The AEI employs a world renown atheist?
The American and Bush supporting AEI employs a world renown atheist at risk to themselves.
I wonder why Dawkins never thought to give her a job? Probably has something to do with cowardice and hypocrisy.tribune7
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
03:40 PM
3
03
40
PM
PDT
1. This is from the maker's of THE GOD WHO WASNT THERE that claims Jesus never existed. This is a claim no reliable historian, even an atheist historian, will make. There's no doubt that Jesus, the man (whether you believe him to be God or not) existed.
2. They have a very rudimentary knowledge of theology, as they're confused with Mark. There is no "unpardonable sin" outside of not believing. Jesus is speaking of a particular group of people who saw him but refused to lay their trust in him. You can deny the Holy Spirit all day long then accept it and be forgiven as Christ makes abundantly clear throughout the NT. If what these (sadly) ignorant kids are doing was "unforgiveable" Saul himself (Paul) would be in Hell!
C learly, these kids think what they're doing cannot forgiven. I guess some of them are in luck, but some of them might be in for a rude awakening when they realize they've been lead down a path filled with distortion.
Brian Flemming, the maker of these videos and websites, is discussed in many theological forums- the guy has no Biblical scholarship to speak of and his followers seem to have little knowledge of the subject matter themselves. I guess all you have to do is claim you were once a "funadmentalist Christian" and that makes you an authority!JasonTheGreek
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
03:40 PM
3
03
40
PM
PDT
The AEI employs a world renown atheist? Wow, ya' learn something new every single day.Inquisitive Brain
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
03:36 PM
3
03
36
PM
PDT
Though, certainly not as scandalously in-your-face as this “Blasphemy Challenge†manure.
That's the point. I don't believe he's even run a cartoon of Mohammed on any website or publication with which he's been invovled and that wouldn't even be scandalous.
It would have actually been the right thing to do after the Danish incident.
And I don't think he's managed to bring himself to support Ayaan Hirsi Ali in any way either.
And note who did and is.tribune7
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
03:16 PM
3
03
16
PM
PDT
All cards on the table here, in "The Root of All Evil," Richard Dawkins did talk about the problem of violence as related to Fundamentalist Islam. Though, certainly not as scandalously in-your-face as this "Blasphemy Challenge" manure.Inquisitive Brain
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
11:56 AM
11
11
56
AM
PDT
venture a guess its because the creators of the blasphemy site are interested in fame and fortune not getting car bombed.
Dave, you are too nice.
My guess would be that they are hypocrites and cowards. They claim that religion is the problem with the world but can't bring themselves to attack the theology obviously connected to the violence and oppression they say they hatetribune7
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
10:26 AM
10
10
26
AM
PDT
How come they haven’t released something mocking Islam to this degree yet?
They're windy cowards. What they have is bravado, not courage.Jaz
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
09:18 AM
9
09
18
AM
PDT
Sales were not so good and now they are having to give them away. I guess the Dollar Tree wouldn't take them.M.Olson
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
08:57 AM
8
08
57
AM
PDT
Dave Scott:
I’ll second that being a good point and venture a guess its because the creators of the blasphemy site are interested in fame and fortune not getting car bombed.
And let me third that excellent point! In this post-Churchillian age who will speak truth to secular powerâ€â€or Islamic terror? Those whose praise is not in the presentâ€â€it belongs to the future.Rude
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
08:57 AM
8
08
57
AM
PDT
How come they haven’t released something mocking Islam to this degree yet?
I'll second that being a good point and venture a guess its because the creators of the blasphemy site are interested in fame and fortune not getting car bombed.
DaveScot
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
08:09 AM
8
08
09
AM
PDT
Seventy years after his death, the words of G. K. Chesterton ring truer than ever before: "If there were no God, there would be no Atheists."
Seventy years after his death, atheists still cannot see the wit and wisdom of this statement.Inquisitive Brain
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
07:06 AM
7
07
06
AM
PDT
Giving this some further thought, one realizes that every person has a compelling need to be significant, and make an impact. And so, fortunately many accomplish this by acts such as feeding the hungry, sheltering those without homes, inventing useful technology, teaching our children, healing the sick, etc.
But then, we get a few that want a shortcut. So what do they do? They do something like videotaping themselves mouthing words of what they think are blasphemy, even though they are totally ignorant of what they are doing. But they think that they are making some sort of bold and brave statement, and we should all be so impressed.
Hmmmm. One wonders whether perhaps they were neglected or abused as children, and it is some desperate cry for attention and affirmation. Perhaps their fathers and/or mothers, their first authority figures, let them down, and now they are shaking their puny fists at the great authority figure in the sky. That's it, they will show that big non-existing entity where to go.
Or instead, why not consider a new pathway, as hard as it is, and realize that it ain't God who let you down, but rather he is the very one who has the ticket for the ride upwards from your pit. Not easy, but well worth it.Ekstasis
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
06:56 AM
6
06
56
AM
PDT
From the site:
"Religious dogma has one chief means of support: Our unwillingness to criticize it in public."
Do these people live with their heads stuck in the sand? Please name a public setting where religious dogma isn't criticized?
In fact, there is an inverse relationship between criticism of Christianity and its spread. The more harshly it is persecuted and stamped out, the faster it spreads among the people.
The site is exemplary in showing what happens when ignorance and stupidity are combined with blind adherence to an unbreakable proposition. This is certainly the greatest example of atheistic fundamentalism that I have ever seen.Inquisitive Brain
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
06:49 AM
6
06
49
AM
PDT
tribune7,
Yep, they are so bold, so brave, so audacious!! So let's see them take their message on a world tour. How about starting with Mecca and Medina, followed up by Riyadh. Tehran is on the list as well, followed by the West Bank and Islamabad. In each gig, they will march right into the local mosque, wearing their big shoes no doubt just to demonstrate their audacity, and announce loudly that God is dead, and that Jesus' had nothing true to say (let's not forget Jesus is a prophet in Islam).
What, not a chance? Oh, they prefer to spout off in lands where values and laws flow from Christian beliefs, and free speech and tolerance is allowed?Ekstasis
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
06:43 AM
6
06
43
AM
PDT
This website is scandalously troublesome, evangelistically atheistic fundamentalism, and, in my view, demonic.
However, I don't think the people in the videos denying God are irredeemable. As with most evangelical atheists, they don’t even understand elementary theology. Their understanding of Christianity cannot even be said to be sophomoric. Unfortunately, they misunderstand and propagate their ignorance and stupidity to their own shame.
The website says that, “he won't forgive you for denying the existence of the Holy Spirit. Ever.†If denying the power or existence of the Holy Spirit were actually grounds to irrevocably damn a soul to hell, all atheists who have converted to Christianity did so only to suffer eternal loss. This is horsepuckey.
And on that point, everyone who ever committed a sin with knowledge of his or her wrong would be irredeemable as well. Sin committed with full knowledge is putting your trust in your own power and denying God’s power to help you. According to the definition provided by the site, sin would also be unforgivable.
In my understanding, their confusion stems from a misunderstanding of Hebraic and Judaic traditions, which says that a blasphemer acknowledges God’s existence, and simultaneously publicly speaks ill of God. Revelation 13:6 states, “[The Beast] opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.†It is clearly shown here that the blasphemer acknowledges the existence of God, his people, and his dwelling.
For the sake of clarity and discussion, here are some possible interpretations of what Jesus meant when he said, “blasphemy against the Holy Spiritâ€Â:
* Ascribing the good acts of God to Satan and other enemies of God. (This is the more likely direct meaning of Jesus’ words, since this is the context of Jesus’ statement about 'blasphemy against the Holy Spirit' in the Gospel of Mark.)
* Final impenitence; going to the grave denying the power or existence of the Holy Spirit, and not repenting of sin committed
* Completely and ultimately despairing of the power of the Holy Spirit to help one become a more virtuous Christian.Inquisitive Brain
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
06:34 AM
6
06
34
AM
PDT
How come they haven’t released something mocking Islam to this degree yet?
Good point.tribune7
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
06:32 AM
6
06
32
AM
PDT
I encourage any of you to check out the "Rational Responders" site and look through some of the blogs. There was one I looked at a while back that gave some "arguments" against theism, including the idea that the supernatural is contradictory because everything has a nature. Pretty funny stuff there. These are kids who have no idea about what is rational and what isn't besides what people like Dawkins and Harris tell them. I actually feel really sorry for the fact that they accept what they're told so easily (just as I feel the same way about anyone who just believes what they're told, including Christians).thechristiancynic
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
06:32 AM
6
06
32
AM
PDT
“What does this have to do with ID ?â€Â
This has nothing to do with science per say, but everything to do with the kind of mindset that keeps Darwinism so entrenched and absolutely unwilling to look at evidence that supports ID. I still can’t believe this site is real, or that Richard Dawkins would actually have anything to do with it – he is, after all, a professor at a prestigious university. How can they get upset about the JJ animation when something like this is out there? How come they haven’t released something mocking Islam to this degree yet? Any religion is anathema to these people right?shaner74
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
06:04 AM
6
06
04
AM
PDT
What does this have to do with ID ? This site seems to be turning into a religion fest. Can’t we have some more posts about the science of ID itself ?
Dawkins has nothing to do with science???
Well, OK, maybe you sorta kinda have a point there.tribune7
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
05:36 AM
5
05
36
AM
PDT
This is evangelical atheism. If anyone still harbored any doubt that atheism is a religion this should banish that doubt.DaveScot
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
02:04 AM
2
02
04
AM
PDT
bdelloid
Instead of whining about what you don't like, why don't you go participate in the threads that do deal directly with science? I made several of them recently and IIRC I didn't see you among the commenters.DaveScot
December 20, 2006
December
12
Dec
20
20
2006
12:12 AM
12
12
12
AM
PDT
Too funny! Check out the last question and answer on their FAQ page!
The irony of writing, “That is a remarkably stupid question†and then the RRS "encourages people to inquire, argue, reason, and doubt†in the next sentence should be too obvious to have to point out, but it does kindly reveal their hostility and dishonesty. Is it just me, or doesn't that first sentence lack the civility that should come with being a rational human being?
Oh well. I discuss further here that the "Rational" Response Squad is a misnomer on my blog. Check it out.
(And please don't ban me, admin, if including the link is wrong; just yell at me abusively or something.)faithandshadow
December 19, 2006
December
12
Dec
19
19
2006
11:27 PM
11
11
27
PM
PDT
Atheism is anything but rational.
It says that non-rational, unthinking, unguided processes created rationailty. Ludicrous and logically absurd.
Unfortunately this is too far above the shoe size IQs of the misnomer "Rational Response Squad".
I would have suggested they use "Squid" instead of squad, but even squid are way smarter than these inane drones.Borne
December 19, 2006
December
12
Dec
19
19
2006
11:18 PM
11
11
18
PM
PDT
What does this have to do with ID ? This site seems to be turning into a religion fest. Can't we have some more posts about the science of ID itself ? All I have seen in the last while is just nonsense.bdelloid
December 19, 2006
December
12
Dec
19
19
2006
09:21 PM
9
09
21
PM
PDT
“BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE did it to the gun culture.†from the “The Rational Response Squadâ€Â
Bowling for Columbine did what for the gun culture? When Al Gore ran for President in 2000 he made gun control one of his platforms. Because of it, he lost. Now nobody dares utter a peep about gun control and Democrat nominees make sure they are photographed hunting with guns.Jehu
December 19, 2006
December
12
Dec
19
19
2006
09:12 PM
9
09
12
PM
PDT
from dawkins site....
"BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE did it to the gun culture." from the "The Rational Response Squad"
Get a clue, they were lost children, losing their souls on the atheistic propaganda Dawkins wants to feed the world. They were evolutionist who went on a killing spree. They asked one of the girls if she believed in God, then shot her. They were into nihilistic death rock. They hated Christians, mocked them and one of them wore a Tshirt with "natural selection" to the killing.
Note the media reports little of this truth. Much like Dawkins and his "rational crew" they only report what they want their public to read, not the entire truth. Just like Moore.
WTG irrational crew. Moore clearly did not tell the whole truth, which suits Dawkins well. But I'm sure others will still defend you.Michaels7
December 19, 2006
December
12
Dec
19
19
2006
08:59 PM
8
08
59
PM
PDT
The blasphemny challenge web site is the sickest thing I have ever seen. They are lucky Christians are not into jihad, and that God is not like what Dawkins thinks the Bible says He is like.idnet.com.au
December 19, 2006
December
12
Dec
19
19
2006
08:42 PM
8
08
42
PM
PDT
A lot of these kids are going to be thinking about this as they turn 50 and 60, or watch loved ones die and start wondering what it's all about.
But I'm not sure he's got his flock committing unforgiveable blasphemy, though, as it applies to Mark 3:29 or Luke 12:10.
It makes you suspect, however, that if his crowd ever manages to take over, they'd demand hands and forheads marked with 666 for service at the supermarket just to prove a point.
Which would not be the one they are thinking they are making since it would show a prophecy coming to pass.tribune7
This basically says: You are soaked in gasoline. Here’s a match. Try to strike it. If it doesn’t light we’ll give you a t-shirt. This site is a joke like “The Brights†right?shaner74