Atheist Summer Camp?

[RoyalShock]

"Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it." - Proverbs 22:6

We have a mandate from God to teach our kids and bring them up as believers.

Atheism has no such mandate and doesn't really make sense, unless you attend the Evangelical Church of Dawkins.

[CharlieHog]

As for the world’s problems, I would contend that as much or more damage has been done by militarist atheist societies than by Christianity or even by religion in general.

Can you give me an example of a militarist atheist society?

[Maggie]

As for the world’s problems, I would contend that as much or more damage has been done by militarist atheist societies than by Christianity or even by religion in general.

Can you give me an example of a militarist atheist society?

Sure, the former Soviet Union.

[SpanglerFan316]

I am no fan of Richard Dawkins and I certainly would not send my kids, if I had any, to his summer camp.

For what it's worth, I've always considered that atheism is, in essence, a religion. Atheism is, ultimately, a matter of faith: the non-existence of God, like the existence of God, cannot be proved rationally, however hard mankind may try. Atheism isn’t a more “rational” worldview than religious belief.

Atheists prefer to pit religion against science (a hopeless enterprise) and to make religion look like the culprit for all the world’s ills (another impossible task). While some fundamentalist Christians may oppose science, this has never been the position of orthodox Christianity or even other mainstream religions. If any hostility exists, it comes not from believers, but from atheist scientists who feel challenged by religious belief. As for the world’s problems, I would contend that as much or more damage has been done by militarist atheist societies than by Christianity or even by religion in general.

In the end, both atheism and religious belief are choices; in other words, they involve the will and not just the intellect. As previously noted, no empirical proof will definitively prove or disprove God’s existence. We all must consider the testimony at our disposal and make a personal choice about the nature of the universe and the meaning of human existence.

Exactly. :yes:

If you read Dawkins, you'll see that he isn't an Atheist. He believes that the probability that "God exists" is very low but he doesn't have the evidence to "prove" that "God exists" is a false statement.

If you consider the behavior of many "religious" people whose actions seem to have no connection with the spiritial values in which their religions' claim to believe, it is easy to see religion as nothing more than hypocrisy.

EXAMPLES:
Catholic Priests abusing young children.
A "pro-lifer" taking a life (Dr. Tiller).
Darfur.
Roman Catholic Inquisitions.
Terrorism involving India & Pakistan.
Religious scams (e.g. Televangelism http://all4jesus.wordpress.com/2008/...list-scandals/)
Christian evangelist scandals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...elist_scandals
Top Ten list http://listverse.com/2007/09/06/top-...ious-scandals/
Another list. http://freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Rel...dals#Metzitzah
"C Street House" http://www.alternet.org/politics/141..._'the_family'/
ETC.

[RoyalShock]

Religion cannot be hypocritical. The people who claim to practice it can be. The human condition (imperfect and sinful by nature) is not resolved by following a religion. Attempting to discredit religion by pointing out the flaws of it's followers (some of whom aren't, but use it to their own ends) is illogical. You can't hold "religion" accountable, only individuals.

An essential doctrine of Christianity is the recognition that we are unrighteous and unworthy and in need of redemption (the blood of Christ). Upon acceptance of that redemption (repentance) we are still unrighteous and unworthy, but now, by the grace of God we're forgiven for our transgressions.

I can't vouch for other religions, but Christianity is a deep spiritual relationship with God through Christ, who taught us to love our enemies and love our neighbors as ourselves. Failure to do that falls on the individual, not God, not Christ, not biblical doctrine, not "religion".

[SB Shock]

Religion cannot be hypocritical. The people who claim to practice it can be. The human condition (imperfect and sinful by nature) is not resolved by following a religion. Attempting to discredit religion by pointing out the flaws of it's followers (some of whom aren't, but use it to their own ends) is illogical. You can't hold "religion" accountable, only individuals.

An essential doctrine of Christianity is the recognition that we are unrighteous and unworthy and in need of redemption (the blood of Christ). Upon acceptance of that redemption (repentance) we are still unrighteous and unworthy, but now, by the grace of God we're forgiven for our transgressions.

I can't vouch for other religions, but Christianity is a deep spiritual relationship with God through Christ, who taught us to love our enemies and love our neighbors as ourselves. Failure to do that falls on the individual, not God, not Christ, not biblical doctrine, not "religion".

Amen.

[Maggie]

Spangler,

You lost me; and I think it is fair to say that Dawkins is an atheist.

Regardless, I don’t think it is particularly helpful, or insightful, to take a broad brush and declare all religion hypocritical. Human fallibility does exist.

[SpanglerFan316]

Spangler,

You lost me; and I think it is fair to say that Dawkins is an atheist.

Tell me which of his books you have read. It would be illogical of hm to be an atheist (according to the literal meaning of the term) and he discusses this in places.

[SubGod22]

Religion cannot be hypocritical. The people who claim to practice it can be. The human condition (imperfect and sinful by nature) is not resolved by following a religion. Attempting to discredit religion by pointing out the flaws of it's followers (some of whom aren't, but use it to their own ends) is illogical. You can't hold "religion" accountable, only individuals.

An essential doctrine of Christianity is the recognition that we are unrighteous and unworthy and in need of redemption (the blood of Christ). Upon acceptance of that redemption (repentance) we are still unrighteous and unworthy, but now, by the grace of God we're forgiven for our transgressions.

I can't vouch for other religions, but Christianity is a deep spiritual relationship with God through Christ, who taught us to love our enemies and love our neighbors as ourselves. Failure to do that falls on the individual, not God, not Christ, not biblical doctrine, not "religion".

Amen.

:good:

[1979Shocker]

For what it's worth, I've always considered that atheism is, in essence, a religion. Atheism is, ultimately, a matter of faith: the non-existence of God, like the existence of God, cannot be proved rationally, however hard mankind may try. Atheism isn’t a more “rational” worldview than religious belief.

I agree with all of this. Let me add another spin on whether the existence or non-existence of God can be proved.

First, consider that God is not bound by space and time. So if the universe was limited to a certain size, no matter how vast (even though I believe it to be infinite), God would be outside of that where space and time don't exist.

With that being the case, the only way to scientifically prove that God exists would be for mankind to develop instruments so sophisticated that they could peer outside the universe (outside of space and time). Mankind in its present state will never be able to do that. That's why mankind must rely on faith to believe that God exists.

But let's just say that mankind was able to scientifically prove the existence of God. If that occurred, then faith would no longer be required. Now we get into something that is mentioned in the Bible, specifically the faith chapter, Hebrews 11. Verse 6 says the following:

• But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

This is telling me that you have to have faith. Otherwise, you're not pleasing God.

[Maggie]

Spangler,

You lost me; and I think it is fair to say that Dawkins is an atheist.

Tell me which of his books you have read. It would be illogical of hm to be an atheist (according to the literal meaning of the term) and he discusses this in places.

The Blind Watchmaker and more recently, but still a couple of years ago, The God Delusion.

[SpanglerFan316]

For what it's worth, I've always considered that atheism is, in essence, a religion. Atheism is, ultimately, a matter of faith: the non-existence of God, like the existence of God, cannot be proved rationally, however hard mankind may try. Atheism isn’t a more “rational” worldview than religious belief.

I agree with all of this. Let me add another spin on whether the existence or non-existence of God can be proved.

First, consider that God is not bound by space and time. So if the universe was limited to a certain size, no matter how vast (even though I believe it to be infinite), God would be outside of that where space and time don't exist.

With that being the case, the only way to scientifically prove that God exists would be for mankind to develop instruments so sophisticated that they could peer outside the universe (outside of space and time). Mankind in its present state will never be able to do that. That's why mankind must rely on faith to believe that God exists.

But let's just say that mankind was able to scientifically prove the existence of God. If that occurred, then faith would no longer be required. Now we get into something that is mentioned in the Bible, specifically the faith chapter, Hebrews 11. Verse 6 says the following:

• But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

This is telling me that you have to have faith. Otherwise, you're not pleasing God.

It isn't faith if it can be proven. Of course, many religious people claim that THEIR RELIGON can be proven to be true; I guess they don't have faith.

If I have faith that a stick of butter is GOD, can you prove that I'm wrong? How about a wafer? Some wine? Some pasta?

Religion is a cultural construct. It's easy for "us" to view Islam or Shintoism that way. It might be harder to view Christianity that way. If we lived 3000 years ago, what would be your religion? 5000 years ago?

PS I have no objection to your religious beliefs provided you don't try to impose them on me.

[SpanglerFan316]

As for the world’s problems, I would contend that as much or more damage has been done by militarist atheist societies than by Christianity or even by religion in general.

Can you give me an example of a militarist atheist society?

Sure, the former Soviet Union.

You don't think (the worship of) Stalin was a "religion"?

[Maggie]

As for the world’s problems, I would contend that as much or more damage has been done by militarist atheist societies than by Christianity or even by religion in general.

Can you give me an example of a militarist atheist society?

Sure, the former Soviet Union.

You don't think (the worship of) Stalin was a "religion"?

I think belief in a lot of things, such as, statism, environmentalism, fascism, corporatism, etc. can, in some people, take on the form of a religious belief – and in those contexts it can be quite dangerous and destructive (sometimes intentionally, and sometimes not). I have the same feeling with regard extremist religious beliefs.

I wrote that the Soviet Union is an example of a militaristic atheist society – which is not in historical dispute. It was an atheistic expansionistic system of government. And I also wrote that I consider atheism, when distilled to its essence, ultimately a religion.

My point was, in part, to dispute the atheist argument that their beliefs exist on some higher moral plain.

[shocky]

Not being convinced of something is not a religion or faith. If I say I know, for a fact, there is no God because someone told me so and that's the only reason, THEN I have a religion. Dawkins and other atheist contend that there is no proof, therefor, no reason to believe or have faith in something that may or may not be true. Big difference, because if you are proven wrong as an atheist, you must change your opinion based on new evidence. Religion knows it's right from the start and can not be changed because of faith and dogma, even in the light of new evidence.
Like some cultures, maybe I believe in spirits instead of God or Gods. I don't need proof or logic because I believe it to be true, even if I'm proven wrong. Which I know I can't be, because it's supernatural. That's religion versus rational thought or Faith versus atheism.
This is an obvious straw man argument to make atheist seem to appear to promote some kind of unproven belief system, like Islam or Christianity. Some believe that the earth is hollow. If I want, I can say that there is no proof that the earth is hollow and demand evidence. If they can't prove it, then why should I believe it. If I don't, am I creating a new religion of hollow earth atheism? Of course not. I am simply stating that I need more than someone's word that it is so. Same with the Holy books of the worlds religions which are mens stories about their Gods.
As far as societies are concerned. Read some history and current events about the wars fought now and throughout history for a GOD or Gods. What people have done to each other because of their faith and beliefs. To say that atheist societies, if there is such a thing, has caused more damage than the worlds religions is just silly. You know better, but you'll claim a few nut jobs dictators represents rationalist thought. How about the Middle East as just one small example of true belief and cruelty coming together as one in todays world.
People can do anything, if they truly believe it's the will of God. You'll never convince them otherwise because they have faith. Can you blame them. As an example: Didn't God kill the first born Egyptians??? Not just the Pharaoh's kid (even though he had nothing to do with anything), but all the babies, kids, adults, women, you name it. Talk about a late term abortion. That is called genocide when humans do it folks. But when your God does it, well they had it coming or we just don't understand why and can't know. That's not just or moral or right then and certainly not today, if it even really happened at all. I can't just look at the Bible or any other Holy Book and ignore the crazy stories and cherry pick the ones I like or that make feel good about it. Maybe you believe that those stories are real or hold some deeper meaning, but can really blame rationalist and atheist for asking...WHY!