay for it.

We have lives. Or something like lives, anyway. Whoever sat through four hours of that stuff should get danger pay.

How about this Atheist TV zinger: Calling Jesus “the zombie Jew”? A position zillions of people agree with, you can bet on it. 😉 – d.

Hat tip: Stephanie West Allen at Brains on Purpose

25 Replies to “Atheist TV is a bust, and no wonder

  1. 1
    camdenguy says:

    I can’t imagine why anyone wouldn’t want to spend hours watching program after program telling us why there is no reason or purpose to life and how we are merely the result of several hundred billion lucky chemical accidents, followed by more hours of endless diatribes against those who disagree!! Pass the popcorn!!

  2. 2
    bornagain77 says:

    of interest:

    The bizarre – and costly – cult of Richard Dawkins
    It’s like a church without the good bits. Membership starts from $85 a month
    Excerpt: For $85 a month, you get discounts on his merchandise, and the chance to meet ‘Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science personalities’. Obviously that’s not enough to meet the man himself. For that you pay $210 a month — or $5,000 a year — for the chance to attend an event where he will speak.

    When you compare this to the going rate for other charismatic preachers, it does seem on the high side. The Pentecostal evangelist Morris Cerullo, for example, charges only $30 a month to become a member of ‘God’s Victorious Army’, which is bringing ‘healing and deliverance to the world’. And from Cerullo you get free DVDs, not just discounts.

    But the $85 a month just touches the hem of rationality. After the neophyte passes through the successively more expensive ‘Darwin Circle’ and then the ‘Evolution Circle’, he attains the innermost circle, where for $100,000 a year or more he gets to have a private breakfast or lunch with Richard Dawkins, and a reserved table at an invitation-only circle event with ‘Richard’ as well as ‘all the benefits listed above’, so he still gets a discount on his Richard Dawkins T-shirt saying ‘Religion — together we can find a cure.’

    The website suggests that donations of up to $500,000 a year will be accepted for the privilege of eating with him once a year: at this level of contribution you become a member of something called ‘The Magic of Reality Circle’. I don’t think any irony is intended.
    http://www.spectator.co.uk/fea.....d-dawkins/

  3. 3
    Mung says:

    Top ten reasons why you should watch atheist TV.

    #1. It’s better than dying and going to hell.

  4. 4
    Acartia_bogart says:

    “See, atheism is not interesting.”

    I don’t think that any atheist, myself included, ever said that it was. It doesn’t claim to be. It doesn’t claim to provide anyone with a meaning or purpose to life. Its only claim is that there is no “higher” power. No supernatural entity who created the heavens and earth.

  5. 5
    News says:

    Mung at 3 – How do I know that it is better than dying and going to hell? If it’s as dull as dishwater, … give us all another reason.

  6. 6
    bornagain77 says:

    #2. Sunday mornings are free anyway.
    #3. Because I choose to even though I have no free will.
    #4. It’s the right thing to do even though right and wrong don’t exist.
    #5. Because being a mindless TV staring zombie goes with the territory of denying I have a mind.
    #6. Because it gives my life meaning even though life has no meaning.
    #7. Because mocking God is a 24 hour, life long, undertaking and we need all the support we can get.
    #8. Because my belief is important to me even though I deny the importance of belief.
    #9. Because I need someone just as smug and arrogant as I am to tell me how smart I am for not believing in God.
    #10. Because if I don’t worship God I’m still compelled to worship something so I might as well worship 24 hour atheist TV.

    Music:

    Extreme – Hole Hearted
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-h4A7bF8wQ

  7. 7
    jstanley01 says:

    From OP linked:

    One hardly needs to be religious to see the rhetorical flaws in Andy Shernoff, the frontman of punk band The Dictators, describing himself as “a little like Martin Luther King” before asking the audience “Ready for some sarcasm? Ridiculous ideas need to be mocked.” That Shernoff’s performance indulges straight-up homophobia and misogyny in a frankly mean-spirited song about giving Jesus oral sex is just a fringe benefit of being a radical truth-teller who doesn’t care whom one offends. Beyond the catharsis of mockery, what can AtheistTV offer? What alternative does it provide? Leaving aside even the question of winning over believers, how can it even keep atheists watching if it’s just a perpetual drumbeat of calling Jesus “the zombie Jew”?

    Seemed like a good idea at the time, I guess. After all, catharsis is so, you know. So clean. Especially when it comes from mockery (do tell). How could the concept have missed, really? “Sorry about the loan, Mom.

    If my (recent) experience is any gauge, talk to an average “new atheist,” and he or she likely has exactly zero idea that what they’ve hanged their hat on “scientifically” — Darwinian evolution — has all but gone belly up. Which becomes evident when all they can do, when the subject of ID comes up, is blubber something borderline incoherent having to do with men’s formal wear.

    To me, all the caterwauling — from Hitchens to Shernoff and everyone in between — sounds more like the last gasps of a defunct idea than anything else. Except maybe blasphemy.

  8. 8
    bornagain77 says:

    Francis Chan’s reponse to Pastor Rob Bell’s denial of Hell

    Erasing Hell – Francis Chan – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnrJVTSYLr8

    =============

    John 8:23-24
    But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.

    G.O.S.P.E.L. – (the grace of propitiation) – poetry slam – video
    https://vimeo.com/20960385

    Matthew 10:28
    “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

    Evanescence – The Other Side (Lyric Video)
    http://www.vevo.com/watch/evan.....tantsearch

  9. 9
    KRock says:

    It is quite likely that the biggest oxymoron ever, “the church of atheism,” will be the atheists next endeavour to fizzle out.

  10. 10
    Dionisio says:

    And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear Him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. [Matthew 10:28 (ESV)]

    But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. [Matthew 5:22 (ESV)]

    And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire. [Mark 9:43 (ESV)]

    Commentaries from the Reformation Study Bible provided by Ligonier Ministries:

    You fool. Apparently Jewish law had sanctions against the specific insult Raca, but Jesus shows that any verbal abuse makes one liable to eternal damnation.

    hell. This is Gehenna, the “valley of Hinnom,” a trash dump outside Jerusalem where fires burned constantly. It was notorious as the location of human sacrifices by fire during the reigns of Ahaz and Manasseh (2 Chr. 28:3; 33:6). Jeremiah called it the “Valley of Slaughter” a symbol of God’s fearful judgment (Jer. 7:32).

    cut it off. This admonition should be understood as a kind of exaggeration used in speech to make a point (cf. vv. 45–47). Jesus is talking about costly renunciations of sinful habits.

  11. 11
    Dionisio says:

    Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.” [John 14:21]

    But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love Him” [1 Corinthians 2:9]

    Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into Him who is the head, into Christ, [Ephesians 4:15]

    Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love Him. [James 1:12]

    Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which He has promised to those who love Him? [James 2:5]

  12. 12
    Dionisio says:

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

    The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, yet the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own people did not receive Him. But to all who did receive Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

    And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

    John 1:1-5,9-14

    Amen!

  13. 13
    Dionisio says:

    The Wisdom and Power of God

    For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written,

    “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
    and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”

    Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

    For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

    [1 Corinthians 1:18-31 (ESV)]

  14. 14
    Dionisio says:

    For God So Loved the World

    “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through Him. Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.” [John 3:16-21]

  15. 15
    Dionisio says:

    God so loved the world.
    Some have insisted that God sent Jesus to die for the purpose of bringing salvation to everyone without exception, but only as a possibility. However, Jesus makes clear that the salvation of those whom the Father “gives me,” and only those, is not a mere possibility but an absolute certainty; “will come to me” (6:37–40; 10:14–18; 17:9). The point made by “the world” is that Christ’s saving work is not limited to one time or place but applies to the elect from all over the world. Those who do not receive the remedy God has provided in Christ will perish. It remains true that anyone who believes will not die (be separated from God) but live in God’s presence forever.

    Reformation Study Bible provided by Ligonier Ministries

  16. 16
    Dionisio says:

    Comment copied from another thread:

    In this world sorrow is central, while joy is fake, superficial, temporary, intended to masquerade the pain, to entertain and make time run faster.
    However, if we are in Christ, then joy is central, eternal, while sorrow results mainly from having compassion toward others.
    We hear in this world that life is hard AND then we die. A true Christian could say it differently: this life is hard, BUT then we die.
    After Stephen Hawking said that Heaven is a fairly tale for those who are afraid of darkness, professor John Lennox replied that atheism is a fairy tale for those who are afraid of Light.

  17. 17
    Dionisio says:

    Most probably they won’t show the preceding comments or this post on the AtheistTV channel:

    Commentary on John 3:1-21 copied from the Reformation Study Bible provided by Ligonier Ministries

    This is the first of many teaching discourses recorded by John. Typically on being asked a question, Jesus answers in a way that steers the discussion into a deeper realm, often through misunderstandings that are corrected for those becoming true disciples. The new understanding reveals Jesus more fully.

    God so loved the world. Some have insisted that God sent Jesus to die for the purpose of bringing salvation to everyone without exception, but only as a possibility. However, Jesus makes clear that the salvation of those whom the Father “gives me,” and only those, is not a mere possibility but an absolute certainty; “will come to me” (6:37–40; 10:14–18; 17:9). The point made by “the world” is that Christ’s saving work is not limited to one time or place but applies to the elect from all over the world. Those who do not receive the remedy God has provided in Christ will perish. It remains true that anyone who believes will not die (be separated from God) but live in God’s presence forever.

    to condemn the world. Jesus elsewhere says that judgment does attend His coming into the world (9:39). His point is not that He will not judge, but that the time is not ready. The world was already under threat of judgment before He came, but with His coming salvation became a reality offered to a hostile world (Matt. 23:37; Rom. 5:8).

    Unbelief is not the only basis for condemnation, but it constitutes the climax of rebellion by resisting even God’s gracious offer of salvation in Christ. Jesus comes into a world that is already condemned because of its rejection of God’s self-revelation (Rom. 1:18–32).

    people loved the darkness rather than the light. Jesus gives the reason for the world’s rejection of Him: He is the light who exposes whether a person is righteous or not.

    whoever does what is true comes to the light. Jesus speaks of “doing” the truth. This indicates that “truth” is a matter of both thought and practice. Living by the truth is contrasted with doing what is evil (v. 20).

    NIV Application Commentary

    The statement that God loves the world is surprising on two counts (3:16). (1) Judaism rarely (or never) spoke of God’s loving the world outside of Israel. God desires to reach this world through Israel, his child. It is a uniquely Christian idea to say that God’s love extends beyond the limits of race and nation. (2) John tells his readers elsewhere that they are not to love the world (1 John 2:15–17) because it is a place of disbelief and hostility (cf. John 15:18–19; 16:8). Carson comments effectively, “There is no contradiction between this prohibition and the fact that God does love it [the world]. Christians are not to love the world with the selfish love of participation; God loves the world with the selfless, costly love of redemption.”

    This helpful insight gives a clue to what John means by “the world.” In John’s writings “world” (Gk. kosmos) is not a reference to the natural world of trees, animals, and plants—a world defended by the Sierra Club and Greenpeace. For John kosmos (used seventy-eight times in this Gospel, twenty-four times in his letters) is the realm of humanity arrayed in opposition to God (1:9; 7:7). Thus Jesus enters this world in his incarnation, knowing that hostility will result and that sacrifice will be needed in order to redeem the world (1:29; 3:17; 6:51). This dimension of the Son’s work must be underscored: The Son did not come to the world to save a select few (those chosen, those privileged); rather, he came to save the world, namely, the all-encompassing circle of men and women who inhabit this planet, people who embrace darkness habitually (3:19–21).

    In this respect, the entry of the Son into the darkness of this world is an act of judgment (3:19; cf. 9:39) inasmuch as divine light has penetrated and unveiled the darkness for what it is. Jesus has not come to condemn the world (3:17) but to reveal and save, to provide a way of escape for those shuttered in the darkness. His coming does not bring a “verdict” (niv), but a process by which judgment is active on those who witness his coming. Those who see this light and recognize the tragedy of their own situation have one responsibility: to believe (3:16, 18).

    Yet it is not so simple. The affections of people in the world are corrupt; their desires are fallen; they are not eager to be redeemed. They “love darkness instead of light”; in fact, they “hate” the light. This is strong language, which uncovers something of the seriousness of the moral struggle between God and the world. Evil and darkness do not ignore the light; they wage war against it, trying to bring it down. But despite these efforts, the darkness cannot vanquish the light (1:9). The darkness launches a battle that brings about its own defeat.

    By contrast, those who love the coming of the light, who look on and trust the “upraised,” crucified Son, who believe in Jesus and “live by the truth” (3:21), these people not only enjoy eternal life (3:16, 18) but they come to the light and yearn for its truth. John does not have in mind here people in the world who already have the goodness of God at work in their hearts and whom the light reveals. John is describing what happens when those in the world make a choice to believe; they are transformed into children of God (1:12; 11:52; 1 John 3:10), experiencing the power of the Spirit (3:5–6) and living the truth (3:21). Such people live righteously because God is at work in them (3:21b), not because they have a native desire to be godly.

    From NIVAC: Genesis by Gary M. Burge. Published by Zondervan Academic.

  18. 18
    Dionisio says:

    Most probably they won’t show the preceding comments or this post on the AtheistTV channel:

    Commentary on John 1:1-5 copied from the Reformation Study Bible provided by Ligonier Ministries

    the Word. The term “Word” (Greek logos) designates God the Son with respect to His deity; “Jesus” and “Christ” refer to His incarnation and saving work. During the first three centuries, doctrines of the Person of Christ focused intensely on His position as the Logos. In Greek philosophy, the Logos was “reason” or “logic” as an abstract force that brought order and harmony to the universe. But in John’s writings such qualities of the Logos are gathered in the Person of Christ. In Neo-Platonic philosophy and the Gnostic heresy (second and third centuries a.d.), the Logos was seen as one of many intermediate powers between God and the world. Such notions are far removed from the simplicity of John’s Gospel.

    In this verse the Word is expressly affirmed to be God. The Word existed already “in the beginning” (a clear reference to the opening words of the Bible), which is a way of denoting the eternity that is unique to God. John states clearly, “the Word was God.” Some have observed that the word translated “God” here has no definite article, and argued on this basis that it means “a god” rather than “God.” This is a misunderstanding; the article is omitted because of the word order in the Greek sentence (the predicate “God” has been placed first for emphasis). The New Testament never endorses the idea of “a god,” an expression that implies polytheism and is in sharp conflict with the consistent monotheism of the Bible. In the New Testament, the Greek word for “God” occurs often without the definite article, depending on the requirements of Greek grammar.

    That “the Word was with God,” indicates a distinction of Persons within the unity of the Godhead. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not successive forms of appearance of one Person, but are eternal Persons present from “the beginning” (v. 2). “With” suggests a relationship of close personal intimacy. See “One and Three: The Trinity” at Is. 44:6.

    All things were made through him. This verse also emphasizes the deity of the Word, since creation belongs to God alone. See also v. 10; Col. 1:16–17; “God the Creator” at Ps. 148:5.

    In him was life. Another affirmation of deity: the Son as well as the Father has “life in himself” (5:26).

    has not overcome it. It is characteristic of the style of this Gospel to emphasize contrasting concepts (see Introduction). The plot of this Gospel could be seen in terms of a struggle between the forces of faith and unbelief.

  19. 19
    Mung says:

    ba77 @ 6:

    thanks!

  20. 20
    Mung says:

    News:

    Mung at 3 – How do I know that it is better than dying and going to hell? If it’s as dull as dishwater, … give us all another reason.

    #11: It’s more interesting than doing the dishes.

  21. 21
    wallstreeter43 says:

    Bogart said “”“See, atheism is not interesting.”

    I don’t think that any atheist, myself included, ever said that it was. It doesn’t claim to be. It doesn’t claim to provide anyone with a meaning or purpose to life. Its only claim is that there is no “higher” power. No supernatural entity who created the heavens and earth.””

    Bogart then how do you account for veridical nde’s when people like Pam Reynolds have no brain activity and no heart beat, and please don’t tell me they are products of a delusional mind. Remember they are veridical nde’s and therefore have been verified by eyewitnesses like doctors and the nursing staff.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNbdUEqDB-k

    And how do you account for scientists saying that remote viewing has been proven by every account of science.

    http://deanradin.blogspot.com/.....ng-is.html

    Excerpt from a January 2008 item in the UK’s The Daily Mail newspaper:

    In 1995, the US Congress asked two independent scientists to assess whether the $20 million that the government had spent on psychic research had produced anything of value. And the conclusions proved to be somewhat unexpected.

    Professor Jessica Utts, a statistician from the University of California, discovered that remote viewers were correct 34 per cent of the time, a figure way beyond what chance guessing would allow.

    She says: “Using the standards applied to any other area of science, you have to conclude that certain psychic phenomena, such as remote viewing, have been well established.

    “The results are not due to chance or flaws in the experiments.”

    I have always found atheism to be more an emotional worldview then an intellectual one.

  22. 22
    Mung says:

    And up next on AtheistTV, readings from Nietzsche and Sartre.

    Please do try to stay awake.

  23. 23
    Acartia_bogart says:

    The failure of a TV show (or station) isn’t proof of the opposite (god). Star Trek was moderately successful as a TV show but I have not heard anyone claim that Klingons really exist.

    The success of a media production is totally dependant on the number of viewers, not the truth of the message being presented. Truth is not a democratic concept. If it was, this in itself would be proof that Christianity is wrong.

  24. 24
    Axel says:

    I’ve often remarked on how boring atheist sites must be to the atheists, themselves, since they seem addicted to religious sites, as well as science sites, such as this.

    The tariff for drawing closer to Dawkins, and then to meet him reminded me of a joke in horse-racing circles here, in the UK.

    It was quipped that the prize for the young, champion apprentice jockey was to spend a fortnight on a working holiday in Jamaica with (the now late) Raleigh Gilbert, a TV commentator. The second prize was a month’s holiday with him…! There was no malice in the joke. I believe Gilbert was very popular.

  25. 25
    awstar says:

    from #7

    One hardly needs to be religious to see the rhetorical flaws in Andy Shernoff, the frontman of punk band The Dictators, describing himself as “a little like Martin Luther King” before asking the audience “Ready for some sarcasm?

    I wonder in which little way Andy Shernoff sees himself as Martin Luther King? Like when MLK quotes the Bible when he proclaimed “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.” perhaps?

Leave a Reply