Is God dead? Atheism finds a market in U.S

Reuters ^ | 10/18/06 | Michael Conlon

[Elsie]

Yes

[atlaw]

Elsie -- Can you prove there were children on the earth when God brought the flood? No, of course not.

Junior -- So you're going to read something into the Bible that isn't there.

Biblical literalism means adding to the Bible literally anything you want.

[Dustbunny]

Is God dead?

Each one of us will discover the answer to that question at the end of our earthly life.

What is really great is that those of us who know he is not dead are prepared to eventually meet him!

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Hey lets not get into fundamentalsim would support slavery arguements...modern fundamentalist Christians would not, citing many of the same arguements you just did!"

Point well taken. The word "fundamentalist," has --- like one of Mrs. Don-o's sweaters --- been stretched too far to cover too much. Sorry about that!

Instead of "fundamentalist," I probably should have said "simplistic and literalist." I apologize to the anti-slavery fundamentalists and will try not to repeat this error.

[atlaw]

There is no way I can discuss Spiritual Things with you because we are not on the same level.

Don't keep us in suspense. What level are you on?

[JWinNC]

"If we had any idea of what this means, we would see that it is the most shocking thing that has ever happened in the history of the Universe."

Indeed.

It isn't the the magnitude of God that makes his actions small, but rather the magnitude of God that makes His deeds so great. To misunderstand this is to misunderstand how high God really is and what it means that he bowed so low.

jw

[Dumb_Ox]

Not that there is a huge market for such tracts, but many intelligent religious writers are crippled from writing anti-atheistic polemics. They are constrained by things like humility, charity, and good habits of argument. Harris and Dawkins, among others, rarely suffer from such inconvenient limitations.

[GSlob]

Then it is not a religion. Religion needs something external to which to relate its practitioner - be it a god or an idol. If everything is wrapped up in me, then there are no externals left. And then a religion needs an organizational apparatus - the priests and the flock to be fleeced. Your description demonstrates their complete absence, both on ideological and organizational levels. Thus it is not a religion. Q.E.D.

[MineralMan]

I'd say that taking phrases and exerpts from anything and using them out of context is a mistake. If done deliberately, it's dishonest.

Doesn't matter what the work is.

[Mrs. Don-o]

You might want to see my post #212

[Mrs. Don-o]

I don't think dangling participles are the worst things up with which we have to put.

[Junior]

Cannot the Potter do with the clay as He pleases?

I am a sentient being, not clay. God could no more morally treat me like an object to be disposed at will than I can do the same to my kids.

[Junior]

There is no way I can discuss Spiritual Things with you because we are not on the same level.

Interesting dodge. One has to be indoctrinated in the worldview to discuss the worldview. I wonder if the same holds for Islam?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Absit invidia.

[Old_Mil]

God creating humans with free will is enough reason for me to be satisfied with.

Indeed - if one isn't Jewish. However, if one is Jewish, the testimony of their own prophets would go much further than that. Unless you wish to make the case that many people who call themselves Jews today care nothing for their faith but in fact adhere to a loose racial/tribal affiliation...which is another issue altogether.

[trisham]

Accipere quam facere praestat injuriam.

[LibertarianSchmoe]

Clay Achin' placemarker

[Mrs. Don-o]

"God’s revelation of himself is not only true and good, but also beautiful"

“The first thing that must strike a non-Christian about a Christian’s faith is that it is all too daring.

It seems too beautiful to be true: The mystery of being, unveiled as absolute love, coming down to wash the feet and the souls of its creatures; a love that assumes the whole burden of our guilt and hate, that accepts the accusations that shower down, the disbelief that veils God again when he has revealed himself, all the scorn and contempt that nails down his incomprehensible movement of self-abasement—all this, absolute love accepts in order to excuse his creature before himself and before the world.”

Hans Urs von Balthasar

[Junior]

I hear you, but it's still, in my opinion, a no-go. As tortures and deaths go, Jesus got off easily. It might have meant something if he'd hung there for days (as most crucifiction victims did) rather than popping off in a couple of hours. I can think of any number of execution methods that would have made a more significant point about suffering and dying -- impalement comes to mind. Basically what I'm trying to say is a vastly greater number of human beings have died in much more horrific circumstances than Jesus, so the latter's "death" seems kind of chintzy -- especially since his "death" is more like a "death" in a video game in that it really didn't affect him at all.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"The amount of suffering that God could easily endure..."

God, in His divine nature, does not suffer; He dwells in bliss. That is why He became Man, in Christ: Christ is the compassion of God.