Posted on 06/04/2009 10:23:17 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Atheist Ads in Chicago Say Man Created God
by Christine Dao*
“In the beginning, man created God,” according to recent advertisements posted on 25 Chicago buses. The Indiana Atheist Bus Campaign targeted the country’s third largest city to espouse “the idea that man created God as well as all religions.”[1]
The ads were inspired by similar campaigns elsewhere, including...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
When atheists say we evolved.. I say if that is so then God also created Evolution.
When spiritual people become “religious” IMHO they lose the true purpose of what God intended for us. It’s not about “chapter and verse”.. it’s not about all the “mumbo-jumbo” and “rituals” it’s not about going to church and being a “good Christian”.. it’s about following your conscious which was given to you by God.. and not blaming or making excuses for your sins or the sins of others.
The Church should groom you to eventually leave it.. not groom you to be dependent on it.
There's strong atheism (I assert that no God exists), and then there's weak atheism (I have no belief in God).
I subscribe to the latter, myself.
"For an atheist to reject religion means only that he has failed to understand it, precisely. A confession of atheism is simply an honest confession of ignorance of any realities that transcend the human ego, nothing more, nothing less. And why argue with a man who not only clings to ignorance, but is proud of the fact?"
“..For reason is only a faculty of knowing something indirectly in the absence of direct vision, while God is known directly, the same way one knows one is alive, perceives reality, or is aware of free will. In order to see something, it is not necessary to logically prove the existence of sight. Many of the most important truths are known simply by their “superabundance of clarity,” by pure intellect, not by the reason which is its servant. Reason is not Intelligence in itself, only an instrument of intelligence. Few things create more mischief than reason in the hands of an unintelligent or immoral wonker. .[..]Not for nothing did Richard Weaver say that “every attack upon religion is inevitably an attack upon mind.” Naturally there are many forms of stupid religion, for there is nothing touched by humans wonkers that cannot be made stupid. But at least religion as such does not exclude the possibility and priority of Intelligence, and therefore, Truth. ...” ~ Gagdad Bob The Absolute Science of the Center and the Darwinist Religion of the Periphery
He can say that he’s the Queen of England. That hardly makes it so..
I don't believe in Odin or Jupiter; I regard them as creations of ancient mythology. Am I professing faith?
Huh?
I reject Islam; does that mean I don't understand it?
While we can't see air or wind, we can measure their effects and document their existence objectively. The evidence for the existence of (for instance) neutrinos is overwhelming. This is not the case for deities.
Scholars have confirmed the accuracy of God’s Word throughout history, just as they have confirmed the existence of Christ.
Incorrect (I assume by "God's Word" you mean the Bible). There was not a worldwide flood thousands of years ago. The Earth is far more than 6,000 years old. (just to cite a couple of "for instances"). As for Christ, I would certainly agree that that a historical figure named Jesus taught throughout the Galilean countryside c. 30 CE, was believed by his followers to have performed supernatural acts, and was sentenced to death by the Romans.
This doesn't mean, of course, that there's any reason to believe that he rose from the dead, any more that the fact that Muhammad existed means that he rode a winged horse...
I better read Bullfinch's Mythology again, since I reject Zeus, King Arthur, Beowulf, Prester John, and Thor...
Rastafarians believe that Haile Selassie was the messiah. I'm wondering if I'm expected to prove he was NOT the messiah, and if my disbelief in his divinity is an article of faith.
Most of this discussion reminds me of the dyslexic agnostic insomniac that would toss and turn all night wondering if there really was a doG.
In contrast, your post reminds me of why the religious expression of some is greatly deserving of respect, though it usually passes unnoticed except for its humanity. You are exactly right, save for perhaps the unintended implication that only atheists might say we evolved.
The genuinely sad cases are of course, the dogmatically “religious” that seem so lacking in spirituality as to have missed the point of it all. Ritual seems to substitute for faith and faith’s deficit breads intolerance and insecurity.
Too often these are the folks being duped by those that pound Bibles citing Chapter and Verse with the primary purpose of fleecing the flock. There is unfortunately big money in “religion” and no shortage of “good Christians” willing to exploit that opportunity. If you think otherwise, find out who owns a few of the corporate jets hidden away in hangers in say Tulsa.
Other "religions" would scream "This is Hate Speach"...but the good news is, we serve a BIG GOD and by the way He already knows these folks by name...
The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God"...
Psalm 14:1 (New American Standard Bible)
yeah...as old as Michelle Obama and Sonia Sotomayor screeching pooor poor ME, the minority female...
or militant gays screeching about marriage and hate.
Anything other than agnosticism is dishonest.
Just as man can measure the effects of wind, air, and gravity, we can see evidence of God’s existence.
Your response is precisely why I stated:
“Whether or not a man chooses to believe...is another facet...”
Non-believers will choose to disbelieve regardless of the facts. In their finite minds, they will desire a “logical” explanation, but history and God’s Word (yes, the Bible) reveals that they are not truly interested in knowing Him.
In other words, orthodox scholars have presented evidence (especially in modern times by way of technology, etc.) substantiating the historicity of the Bible, and yet, man simply chooses to reject the Lord.
My hope is that our Creator will reveal Himself to you in a way that will bring about a personal relationship.
Best Wishes,
TJI
"If it can't be expressed in figures, it is not science; it is opinion." ---Robert A. Heinlein
Non-believers will choose to disbelieve regardless of the facts.
That's more than a little condescending, don't you think? All I care about (in this context) is facts. It's "believers" whose worldview is based on faith rather than facts...by definition.
In their finite minds, they will desire a “logical” explanation,
Why in the world would you put the word logical in quotes? For that matter, what's wrong with a logical explanation?
but history and God’s Word (yes, the Bible) reveals that they are not truly interested in knowing Him.
In other words, orthodox scholars have presented evidence (especially in modern times by way of technology, etc.) substantiating the historicity of the Bible, and yet, man simply chooses to reject the Lord.
You can assert that, but there's a wealth of evidence showing that the mythological events in the Bible are just that.
My hope is that our Creator will reveal Himself to you in a way that will bring about a personal relationship.
If I'm wrong and you're right I hope the same thing...but I don't think that's likely.
Best Wishes, TJI
The same to you as well.
On asking an atheist if God existed, if he had an opinion I see no reason why he would not express it and if he had no opinion, seems to me that would make him an agnostic.
“And in so doing, they are expressing their beliefs about God, ironically becoming theists, expressing a theology.”
That I agree with.
“I don’t believe in Odin or Jupiter”
Then “no” is the answer to your previous question (Is it professing faith if I say Man created Odin, or Man created Jupiter?) given that by “created” you meant brought into actual existence. However, you subsequently wrote:
“I regard them as creations of ancient mythology. Am I professing faith?”
That indicates that by “created” you did not mean brought into actual existence and instead you meant developed as an idea or concept or something like that, and again the answer depends on why you regard them as creations of ancient mythology.
For example, if your regard is based on evidence you have seen precluding the necessity of faith, then the answer is “no” to either of your questions about professing faith.
For another example, if your regard is based on the word of others who have led you to that regard without particular evidence, necessitating at least faith in those others, then the answer is “yes “to either of your questions about professing faith.
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.