Replies

The UK experienced God’s grace and divine protection this past week.

So I guess that means that all the people who died on 9/11 in the Twin Towers, at the Pentagon or in that field in Western PA, where not deserving of your god’s grace? BS! So tell me, how do you reonconcile the illogical and total randomness of your god’s actions that that says one group of innocent people can fall under the “magical spirit in the sky’s” protection one day while another group of equally deserving innocent people (some who where serving our nation in our military) deserved to burn and die in a horrible death under a heap of burning rubble. Explain that to me in a reasoned and logical fashion and you might momentarily get my attention. In the meantime, I’ll be continued to be convinced in my belief in Atheism.

Meanwhile the author of this article is a complete moron. On one hand he decries the religious intolerance that was practiced in Greece against Christians over 400 years ago yet his answer to this problem is to practice even more intolerance against anyone who is not a Christian today – the same sort of brilliant reasoning that the Imams and terrorists use as justification to kill anyone who is not a Muslim in their equally narrow world view.

Am I the only one to see that the folly of this flawed and very circular logic? And I don’t want to hear from anyone, that our people, including my cousin, deserved to die on 9/11 because they were sinful in your god’s eye. If that’s the case I spit your god’s eye just as I would spit in Osama’s eye.

If that’s the case I spit your god’s eye just as I would spit in Osama’s eye.

I agree the reasoning you attack is not very good. Folks often see the hand of providence randomly.

But in response to what I think was the thrust of your post, if there is a God and those are His rules, what you think about it and whether it makes you spit doesn't really make much of a difference. That's the difference between God and man.

This is just a passionate version of the: "I could never accept a God who . . ." argument. If there is a God, it really doesn't matter whether you accept Him or not. Whether He accepts you is much more to the point.

Of course, if you are right and there is no God, I guess you win the best, correct, angry athiest of the day award. Not worth much. Because if there's no God, there is no meaning and no reason to choose one course of action over another aside from how you feel. ANY decision you make is as good as any other. If there is no personal God, Camus and the existentialists were right. We are Sysiphus carrying rocks up the hill, only to have them roll down again so we can carry them up again. So even if you are right, my FRiend, being an angry athiest spitting in God's eye is an utterly empty gesture, no more or less meaningful than blowing up the WTC. There's no reason to do, or not to do, either of them.

I'm a recovered angry athiest. Every word you write is something I could have written. But I assure you, He's out there knocking. All you have to do is open the door. Just because some of his followers get overzealous in thinking they understand His will doesn't change that one little bit.

“So I guess that means...”

Don’t just guess, go back and read what he said, and think about it. Then come back and talk to us.

You missed several things he said, or ignored them. One of those is that people have free will, and can choose to do evil. Or to do good. He seems, to me, to be asking us to choose to do good. There is a way to fight radical Islam without oppressing moderate Islam. We have to find out what it is, and do it. It won’t be easy, but it needs to be done.

Nowhere, btw, did he say your cousin or any of the others deserved to die. That is the Westboro Baptist attitude. I’ll join you in spitting in their direction.