Posted on 10/18/2006 5:25:05 PM PDT by wagglebee
CHICAGO (Reuters) - A fresh wave of atheistic books has hit the market this autumn, some climbing onto best-seller lists in what proponents see as a backlash against the way religion is entwined in politics.
"Religion is fragmenting the human community," said Sam Harris, author of "Letter to a Christian Nation," No. 11 on the New York Times nonfiction list on October 15.
There is a "huge visibility and political empowerment of religion. President George W. Bush uses his first veto to deny funding for stem cell research and scientists everywhere are horrified," he said in an interview.
Religious polarization is part of many world conflicts, he said, including those involving Israel and Iran, "but it's never discussed. I consider it the story of our time, what religion is doing to us. But there are very few people calling a spade a spade."
His "Letter," a blunt 96-page pocket-sized book condensing arguments against belief in quick-fire volleys, appeared on the Times list just ahead of "The God Delusion," by Richard Dawkins, a scientist at Oxford University and long-time atheist.
In addition, Harris' "The End of Faith," a 2004 work which prompted his "Letter" as a response to critics, is holding the No. 13 Times spot among nonfiction paperbacks.
Publishers Weekly said the business has seen "a striking number of impassioned critiques of religion -- any religion, but Christianity in particular," a probably inevitable development given "the super-soaking of American politics and culture with religion in recent years."
Paul Kurtz, founder of the Council for Secular Humanism and publisher of Free Inquiry magazine, said, "The American public is really disturbed about the role of religion in U.S. government policy, particularly with the Bush administration and the breakdown of church-state separation, and secondly with the conflict in the Mideast."
They are turning to free thought and secular humanism and publishers have recognized a taste for that, he added.
"I've published 45 books, many critical of religion," Kurtz said. "I think in America we have this notion of tolerance ... it was considered bad taste to criticize religion. But I think now there are profound questions about age-old hatreds."
The Rev. James Halstead, chairman of the Department of Religious Studies at Chicago's DePaul University, says the phenomenon is really "a ripple caused by the book publishing industry."
"These books cause no new thought or moral commitment. The arguments are centuries old," he told Reuters. Some believers, he added, "are no better. Their conception of God, the Divine-Human-World relationship are much too simplistic and materialistic."
Too often, he said, the concept "God" is misused "to legitimate the self and to beat up other people ... to rehash that same old theistic and atheistic arguments is a waste of time, energy and paper."
Dr. Timothy Larsen, professor of theology at Wheaton College in Illinois, says any growth in interest in atheism is a reflection of the strength of religion -- the former being a parasite that feeds off the latter.
That happened late in the 19th century America when an era of intense religious conviction gave rise to voices like famed agnostic Robert Ingersoll, he said.
For Christianity, he said, "It's very important for people of faith to realize how unsettling and threatening their posture and rhetoric and practice can feel to others. So it's an opportunity for the church to look at itself and say 'we have done things ... that make other people uncomfortable.' It is an opportunity for dialogue."
Larsen, author of the soon-to-be-published "Crisis of Doubt," added that in some sense atheism is "a disappointment with God and with the church. Some of these are people we wounded that we should be handling pastorally rather than with aggressive knockdown debate."
These are also probably some of the same people Harris says he's hearing from after his two books.
"Many, many readers feel utterly isolated in their communities," he said. "They are surrounded by cult members, from their point of view, and are unable to disclose their feelings."
"I get a lot of e-mail just expressing incredible relief that they are not alone ... relieved that I'm writing something that couldn't be said," Harris added.
So, are you saying only atheists can be hypocrites? I see a lot of people in all faiths do as they will and preach otherwise. There are plenty of atheists who lead wholesome lives. Some people are good, some are bad. Their religion or lack there of should not be an immediate red flag pointing to evil.
I understand you objection, but I think you're expecting the Bible to be the Koran.
Please don't take this as an insult, but as a note about the nature of religious truth. Namely: you might find the Koran more to your liking, inasmuch as it is not "inspiration" but "recitation." (Koran means recitation.) The Koran has laws which are directly transcribed into Shari'a. This is possible in Islam because there is no necessary interaction between Allah's will and the human mind. It is not a dialog. It is a decree.
This is quite unlike the Bible, which was written in three languages (Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek) and three continents (Europe, Asia, and Africa) by some 80 different authors over a period of 800 years. Unlike Mohammad, these authors did NOT get possessed by a bodiless spirit and were NOT compelled to recite or write as dictated. What happened to them is a far more supple and interactive thing called "inspiration" --- which means they wrote consciously, in their own style, using their own words, drawing on the cultural vocabulary and images that were available to them int heir own experience.
The beauty of it is that what you have is not a dictator's monologue, but a dialogue of divine initiative and human response.
The Hebrew Scriptures were written in a society in which slavery, polygamy, concubinage, tribal vendetta, etc. were already present as a given. God's word in this context is not a blessing of the status quo, but an invitation to adveniat regnum tuum--- Thy kingdom come. A kingdom which is literally our task to work out.
You could say God supplies the inspiration, and we supply the perspiration.
God is not looking here for slaves. John 15:15
"No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you."
That means we have to work out all the implications based on a progressively fuller grasp of what God is up to!
Doesn't it strike you, the difference between Islam ("submission") and Israel ("wrestler with God")? Can't you see the progression between God saying in Exodus "Do not oppress people, for you yourselves were once slaves in Egypt," to St. Paul saying to Philemon "accept your manservant back, not as a slave but as a dear brother" and St. Patrick saying, "If he's your brother he can't be your slave"?
This is human response to a Word Who is always going before us. And we are the sons and citizens -- not the dhimmis--- of the kingdom.
Jesus as Man didn't have any divine cushions that made his sacrifice less extreme.
Not a barnacle? Paul says he "emptied himself." Kenosis. In the Psalms, speaking in prophecy, the Messiah says "Scorned by men and despised by the people, I am a worm, not a man."
How old were you when you were a Christian before? You know, Christianity can not be approached academically or even apologetically. The truth isn't there and there will always be contrasting theories and worse, man's opinion. It's a heart things and a faith thing. This may seem like an abstract means of finding the truth, but it's the only way. That's why I suggested trying asking God yourself to give it to you from the throne, with no human intervention. When you hear from Him, all questions are out the window. I'm speaking from experience.
"A kingdom which is literally our task to work out"
The work has already been done on the cross, that we respond to God's initiatives out of faith, that is our "work"
"In my Father's house there are many mansions, I go to prepare a place for you, if it were not so I would have told you" Jesus Christ
"For you have not come to Mount Sinai where there is smoke , fire, and gloom(meaning the Law and blood sacrifice and works), but you have come to Mount Zion...(salvation by faith not by works of righteousness alone, the final work having been done on the cross with the HIS words "IT IS FINISHED!") the book of Hebrews
Inasmuch as Jesus Christ is True Man, He too had this status: his human will acted in faith and trust, not in divine omniscience.
This is why the Epistle to the Hebrews says that Jesus "though he was the Son, yet he learned obedience by the things which he suffered."
Why "learned," if He was acting on the basis of divine omniscience?
Why "obedience," if He acted in His divine nature as Sovereign Lord of all?
Why "suffered," if He dwells in endless bliss?
Why? Because He was emptied of all the glory of His divinity.
Because "for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate: He suffered and was buried."
As were you when you claimed that babies and children were killed.
It appears though that life right up until the rain started was pretty much normal for that time
Isn't it interesting that the scriptures mention nothing about children being born during that time.
One would think that "not having children" would be noticeable enough to have rated at least a mention.
It IS noteworthy that having children isn't mentioned in the passage you quoted.
So it remains - it's an assumption either way.
It doesn't take God's nomination to have a good common sense grip on cause and effect. It sometimes takes God's nomination for other people to listen, however.
Jaques: O that I were a fool!
I am ambitious for a motley coat.
Duke Senior: Thou shalt have one.
-ibid.
I had rather have a fool to make me merry than experience to make me sad
-As Your Like It 4:1
There is, sure, another flood toward, and these couples are coming to the ark. Here comes a pair of very strange beasts, which in all tongues are called fools.
-As You Like It 5:4
Kent. Where learn’d you this, fool?
Fool. Not i’ the stocks, fool.
-King Lear 2:4.
Come back, fool!
-2 Henry VI 1:3
Lafeu. I will subscribe for thee, thou art both knave and fool.
Clown. At your service.
-All's Well that Ends Well 4:5
Certainly we're coming back. We (meaning, Christians) believe in the resurrection of the body. Just who or what do you think you'll be for all eternity? Casper the Friendly Ghost?
Certainly we're coming back. We (meaning, Christians) believe in the resurrection of the body. Just who or what do you think you'll be for all eternity? Casper the Friendly Ghost?
In this earth, we pray "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."
That "on earth" part is our responsibility. We're God's chuildren, but not His infant children. We have a job to do.
Acts 13:2
While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them."
1 Corinthians 16:10
If Timothy comes, see to it that he has nothing to fear while he is with you, for he is carrying on the work of the Lord, just as I am.
If this was the order of God, what, under the same circumstances, would have been the command of a devil? ... A general, who now should make such an order, giving over to massacre and rapine a conquered people, would be held in execration by the whole civilized world.
Read a bit closer and you'll see,
The poster who typed this, wasn't me!
Why?
Don't bet your soul on this thought!
Luke 12:4-5
4. "I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more.
5. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him.
Except for the fact that none of them have a Savior.
You get to 'be good' to get to 'heaven'.
Because religious relationship [as distinct from other relationships, like, say, of a person to his/her tools] is that of uncomprehending supplication. To oneself one does not relate that way, thus it has to be directed externally.
He subjected Himself to that suffering willfully, because He is omnipotent and can choose to do that...because He can do anything. If He couldn't, He wouldn't be omnipotent. The amount of time that He suffered is irrelevant. The point is that He did it, period. That was enough to atone for the sins of humanity.
Man, what a thread this turned into! Methinks I'm in over my head!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.