Wow, did you ever nail it. Well done.

Proverbs 14:12
There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death.

All of us who are Christians were, at one time, not Christians. We learn of Christ, come to accept him — maybe after spells of atheism, agnosticism: aka "atheism light," spiritual journeys, even falling away from the faith and returning like the prodigal son — so we know what the non-believer goes through in avoiding the faith: the excuses and, let’s face it, downright laziness.

I challenge any non-believer reading your post: find a Bible teaching church and go. Read the Bible (cover to cover; I like the NIV study Bible), and START PRAYING, alone and with family and friends. You will soon have faith. It’s true. The truth of God’s word does not come back empty.

Time to get ready for church now (Discovery Church, Simi Valley). My wife and I are greeters there and I’ll be singing in the choir this Easter. Love it. Love God.

That was beautiful, thank you for that! One thing I would change though – "…a culture dominated by secularist ideals …"

I would make that "…a culture dominated by devilish ideals …"

God bless you!

How many atheists have you knowingly met? What you wrote here sounds every bit as uninformed as you make atheists out to be. I'm an atheist and I came to the conclusion that there is no God not out of some desire to justify and live an hedonistic lifestyle. Instead I came to it by learning about religion and the arguments against it and decided simply that God and the supernatural are simply concepts we use to explain what we don't yet understand. I live a peaceful life, respect my fellow man and treat him with kindness. I drink very little (often I go for months without alcohol), I don't do drugs, I am in a committed relationship (I'll say that I am heterosexual, since it seems to matter to a lot of people for whatever reason), I'm honest. I am also not an anti-religion atheist. Those people annoy me as much as anyone that tries to convert me to their religion. Believe what you want to believe, I respect it doesn't cause harm to come to others and so long as it isn't shoved down my throat. I believe morality exists as a human concept, and I'm fine with it. Society needs rules and norms to exist. Saying morals are created and monitored by a higher power may be helpful in getting some people to conform to the norms of our society, but it doesn't make it true. They say that the real test of a person's honesty and morality is how they behave when no one is looking. Atheists such as myself feel there is no one looking over our shoulder, yet most still behave in a moral fashion. What I wonder is how many religious people would behave morally if they thought God was not watching?

I didn't read anger in Medley's comment. She was stating her point of view. And I doubt all atheists are boring. I think boring has no theological boundaries.

" What I wonder is how many religious people would behave morally if they thought God was not watching"?

1,719,862,543. Now you can stop wondering about that subject and see if you can find something else to impune those wrascally hypocritical believers.

I love your self-evaluation. You are such a good person, so honest and humble. Inspirational and near godlike.
Almost worthy of worship. Next time, though, get an independent and unbiased evaluator. The results might turn out differently.

A great article–and on a Sunday, too! Thank you for writing this. Beautiful.
I've met atheists who were perfectly likable people, but for some reason they were content to dismiss God as a human invention to explain what we can't fully understand (not in this life, anyway). I would ask why they are so comfortable dismissing it and resting on an assumption that it's all just a bunch of hooey, an invention to comfort (and govern) people who aren't enlightened enough to live a morally upright life without the crutch of religion.

It's easier to be an atheist than to keep seeking for the Truth. It's easier to develop one's own code of conduct and stick to it for love of human respect than it is to bend your own will to God and live according to His law (even if it means giving up something to which you're desperately attached). The attitude exemplified by other atheists I've known is one of "Go ahead and believe in God–if you need that kinda thing. I'm okay as I am." But they never really want to consider the potential–and eternal–consequences if they're wrong. The moment your soul leaves your body isn't a great time to find out, "Oops! I was wrong!' I would challenge any atheist to make a simple prayer, every day, asking God to lead Him down the path to Truth, even if he doesn't yet believe that God is real. What does he have to lose? Nothing but a brief moment out of every day. Don't rely on your own intelligence. Too many things in this life can cloud even the best judgment. God is up to the challenge. Are you?

Every day I am satisfied and happy to talk to God; a prayer of thank you and then a prayer of hey, how's it going for you, here's what happening with me, bec. I know you've been busy elsewhere.

But neither need nor want to proclaim I AM A CHRISTIAN!! Never been able to understand that. Like that's a badge to pinned to you — you, personally – for your self-promotion of I AM A CHRISTIAN!!

I belive in God, I believe he takes care of me. I believe in that. And I will do my best to help others when I cna and when they need it and to be a "good" person, whatever that truly means. But I do not believe I have to proclaim for Jesus over God. Leave Jesus out of it — FOR ME. If that's what you believe, that's fine. I don't.

"It’s completely harmless to us if others in society are not up for what Christianity asks of its faithful, but where we draw the line is the distorted representation of faithful people in our pop culture entertainment, a culture dominated by secularist ideals and themes."

Where do I find these pleasant, accomodating, "live-and-let-live" Christians you speak of? These people who have no problem with a secular society outside of media-misrepresentation? I'd like to meet them, them sound like such a nice antidote to the Christianity (and Islam, while we're at it) I'm putting up with right now – the one that demands the government regulate society to reflect THEIR religious doctrine, urging for laws against abortion, homosexuals, etc. that don't make any logical sense outside of a spiritual component. People willing to leave me alone in exchange for being left alone sound MUCH nicer… where are they?

That's EXACTLY the point. Religion asks us to change our behavior for the purpose of a higher ideal.

This charge of 'hypocrisy' is quite shallow. Who's "better" — a man who doesn't cheat on his wife because he's afraid of what God would do, or the guy who cheats on his wife because he feels like it. The first is being a hypocrite, the latter isn't.

Obviously, the ideal is to do good because you want to do good. But, doing good because you're afraid of a God who punishes is FAR better than doing whatever you feel like doing, whenever you feel like doing it.

A guy cuts me off in traffic and I want to run him off the road – is my fear of the law, at that moment, a good thing or a bad thing? I have a few drinks in a bar and then want to drive home, is my fear of getting a DUI, at that moment, a good thing or a bad thing?

Medley, from where are those "rules and norms" derived? Your an atheist that lives by religious-based principals, not secular ones. You do know that, don't you?

"Society needs rules and norms to exist."

And what are those rules and norms? Without a Judeo-Christian conception of God. You cannot justify the rules and norms you promulgate/wish to follow over those of the Taliban, or Stalin, etc. In a world without such a God, it is easy to justify Hitler – survival of the fittest (pruning trees is good for their health, pruning humanity might be as good – especially when they don't conform to some 'ideal'). I mean, according to that mindset, why are individual rights the best way to go? Why should some be a drain on society?

Can you justify those rules and norms on any other basis than, I 'think' they're better?

You are swimming in an ocean of Judeo-Christian values and you imply they just sprouted up by accident.

Where do I find these pleasant, accomodating, "live-and-let-live" Christians you speak of?
Try dropping into a church any Sunday. I'm serious. The Christians you speak of are often caricatures portrayed in enlightened circles.

By the way, much of the argument against "the religious right" is framed in hostile terms.

Take abortion. I'm against it and feel that even though it will exist and continue to exist, I don't want my tax dollars subsidizing it. That gets immediately spun that I'm imposing my morals. In a democratic society, I can use my voice and vote to see that my taxes don't go to something I consider wrong.

And while we're talking about imposing morals, please tell me how punitive taxes on tobacco and trans-fat and banning foie gras aren't secular religionists doing the same thing?

"…. securalists go to therapy."

Are you sure about this? What do you think of this video?
http://www.dts.edu/media/play/?MediaItemID=6db486...

I'm a born again Christian, but sometimes need help that a church is unable to provide. I honestly don't believe I'm taking part in a "Devilish society" when doing this anymore than I am when working for a secular company when providing for my family.

Maybe I misunderstood the article, or perhaps it was made clear by the author.

Do you think therapy will fix everything? Or do you accept psychological treatment in addition to the relationships provided through church and reassurance from your faith? If you're a born again Christian, I'm figuring the therapy is an "in-addition-to" remedy, and not THE remedy.

At least that's how I read it.

*T*

"which quickly spirals into enmity as a defense against what they deeply fear is the truth. "

I have been an atheist for as long as I can remember – I'm 46 years old. I have neither enmity nor a deep fear that there really is a god. So you can probably put away the broad brush of the quick spiral.

I am not a narcissist and I am not a hedonist. I consider myself to be a rationally moral individual. In conversations on the subject of morality with Christian friends and friends of other faiths I find that we hold much the same judgement of what is right and what is wrong. That I came to those judgements via a rational process vs through faith and following the commandments of higher power has never been an impediment to our friendships. We have a largely unspoken agreement not to proselytize and that seems to work just fine.

Are there atheists who fit Mr. McGruther's description – absolutely. In fact I refer to them as God Fearing Atheists. Just as Christians are not all alike, neither are atheists.

REALLY sloppy on the C.S. Lewis supposed quote, dude! The ONLY citation Google comes up with for that is you. The above poster is right about Chesterton. Hope this doesn't take on a life of it's own like the fake Thomas Jefferson "quote" about dissent.

Too bad, because it's a great article otherwise.

Beautifully said, Mike. May I also add another quote that dovetails with your thoughts:

"As the astronauts soar into the vast eternities of space, on earth the garbage piles higher; as the groves of academe extend their domain, their alumni's arms reach lower; as the phallic cult spreads, so does impotence. In great w 'ealth, great poverty; in health, sickness; in numbers, deception. Gorging, left hungry; sedated, left restless; telling all, hiding all; in flesh united, forever separate. So we press on through the valley of abundance that leads to the wasteland of satiety, passing through the gardens of fantasy; seeking happiness ever more ardently, and finding despair ever more surely."
—- Malcolm Muggeridge

The point of the article is that weather or not Jesus is God it's still plainly obvious that wholesale corruption of the Christian faith is happening. Atheism is the non-belief. Period. This is something more sinister – Anti-Christian.

Many here asked where the rules and norms are derived? As an atheist I resent the statement that all of my rules and norms have come from Judeo-Christian roots. I will not argue that the laws that society has placed do not stem from the five commandments that do not deal with religion. But, these five commandments were unwritten rules in the societies that existed before Christ and Abraham, for example murder was punishable by death, adultery resulted in justifiable homicide, stealing resulted in the loss of limbs. I grew up learning to question the roots of what I see around me, starting first with the idea that everyone must believe in God (as I was told numerous times) and that everyone needs to go to church. From there I questioned the basis on which laws were made. What is the binding factor? I believe that Jefferson put it best in the wording of the Declaration of Independence when he says:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

If I remember my history correctly "endowed by their Creator" was not in the original text, but added by the delegation after it was written. Omitting that is not skirting the issue of God because it is written as a second clause of what is self-evident. The list included that God gave them rights and that among them were life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is not necessary how man attained these rights, but the idea is that all humans have inalienable rights and government was designed to protect them.

As for the essay, as I stated I am an atheist, not a hedonist and these two do not go hand in hand. Too much pride may be a bad thing, for it is called arrogance, but why is it that pride in and of itself is a sin? I am proud of my accomplishments. My father is proud of me and my brothers. How is pride devilish?

Knowing that we are sinners saved by grace, I don't think anything will fix everything. No matter how holy and refined we are, we're always going to have more in common with Jeffrey Dahmer than GOD due to HIS divine nature.
Having said that, I have found the church (at least the one I've attended) lacking in some areas. As the video I provided describes, a common answer to personal struggles that I mention is that I must be heavily into sin. When I press as to what the sin is or what can be done, the answer is typically something along the lines of praying and asking for forgiveness. While I don't doubt that I have a sinful nature, I think most people can objectionably say that this advice is about as helpful as a screen door on a submarine. Because of this I often refer to people who can offer better insight into the actions and thoughts of human behavior, and unfortunately this falls outside of the church. I wish it didn't, but it does.

[...] The Faithful Go To Church, The Rest Go To Therapy At the very heart of the Christian way of life is the belief that we individual Christians, no matter what our faith, can best effect society with gentle nudges towards God by living a Christ-like life the best we possibly can, while recognizing at the same time that there has in fact only ever been one real Christian to walk the Earth – Jesus. We’re not capable of that kind of perfection. We know this. We are merely asked to try. [...]

Waldo?? (Goof)

Kath,
Jesus claimed to BE God. Multiple, multiple times.

C.S. Lewis said it best. "I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic- on the level of the man who says he is a poached egg- or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon, or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."

I think we both are in agreement, just from different angles. Sometimes there is hurt that God has to let us figure out for ourselves, and I don't think He would begrudge us therapy to meet us in those places. But I guess the line is that the writer is stating that the secular person is trusting Therapy to fix everything, when Christians know there are somethings therapy can fix, and cannot fix, and as to everything else, you have to leave it in God's hands.

*T*

Medley
Check out: http://www.leestrobel.com/videoserver/video.php?c...
and http://www.leestrobel.com/videoserver/video.php?c...

With respect…

As one of the "heathens in the crowd," though decidedly un-riled, the author specifically called us out which I think makes it highly relevant in the first, second and third place.

Actually, Jesus claimed to be the son of God, not God.

Thanks for the respect and the muddy thinking I rejected long ago. Having made the choice to live a life based on reason, I have no interest in cultivating some sort of half-caffeinated hybrid.

I'm glad you drew that line. Despite being a church going Christian, I see nothing wrong with people have different faiths or beliefs so long as we can all get along.

I don't think the atheists are correct, but that's their right. What I can't stand, however, are the anti-Christians. I don't equate atheism with anti-Christian. Anti-Christian are the people who can't let others be. They're the ones who want to impose their morality on others. They're the ones who want to strip religious people of their basic rights. But I think it's wrong to tar all atheists with that brush, just as its wrong to tar all Muslims with the acts of their intolerant fringe (disturbingly large though it may be) or Christians with the acts of their intolerant fringe.

This will change your life

there is more

Are you happy with what you have ?.
Do you only want a little truth concerning God ? What kind of love is it when one has a little or no interest at all in finding out about the character of their partner ? One just doesn’t care who they are ! It is in issues as this that we can have a measure to test the extent of our love for God. Is He any interest to You. Enough to open a book and learn. You must learn the immortal truth of life.
GO AND LEARN YOU OWE IT TO YOUR SOUL AND EVERONE ELSE

http://godssecret.wordpress.com/2008/06/10/wake-u...

go for it !

I would definitely say that churches need to be wiser. There is a reason that many of our ancient stories have riddles in them. The Church needs to learn to unriddle the human soul.

Possibly the first novel ever, Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress had a scene where the hero is entrapped in a dungeon, and he had to find the key to escape. A simple 'its sin' might be correct, but we need more than that. We need subtlety and wisdom in the application of truth.

I would be a bit leary of therapy as some have made the arguement that pschyology is essentially another religion.

YES! Exactly. For me, God is the important one, who I look to, who I believe in and depend on. I know for other people, that is Jesus. Just not for me.

Thank you, Kadaka.

"Remember Pascal's wager: It's a good bet that God exists. If He does, we gain everything; If He does not, we lose nothing."

Well, a Muslim might say, "If Allah does exist, we gain everything; If He does not, we lose nothing." And a Mormon might say, "If Joseph Smith was right, we gain everything; If he was not, we lose nothing."

By Pascal's logic you should just worship that Diety which promises the best pay-off upon death. For example, Allah promises eternal life AND seventy virgins. That's quite the deal-sweetener.

This is why I worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Our Heaven has a beer volcano and a stripper factory, all bless His sauced name, ramen.

[...] If you think I am too hard on you then read this. The precise goal of a Devilish society is to get as many people away from God as possible through [...]

The author only called you out if you're anti-Christian. So, are you? Being an atheist does not automatically make one anti-Christian as I've met atheists who are not anti-Christian just as I've run across anti-Christian practitioners of other faiths. Whether or not you believe in a deity does not give you a corner on Christian-hating nor does it define you as such.

"Tale of Genji" is considered the 1st, right?

"With God, all things are possible. With man, all things are permissible." I don't know if he was the first to say that, but the first time I read it, it came from William F. Buckley. I can think of a few times in my life that murder would have been a perfectly logical thing for me to do. I'm including all the moral, philosophical, sociological and legal arguments against it, and it still comes out the same way. I concluded that both society in general and I in particular would be far better off without the other person's existence.

So why didn't I just do it? My faith, and my belief that God demands that I not commit murder. I'm not denying for one second that there are plenty of atheists out there who have highly-evolved moral codes and are really great people. But I know that my instinctive horror of murder could be overcome by my human moral code given the right situation. Atheists would say that this is the underlying reason that people of lesser minds need the concept of God. I don't happen to think so, and if that makes me weak, so be it.

Read up on the Trinity. Jesus is God.

To my reading he was addressing all non-believers.

I'm not anti-Christian – until I come across one who wants to make it their mission to help me see their light. Then – I'm the lion.

As Nicholas Cage once said "Some things are true whether you believe them or not" (City of Angels)

Not necessarily….. The Golden Rule was around long before most established religions.

Very good point Stephen, But being a Latter Day Saint we have been given a special commission from Christ to share the Good News of the Gospel with everyone we can. Admittedly some do not want or care about our missionary efforts and are even offended when we try, but try we must. I converted to the church over 25 years ago and the basic thing is that it just made me a better person and brought me closer to Jesus Christ. It is my desire to share this glad message with anyone who will listen and I go out of my way to not offend those who are not interested, but there is no way I can tell who might or might not be interested. My mission till the day I die is to continue to share the Gospel with anyone who will listen…….I do so out of love and concern for my brothers and sisters here on earth and because my Lord and Master has given me instructions to do so. One of the greatest gifts Father in Heaven gave us here was the "Agency" (choice) to do as we please, and I support your agency to be left alone as much as mine to try and share his story.

See …..why prescribe to a belief system where even the followers aren't in agreement over what is true.
Screw that….I'll follow the teachings of the bible – most of which are common sense and have been around before the bible – without all the Jesus stuff.

True Blue – I have no problem with someone bringing the idea up. If I'm in the mood I might even debate a while. More likely though I'd ask for a new conversation topic. It's the one's that won't accept that I'm not interested that truly annoy me. My friends of various faiths and I do well with an understanding that we're not going to try to convert one another

Wonderful, wonderful exposition. The last paragraph set me to tears recalling my own failings. I wish I had a T-shirt big enough to silk-screen this onto. Thank you MM. Lucy & Ellen….Daddy loves you.

The first man isn't a hypocrite. He's being obedient to God. Subverting his will and desire to the will of God. Does his motivation matter? I think not. It is better to be right, than consistent. And there is a scriptural reference, if you're interested. Matthew 21:28-31. Not a direct transposing of your scenario, but close enough. Gotta say Hi to my 5 & 9 year olds….Hi Lucy, Hi Ellen…Daddy loves you. Lucy, put your glasses on!

Rewrite! Bobbo, where do those laws of yours that you follow come from?

'without all the Jesus stuff' – then you're Old Testament and therefore Jewish. Why not just say that up front?

" . . .your numbers are drastically decreasing" Not so, my friend. The numbers of conservative and moderate Christians is increasing. The losses over the last ten years have come from the liberal denominations. Check out the whole study, not just the headlines

Why is "all humans are equal" any more valid in a moral relativist world than "some are more equal than others"? Because you say so? That's my point. I have a worldview that is based upon certain foundational truths as revealed by a Creator. What 'reveals' your foundational truths — because it makes sense to David? "It is in the nature of being a human that you are equal" — WHY? How can you say that? I can say "it is in the nature of being a human to dominate the weak". Why is your comment more valid than mine? In a moral relativist universe, it's not. Certainly, in the history of humanity, my comment is WAAY more valid/true than yours.

"All men are created equal" is a Judeo-Christian TRUTH, NOT, e.g., an Islamist truth. Islam does not believe Christians and Jews are the same as Muslims (unless they convert to Islam), nevermind Buddhists, Hindus, etc.

The arguments about abortion and gay marriage are not about intolerant Christians attempting to shove their doctrine down others' throats. In fact, exactly the opposite is true. I try to convince people that abortion and gay marriage aren't even on the same debate level. I hate abortion, I merely disagree with gay marriage. But "attempting to convince" doesn't even come close to "shoving it down someone's throat." Can the same be said of the "Prop H8" campaign. How about the concerted effort to suppress and/or ridicule religious belief and crush dissent in the mainstream media, the schools, and of course, in Hollywood?

Old Testament/Talmud. I'm not a Christian, but Jewish. Still, I acknowledge, and am eternally grateful, that this country is founded largely on values of a very particular brand of Christianity.

America is not a country/an idea that would be founded based solely upon Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, or Catholic principles. It is a unique and wonderful embodiment mostly of Anglo-Protestant values tradition.

Stephen….then thats when I would respect your wishes and not bring it up again. I can always say at least i tried but certainly would not push the issue. Your friendship would be much more important than shoving my beliefs down your throat. Like I said (Agency)(Choice) is very important in the doctrine of God……:)

The quote actually comes from G.K. Chesterson, but the point is well made. It can also be said that Republicanism has been left untried because it is too difficult. From Timothy Ferguson's "The Third Form":

"Just as some men — perhaps most men — who have declared themselves Christian, have wrongly declared themselves to be Christian, most states have wrongly declared themselves republics. We know this simply because both men and states claiming such titles have behaved in a most un-Christ like or non-republican manner. Both have deviated from the paradigm."

Americans are abandoning Republicanism because it has become "too hard" and "unnatractive." Socialist Decmocracy has become much more self-fulfilling and convenient, but it is destined to fail and result in Ochlocracy.

http://www.isthisthechangeweneed.com/webblog/

"people of lesser minds need the concept of God." This is a very good statement about what I believe to be deep in most atheist's psyche. Hubris. Most of them seem to put themselves above the "liitle people" and stroke themselves with a preening brush of intellectual superiority. Because no one can answer each and every question they have about God, and no one can refute every logical conundruum they can conjure (If God is all powerful can He make a rock so big that He Himself can't lift it? Can he Father?), they choose to abandon any search for answers, to refuse to have faith, and then create a god of their own…themselves. After all whomever one chooses as their final moral authority is their god. And atheists choose themselves.

On the otherside of the Great Box. He's waiting for us with parting gifts.

P.S. Guess I should have said, "you must find him from amongst the crowd."

… For this reason I think, not that the ancients acted rashly and at haphazard in introducing among the people notions concerning the gods and beliefs in the terrors of hell, but that the moderns are most rash and foolish in banishing such beliefs. The consequence is that among the Greeks, apart from other things, members of the government, if they are entrusted with no more than a talent, though they have ten copyists and as many seals and twice as many witnesses, cannot keep their faith; whereas among the Romans those who as magistrates and legates are dealing with large sums of money maintain correct conduct just because they have pledged their faith by oath. Whereas else it is a rare thing to find a man who keeps his hands off public money, and whose record is clean in this respect, among the Romans one rarely comes across a man who has been detected in such conduct."

This is the problem with "True Believers" of all stripes, be their religion Christianity, Marxism, Islam, atheism, libertarianism, etc. Yes, they are all religions to their adherents

They accept a creed or doctrine, and vilify or ascribe cupidity or stupidity to those who do not follow their set of beliefs.

Those of us who are honest with ourselves, admit that we DO NOT KNOW, and live our lives by following precepts we find to be the best of other beliefs— Well, we sit there and shake our heads in wonderment that people are so arrogant as to "know" the truth, and force it upon others.

Consider the question of why you are a thinking creature. You KNOW that you think. I KNOW that I think. Yet, if we follow the secularist concept to the logical conclusion, we find that you and I are both simply biochemical computers, not REALLY thinking, but simply reacting to our programming. Yet we still think and KNOW that our mind is something more than simple programming….

The second question to consider is the question of Beauty. Why is a rainbow beautiful? I am a physicist, and can give you all sorts of explanations of why a rainbow is colorful, but I cannot explain the beauty, except as an outcome desired by a God that loves beauty. Ditto wildflowers – their very beauty leads to them being picked and becoming less common. Yet they are beautiful. Ditto a grove of redwoods. Beauty makes no sense without a God that loves Beauty.

I would only amend this a little and say that Christians behave morally at first out of fear of damnation ( the fear of God is the start of wisdom) and the gain of heaven, but at the root and finally, Christians are moral because they love, and love God the most.

While "the rest go to therapy" may make a good tagline, it's not exactly accurate to imply that Christians never go to therapy.

Isn't atheism an actual religion of "not believing" in God? How can you "not believe" in something if it's not there? (an idea of C.S. Lewis's)

"I would be a bit leary of therapy as some have made the arguement that pschyology is essentially another religion. "

I think therapy can be vastly helpful – can't it be another way that God does His work? The only problem is that it can be hard to find the right therapist – many of them are really awful and became therapists because they were in therapy themselves.

I don't like the Devil but I am a fan of his music.

One can't take what he likes and deny the stuff he doesn't like in the Bible. If you are serious about the Bible, even as a literary book, you need to take it all in and deal with it as a whole. If you accept some things it teaches and other you do not, then you might as well go talk to a rock. A rock can teach you about gravity, or geology, or geometry- all good things-, but, when it is flung at you bleeding your head, you can not deny that it is also a painful and hard thing, and some times hard and painful things are the most good of all.

We cant be perfect, we know this, is not true. Like most you believe the lies the world has taught you. Jesus even said be perfect like your father in heaven is perfect. Was Jesus just cracking a joke, like he's back on earth in his one man show. Christ I hate one man shows….

"Moreover, as for the idea that religions shouldn't be allowed to "demand" that society reflect their values, I could say the same thing about you, or about blacks, or about disabled people."

You COULD, but you'd be arguing in an intellectually dishonest manner. No one, short of some overzealous pills at the ACLU, is trying to force Christians to engage in unchristian behavior. A non-Christian who wants the right to enter into a homosexual marriage if they so choose – an act which has no bearing or effect on any other person aside from them and their spouse-to-be – is NOT the same as a Christian who wants to BAN such marriages even though they do not effect them in any meaningful way.

Abortion proponents and supporters of gay marriage are fighting for individual rights and personal freedoms. Their opponents, largely, are fighting to affix society into the static image of a spiritual/moral ideal with little regard of how many people have to be harmed in order to make everything "fit." Before I'm anything else, I'm an American – so GUESS which side I'm on?

Are you saying that Muslims or Mormons have chosen the "wrong" God? If you are, do you recognize that they might say the same thing about you?

"The arguments about abortion and gay marriage are not about intolerant Christians attempting to shove their doctrine down others' throats."

No reasonable person gives a damn about "doctrine" until it becomes LAW. Christians are free to take to the streets and raise holy hell (pardon the pun) against whatever they wish, and I take absolutely no exception to that UNTIL they start passing laws. Why ought any religious person care that the law reflect their beliefs, anyway? The point of living one's faith isn't to abstain from vice because you might get arrested, it's to abstain from vice because it's the right thing to do, yes?

I mean… I dunno, maybe it's different for protestants/evangelicals and whatnot? I was raised Catholic, for "us" just WANTING to do sin is nearly as bad as DOING it. In which case, it always made a certain sense to me to legalize all the various sinful vices: Let the ungodly folks have their fun since just WANTING to have it is going to send them to the fires anyway.

"Protection of unborn life is not just a Christian doctrine. I consider it a Civil Rights issue."

Which is exactly how PeTA feels about The Colonel's chickens, and how the E.L.F. feels about redwoods. Why should secular legal institutions take your consideration any more seriously than it takes theirs?

I submit that abortion proponents are fighting for the same things slaveholders fought for over 150 years ago — the right to legally brand a human being as subhuman and have it stick.

So what crime have you committed if you chose the wrong religion?

And if I disagree with your interpretation, then you aren't a Christian either?

I say this gently as well, but I do not share your views. I do not think atheists suffer from hubris any more than Christians who presume that their interpretation is the only true interpretation. I do not share your very doctrinare view of Christianity either. So who is right? Or SHOULD that even the right question?

How vain, to think you know the truth for another or better than another or to think your way is the one true way. How alienating to those who think differently than you. This article just furthers the frightening divide in America. There are good people on all sides, doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing on all levels and there are sick people that cause pain and trouble on all sides. There is not a right side, but I have found I cannot believe in anyone who thinks there is a one true way or who has no real compassion.

C'mon, Bob, you're being silly. All laws legislate SOMEONE's morality. Whose would you like to endorse? In fact the "laws against abortion, homosexuals, etc." pretty much permeate all cultures, throughout the world and throughout time, except for the post-1970 Western one. That's a lot to pit yourself against! Maybe you better find a better argument.

who wrote Aethiopica, in the 3d century A.D.

A Greek in the Roman Empire.

My problem with this post is the assumed notion that Christians can have their problems cured at church while people without faith rely on counseling. I'm a devout Christian, had a tough and rough 2008 with getting laid off, a parent's brutal divorce, and an unbearable living situation. I needed to seek a counsel (granted it was a Christian one, but Jesus never really came up) and glad I did.

Devils aren't only in Hollywood, there's some on Wall Street and, yes, in BOTH political parties. Those who don't share the value system that Christ taught are everywhere and not always people who disagree with us.

If you are trying to fit God into your mold, you will never understand Him or His followers. You can't fit God into a box that can be understood by human logic. Here is what I would say to you . . . prove that God doesn't exist. You can't. You base your arguments on science which is only a human discipline. The one thing about science is that every now and then there are tenets in science that are disproven so it is not the ultimate answer.

I knew a man who worked on the Manhattan Project as the youngest PhD in his area. He was beyond brilliant. He said to anyone who asked that the more than he learned about science and our world the more he believed in God because only God answered the questions that science cannot answer.

So, I guess it all depends on how open you want to be in your searching. I hope that you will truly do an intellectually honest search some time before your life on this earth ends.

Movie Bob,

You seriously equated a human life with a tree and a chicken? I am at a loss for words, that was beneath, well, anyone.

Please see my post above. Right from wrong determined by whom? Measured by what? Popular vote? Popular vote brought Hitler to power. "Consensus" mob emotions led to lynching.

So how do you determine what is "right"? Inner promptings? If you are just an evolutionary accident, what can "inner promptings" mean? Why observe them? Why not observe your bowel movements for guidance?

I don't think atheists are bad. When someone once questioned my friendship with a relative (who was agnostic) by saying, "How can you be around him? When he doesn't believe in God?" And I told him, "Maybe he doesn't believe in God, but God sure believes in him.".

Walk into any church, and you'll find plenty of hypocrites. That's because hypocrisy is only possible where standards are high. If you seek a society without hypocrisy, you won't like what you find.

Sorry Kath, you need to keep on doing your homework. Jesus is either who he says he is ("Before Abraham was, I AM."), or he was an evil liar. Every other "rational" explanation for him dissolves quickly into absurdity under the lightest scrutiny.
A multiplicity of beliefs doesn't prove that there are a multiplicity of truths, any more than a variety of answers to a math problem on a blackboard proves that there's a variety of right solutions. (Again courtesy of C.S. Lewis. I recommend picking up "Mere Christianity").

[...] Faithful Go To Church, The Rest Go To Therapy The Faithful Go To Church, The Rest Go To Therapy [...]

That an idea is new is hardly an automatic indicator that it is incorrect. I live in a country who's founders said "eff this!" to centuries upon centuries of monarchial tradition because a group of forward-looking big-thinkers decided they'd found a better way. As it turned out, they were right.

Agree!

[...] ‘Intolerable Faith’ A good short article here by Big Hollywood blogger Michael McGruther.  He is a newer director who also happens to be a [...]

Say it very gently indeed.

Jesus is The Word Made Flesh, but don't get hung up on a rhetorical device. A President's wife may say "I and the President are one," yet a soldier knows whose orders are to be followed. His divine nature comes from his lineage, being the only begotten son of God, not from being God himself. If Jesus had asserted he was God, then his words devolve into third-person self-referential egotistical gobbledygook.

And Matthew 10:32 (NIV) says "Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven." As best as I can word it, you honestly tell people "I know Jesus, I am his friend," and Jesus will tell God "I know him, he is my friend." I can't quite see where you get "pledge fealty to me" from that. But as a practical matter, while a soldier does obey his commanding officer, it's recognized the prime authority is the commander in chief. You may serve Jesus to serve God, by following the example and his teachings, which is serving God. But it is a mistake to pledge fealty to Jesus alone and assume you're covered since Jesus and God are the same. Jesus went to the temples to praise his father, he never directed the faithful to worship him instead. If Christians are to follow the example of Jesus, then do so.

Please learn about the triune God. The Holy Trinity. One God in three persons. God the Father, God the Son, and God The Holy Spirit. See Romans 10:9.

A great many people give a damn about doctrine, before it becomes law, while it is law, and after it ceases to be law. And whether you give us permission or not, Christians are free to take to the streets up to and including passing laws. As are atheists, agnostics and members of any religion. It's called the First Amendment. It's a doctrine, and it's part of our foundational law. The law is about consensus, and if a religious belief motivates the consensus, that's just fine so long as it doesn't violate one of the basic rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

Of course Protestanta believe the same as Catholics, and I think you know that. Our religion is about personal behavior. Christians, like nearly everyone, believe that some personal behavior is intolerable personally and collectively. So of course we care that the law reflects our beliefs. If we reach a constitutionally valid consensus, then it becomes law. Until enough people believe differently and form a new consensus and write new law. Many Christians opposed slavery on purely personal religious grounds, and ultimately they convinced enough people that it ought to be abolished by law. It took a civil war, but they won. Should they have sat on their personal non-slave owning hands and let those silly Southerners continue to practice their vices?

I should add that in my original post I singled out abortion and gay marriage, not because I want to kill abortionists or hate gay people. I singled them out because out-of-control Supreme Courts, federal and state, took the longstanding consensus on those issues and made their own law on the weakest of constitutional umbras, penumbras, and emanations. Just for your information, the avatar I use is a photograph of a painting done by a lifelong gay friend of mine who unfortunately passed away last year. He and I spent many hours arguing about gay marriage, and I never once treated him a less than my dear friend, and he never once accused me of being a Christian oppressor. I still support Prop 8 for the same reasons I always did, and he would have civilly disagreed with me.

Thanks for writing this. I've known atheists who were very intelligent and enjoyed conversations with them. We didn't always talk about religion, though neither of us pulled any punches when we did. We respected each other, and our discussions were often more civil than conversations I've had with fellow Catholics over Catholic Church teachings with which they disagreed.

G. K. Chesterton didn't pull any punches with George Bernard Shaw when they discussed religion. They had civil (but not saccharin) discussions, each respecting the other (even when in heated disagreement).

I enjoyed this thread.

Isn’t an atheist a person who would believe that if he can defraud you for his personal gain and get away with it, then nothing bad happens in the end?

the devilry as you say is so easy to fall into. it's gradual, it's not only in hollywood, it's not easily identified. i am a very compassionate person who tries to see the good in people to a fault. This characteristic has gotten me into trouble more than once.

also, this talk of "logic and reason"….may as well give it up. no one will ever prove or disprove God.
and there is no such thing as a non-judgemental person or a non-hypocritical person. we all are…to just what degree is the question.

Good point. There may be some mitigating circumstances in individual cases that help explain why someone chooses atheism (uncharitable treatment at the hands of those who call themselves Christian, for example). When we die, however, our choice is made up, no matter what use we made of opportunities to further explore the existence and identity of God.

Why is sin so much easier than repentance?

Could it be ……. SATAN?

h/t The Church Lady

Ridiculous, MovieBob – your posts are usually more well thought-out and less knee-jerk than this one. Will a chicken or a tree ever POSSIBLY write a poem, help a homeless person get a meal, bond with another in friendship, go to a foreign country and volunteer to fix deformities on their fellow "animals/trees", heck, find a cure for cancer or malaria or alzheimer's? EVERY SINGLE fetus has this potential.

Completely separate question from whether abortion is permissible or not.

Do you truly believe what you wrote — i.e., that there is "about as much logic and reason" backing up the evil of meat eating/tree cutting as backing up the evil of terminating a fetus. If you can't find greater evil (without the qualifying quotes) in destroying a fetus than a chicken, then, I guess you're exhibit A in the dangers of non-belief.

Blake, I am paraphrasing of course because I do not have my bible right in front of me, but Jesus did say that his Father can be found dwelling in many houses. Also, it was another brilliant observation of Lewis' that all religions are pointing you in the same direction — some just take the longer way there. The whole point of his book "Mere Christianity" was to point out that Christians of all faiths have much more in common than they do differences.

Each person decides for himself what he believes and what he chooses to call himself. But the difference bewteen what a person calls himself and what a person believes is what that person really is. A montheistic Hindu may call himself a Hindu, but one cannot be monotheistic and a Hindu at the same time. I did not make up my own definition of what a Christian is. I read the Holy Scriptures and there found out what the requirements are for being a Christian. And the list is pretty short. Does one believe that Jesus is God incarnate? God become man. Does one believe that Jesus suffered died and was buried, and on the 3rd day God raised Him from the dead and made His substitutionary sacrifice a payment for the sin of humanity? If the answer to both these questions is 'yes', then one is a Christian. If the answer to either is 'no' then one is not a Christian. Simple and straightforward. All else is just commentary.

It's very easy to say "What about the other guy?" and attempt to incite argument by an "apparent" loophole. It is only a loophole if you accept that logic is superior to faith.

Logic has it's place and is very important in dealing with other humans, but faith is transcendental to human interaction and, again, relies exclusively on the individual.

Awesome question. Ideally both, but when push comes to shove, I follow laws because they are laws. I presuppose a wisdom greater than myself (e.g., God, society over the ages, etc.) created/shaped that law, and that the law may have purposes which my mere 40 or so years may not understand (or that the changing of the law may have unintended consequences of which I'm not aware).

If there's a law that just offends me to the very core, I'll work on the side of having it changed. And, I'll respect the proper processes for working to change such laws.

Humility is the key.

Medley, Sounds like you have it all figured out…The fact is, you will never know God because of your pride in yourself. Pride in self is an abomination to God. One must come to the end of himself before he realizes that he is nothing, has nobody and has nothing, but God. Anything you have in this world is temporary. Not all will come to that belief and that's OK. Your thoughts are not God's and your ways are not His. God already knows who will choose Him and God will have mercy and compassion on whomever He chooses. It's not about morality, we can never be moral enough, it's all about one's relationship with God. The fact is, we are all sinners and we can only be right with God through a close personal relationship with Jesus Christ. I know the name of Jesus Christ is offensive to atheists…have you ever wondered why? Man does not want to be accountable to God because of pride.

Bob, are you married? Do you have children? Have you felt a "pre-born human" move around inside a mother's womb? Have you seen an ultrasound? They've got newfangled doohickeys now that actually give you a 3-d look at the "pre-born human." They smile, and they suck their thumbs. My daughter (she turned 2 on Saturday) still sleeps in the same position she slept when she was inside her Mama. They may be pre-born, but they are not "pre-living." Abortion extinguishes a humabn life, and that's called murder no matter what God one prays to.

Yes, very impressive. I found this site that has many stories from people.

http://www.jesushelpwanted.com

I disagree with your premise Blake. None of these posts are demanding conversion to Christianity. At least in your posts with me, you seem to be saying that anyone can believe anything they want, and still assert themselves to be Christian. And the posters in opposition are merely saying (Paraphrasing here) no, there are certain things that must be accepted in order to be a Christian, or a Jew, or a Buhddist, or a Hindu. And not accepting the central tenets of any or all of those groups says that the person claiming to be so, is actually not. Can a person claiming to be a Muslim actually be a Muslim w/o accepting the 7 pillars of Islam? Can a person claiming to be Jewish be a polytheist? Can a person claiming to be a Hindu be a monotheist? The answer is no they can not.

Islam believes that the Bible has been corrupted over time and anything in it that disagrees with the Koran does so because of that corruption. Muslims deny that Christ is God. If Christians believe that Christ is God one can only conclude that the two religions worship different Gods. There are real life examples to support the conclusion. Christ spoke against all forms of violence. Allah promotes violence especially against non-believers. Muslims strive to be accepted by God by the deeds they do. Christ told his followers that it didn't matter how or what a person did he was the only way to God. This is the key difference between Christianity and Islam. There are others.

You do realize that it wasn't Paul Bunyan who wrote Pilgrim's Progress, right?

And hard for it to be considered the first American novel when it was published in England a hundred years before the Declaration of Independance.

Folks who don't believe the central tenets of Christianity are all over the place. Most assuredly in Christian churches too. They're not bad people, like everyone else on the planet, they have things about which they are in error. And a Christian who denys the divinity of Christ is in error. It comes down to the question Paul asked in one of the epistles "What say ye of Christ?" The answer to that question determines who is and who is not a Christian. So I ask you Blake, what say ye of Christ?

In a nutshell, that is exactly right.

And you are also in error about the Holy trinity becoming know first thru Paul's teachings. Some of Jesus' last words before ascending to heaven were "…baptising them in the name of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit." *sigh*

From my point of view and beliefs, yes. (So are Muslims and Mormons, lest anyone become confused).

But now that I've answered the question, allow me to point out that it is full of sophistry.

The ONLY thing that matters for MY beliefs is what I believe. Sure, beliefs can be changed by evidence or emotion, but ultimately it is a completely personal decision, without any need for external vindication. Therefore, because I believe I am justified in my faith, I am; likewise, because I believe theirs are wrong, they are. That does not give any institution the right to conquer these beliefs (as the Catholic and Anglican Churches, and the nation of Iran did), since that violates the personal nature of faith. If an individual chooses to proselytize, he is justified in his actions.

lol…:)…Sorry

Huh? I make a simple point and you respond with gobbledygook. No one said it's wrong because it is new. You seem to have the arrogance of those who think all your predecessors are fools. I was pointing out that, among the living and dead of all ages, there aren't a lot of soldiers behind you on this one. Again, ALL laws are based on someone's morality. From what you are revealing about yourself, yours isn't much to base anything on.

Abortion isn't necessarily a spiritual issue. Many believe that the rights of the unborn should be guaranteed and protected by law. The recent case of the aborted baby tossed living into the trash is a perfect example of what is wrong with our laws that govern abortion. Either way the baby was doomed to die. Why do we consider throwing it in the trash to die any different from scrambling its brain just before birth? IMHO abortion is not a religious issue… but liberals have been successful in painting it that way.

Our Revolution began in the streets, with angry citizens throwing rocks at law enforcement; and continued with a team of angry young men donning colorful costumes to committ an act of vandalism against a corporate entity. You can call that a lot of things, "conservative" wouldn't be the first to leap to my mind

what about them? you see Blake, your question has a bias built in, that bias being that people can't disagree and move on. That is wrong, they can disagree and go do other things, that is one of the basics built into Christianity. Not everyone has to agree.

my buddy Atheist has a word for them, Secular Humanists. And he finds it annoying that they wants alot of the morals of the Church, but then attack the Church. Its funny really.

"you stated you have greater discomfort with destroying a fetus because of its (actual and scientific given the fetus' DNA vs. chicken or tree DNA and not merely "theoretical" as you allege) potential for personhood. Why do you have greater discomfort, then?"

In a word: Sentimentality. I can't eat turtle, either – can't even watch one being prepared for eating. Because I like turtles. They're cute.

A fetus has the potential to be a full-blown human. Potential, I stress. They also kinda look like babies at certain stages. So, yes, there is DISCOMFORT for me, for sentimental reasons. It is simply a matter of my commitment's to individual freedom, liberty, the right of people to do what they wish with their own bodies, to not be "trapped" by a biological occurance that can be mitigated or even prevented outweighing my sentimentality.

I'd LIKE to do away with abortion and skip the whole mess altogether. There's research being done in the areas of time-limited chemical sterilization (a "night before" pill for men, basically) that holds tremendous promise in this regard.

I believe the burden of proof falls on thiests. It seems far more likely that the Univese popped into existance through the Big Bang, which there IS evidence for, and over millions of years, the Earth came into being through a series of predictable and logical occurances, than a big, mysterious, all powerful being creating it in 7 days, and then writes a big book about it, then kicks humans out of paradise for something one person did, then commits countless atrocities, WHICH HE DOCUMENTS, then dissapears so that for the next several thousand years, so that people can argue over if he exists or not.

Better yet, prove that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist. Or any other mythical beings. You have no proof that you don't. Likewise, you have no proof the god exists. His only 'evidence' is a really old book. Does being in a book make something true? If I write a really violent book with lots of contradictions, does that make whatever happens in it true 2000 years from now?

The Nazis, (whom you erroneously cite), were under Hitler. Hitler was a Roman Catholic in good standing. He refered to himself as "god's messenger," and other titles like that. He said he was doing "god's work."

Stalin didn't do what he did because he was an Athiest. He did it because he felt that's what he needed to do to get the Soviet Union ahead.

And I'd like to think that my thoughts can be explained as simply that, but in actuality, humans are far more adept at thinking than any other species on Earth. I know my morals and limits.

And the difference it makes me is that I want to be remembered as a kind, giving person who made a positive difference. It won't make anything better for me, but it will make things better for others. That's what counts.

And to say that morals cannot exist without religion, and that religion invented them is dumb. Nobody needs god to tell them not to kill stuff.

You must be logged in to post a comment.