Why is it that those who don’t believe in God so often talk about him? Why do they try and disprove him, when no action would be needed by the standards of their own philosophy? What is more fascinating to me is the fact that they come in waves and they come with their answers but as their questions are answered they only come back with hateful comments and will use any given opportunity to divert attention of any given question to the next point. In which case they can feel superior because nobody could answer all the question in one single post. But most of all their insistence that they have answers when it is often obvious from what they are saying that precisely the opposite is true. Reductionism and oversimplifications are part of the process that helps them feel secure, and wining debates is far more important then finding the truth. But my final thought of the day is that there is nothing wrong with talking about any topic as long as if you are going to invoke reason and logic you stay reasonable and logical. Why do they always try to provoke reaction from Christians, probable answer, to make themselves feel better and secure in the knowledge that there is no such thing as perfect human.
I have mentioned this before, not so much that there are many disagreements between different scientists but that we have carefully staged and controlled scientific data that is shared according to what is acceptable by those who vet all the material of “interest”. These gatekeepers are supposedly safeguarding science and us from becoming to confused with too much data. Yet one has to be reminded again and again that scientist are after all humans, and that we should not live under the illusion that they are immune to professional jealousy deliberate and often malicious attempts to sabotage other peoples work.
Journal stem cell work ‘blocked’
By Pallab Ghosh
Science correspondent, BBC News
Billions of pounds of public money is spent on stem cell research
Stem cell experts say they believe a small group of scientists is effectively vetoing high quality science from publication in journals.
In some cases they say it might be done to deliberately stifle research that is in competition with their own.
It has also emerged that 14 leading stem cell researchers have written an open letter to journal editors in order to highlight their dissatisfaction.
Billions of pounds of public money is spent on funding stem cell research.
The open letter to the major scientific journals claims that “papers that are scientifically flawed or comprise only modest technical increments often attract undue profile. At the same time publication of truly original findings may be delayed or rejected”.
Two internationally-renowned researchers have spoken to BBC News about their concerns.
They are Robin Lovell-Badge, who is speaking in a personal capacity, and Austin Smith, from the University of Cambridge.
Professor Lovell-Badge said: “It’s turning things into a clique where only papers that satisfy this select group of a few reviewers who think of themselves as very important people in the field is published.
As someone who often hears people complain against Christians and as we are hearing people often demand that we should show tolerance for everything as long as it’s not Christian one must accept that Pope makes very good sense here. We must stop pretending that we are tolerance and demand tolerance but at the same time impose our rules on those who disagree with us. That is not called tollerance that is called dictatorship. After all; is freedom not meant to be equally guaranteed to all. We seem to live in the world where we say “live and let live” but what we mean is live by our rules. I would therefore argue that we as humans can’t help but discriminate, but I hasten to add that we must show our tolerance in the way we deal with those that we disagree with. My last thought on this is that if we are going to enforce these rules and force religious people to do secular staff, can they then claim to be any better than the old Catholic church in middle ages that demanded absolute obedience? Freedom means right to choose and right to be rejected and therefore when accepted, then great joy and satisfaction are part of this process we call choice.
From BBC News: Page last updated at 13:16 GMT, Tuesday, 2 February 2010
The Pope has confirmed he will visit the UK later this year
The Pope has faced a backlash after urging Catholic bishops in England and Wales to fight the UK’s Equality Bill with “missionary zeal”.
Pope Benedict XVI said the bill – which could end the right of the Church to ban gay people from senior positions – “violates natural law”.
But gay and human rights campaigners condemned his comments, and Labour MEP Stephen Hughes said he was “appalled”.
Gordon Brown said he respected the Pope but commenting would be inappropriate.
The prime minister’s official spokesman said Mr Brown had “enormous admiration and respect” for the pontiff, who will this year make the first papal visit to the UK since 1982.
‘Sweeping exemptions’
The Pope told the Catholic bishops of England and Wales gathered in Rome: “Your country is well-known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society.
“Yet, as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs.
“In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.”
John Lennox interview from the small group evangelism resource ‘Glad You Asked’.
Find out more at http://www.gladyouasked.org.
(John Lennox had the rare privilege of debating with Richard Dawkins on 3rd Oct 2007)
It is this is kind of action I wish we all took to our hearts, and focus far more of our attention on good stories just as much as we do on the disasters. We need to be thought how to be nice to each other, and consider the needs of those who are less fortunate than us.
A new orphanage for children whose parents died from Aids has opened in Kenya this week, thanks to the singer Cher.
Children at the Togetherness School in Ukunda, Kenya, now have a secure future
The Togetherness School in Ukunda is now home to 360 children aged between two and 14 years. Many of them have HIV themselves.
It was originally the dream of a Scottish couple who went to Kenya on holiday. Moved by the plight of the children, Robert and Eleanor Wood, from Fife, set up a small orphanage on rented land.
Four years ago, after spending their life savings and with the orphanage in danger of shutting down, they appealed on Sky News for help.
Cher: Saved orphanage
The American singer Cher was watching the channel in a hotel room in Germany and immediately pledged crucial funds.
The actor Clint Eastwood also offered financial assistance.
Here are some new years resolutions that we can all do with, in the world that demands so much of us and this life that is passing us too fast, where no time is spared for our spiritual wellbeing.
Lie, Cheat, Drink Swear and steal more this year.
LIE… back and relax just a little more this new year. Let a little more life happen to you without so much worry.
CHEAT… failure. Don’t be afraid to try something new because you think you may fail. It is through failure that we learn the most valuable lessons.
DRINK… from the fountain of knowledge. Many people around you have already been down roads you are about to travel. Learn from mistakes they have made. Take what they have learned and use it.
SWEAR …to do your best. All the time, in every situation. That is all anybody will ever ask.
STEAL … a little time for God. Everyday take a little more time to develop your relationship with God.
By following these simple instructions we may find that we are happier, healthier and closer to living the way God wants us to in 2010.
Are there any other reasons why Dr Dawkins avoids scholarly people like Dr William Craig? Fact is that Dr Craig never claims to be a Creationist, and has countless times even used arguments from evolution to prove the necessity of God should have intrigued people like Dr Dawkins, but hey when you know that your arguments will simply not stand against reasonable, intelligent person I guess the best thing you could do is run.
For once I agree with atheists, I think it is completely unacceptable that we should stop people from saying freely what their disagreements are with religions. It is not like here in Europe with don’t have enough of the anti hate laws, therefore I could not see valid reasoning behind implementing this law that will stop people from doing what comes naturally to all of us. Questioning and critical arguments is not something that should be forbidden, in fact we have plenty of examples in the Bible where this is demanded.
I would argue that as Ireland, being such a strong Catholic country has no valid excuses, tolerance also means freedom to express your dissatisfaction and that means even, if not especially religion. (We know from even recent history that there are many good reasons to feel unhappy with many religious leaders) I’m very sorry but freedom is something that comes to us as a gift from God, to all of us, and if that freedom means rebellion and rejection then this is OK with God. We are becoming indeed very silly, if faith is that we stand for, and we are “worried” about the defence of God we should remember that we need not take charge on defending God. He is big enough to look after himself. I have often said that I like to defend my religious thinking and Gods word, but for there to be a real contest of ideas we must allow freedom for others to disagree with us.
Defend the word
CNN Story
January 2, 2010 5:27 a.m. EST
//
Atheist Ireland has published “blasphemous” quotations from Bjork, pictured, Mark Twain and Salman Rushdie.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Law, making blasphemy a crime punishable by a $35,800 fine, came into effect January 1
Atheist group: Law is “silly and dangerous,” provides an incentive for religious outrage
Group produces “blasphemous” quotations including words of Jesus, Muhammad, Mark Twain
{CNN) — An Irish atheist group has published a series of quotations on religion in an attempt to challenge a blasphemy law that went into effect on New Year’s Day.
The 25 “blasphemous” quotations include the words of Jesus, Mohammed, Mark Twain, Salman Rushdie and Bjork.
Atheist Ireland published the list on its Web site Friday. It says it aims to challenge the law, which makes blasphemy a crime punishable by a €25,000-($35,800) fine.
“Despite these quotes being abusive and insulting in relation to matters held sacred by various religions, we unreservedly support the right of these people to have published or uttered them,” the group said on the site.
“We unreservedly support the right of any Irish citizen to make comparable statements about matters held sacred by any religion without fear of being criminalized, and without having to prove to a court that a reasonable person would find any particular value in the statement.”
Lawmakers in staunchly Catholic Ireland passed the law in July, but it came into force January 1.
Does religion only brings evil, are people or religion that drives Violence? Should we look at the theological teaching and instructions given by the originator of the religion i.e. Look at the teaching of Jesus.
Could there be strong links between rise of science as some have postulated that with the rise of Protestantism we have seen increase and support for the science in the orderly world that is governed by the God who is the creator of all the laws and the material world. Issues like beginning of time and universe are in agreement with the Biblical teaching, first cause is therefore required and can be justifiably used to show that Christianity is reasonable and is therefore logical proposition. DNA and complexity is a strong argument that shows that Dr Dawkins ” Mountain improbable” is in fact really improbable and shows that Dr Dawkins will often uses sneaky arguments that invoke design but refute the designer.
Leading atheist and acclaimed journalist, Christopher Hitchens, goes head to head with Christian apologist and Oxford Professor, John Lennox in March 2009 at Birmingham, Alabama’s Samford University to debate the question “Is God Great?”
Hitchens, who made his opinion clear on this topic in 2007 with his book “God is not Great,” maintains not only that God fails to be great, but denies his existence entirely. Professor Lennox, a convinced Christian and scientist, respectfully disagrees. This event features a unique blend of both planned remarks and fast-paced dialogue that tackles these issues in a refreshing and informative light. It is sure to offer insights to all.
John Lennox is Professor in Mathematics at the University of Oxford and Fellow in Mathematics and Philosophy of Science at Green Templeton College, University of Oxford. Prof. Lennox has debated atheists ranging from Victor Stenger to Richard Dawkins and is the author of “God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?”
Christopher Hitchens is a British-American bestselling author, journalist, and literary critic who has served as a columnist for several prominent publications, some of which include Vanity Fair, The Nation, and The Atlantic. He is one of the world’s most influential and outspoken atheists.
This is taken from the 1998 debate between Dr William Craig (Christian) and Dr Peter Atkins (Atheist). Issue of faith is often overlooked when claiming that science is demonstrably eliminating God hypothesis from our modern lives. Fact that some of the science is based on faith itself, and continues its reliance upon previous “facts” taken from the existent sciences that will and have changed (as history of science will confirm for us) should be considered, when assertions are being made that science has rightly excluded God from our “enlightened” world dominated by self-declared “Bright’s”.
Book review; God’s undertaker, has science buried God? By John C Lenox.
If you enjoy everything British you will like this book, like Prof Alister McGrath he is originally from Northern Ireland and like McGrath holds two doctorates, one in Mathematics and second in as a philosopher of science. He is well spoken measured in his statements and full of references to support his statements. It is written as a short but to the point book on number of issues facing modern anti theists and atheists when dealing with major arguments when confronting Theism. He is clear and stern in his criticism of many modern scientist who are also evangelists of atheism ideology. His points that in order for one to claim atheistic position will necessitate reasonable evidence based on facts rather than faith they place in their presuppositions that have never been tested.
I highly recommend this book it covers number of subjects things like the fact that today we are facing a war of the worldviews in our debates and it is not scientific data that is supposedly dominating much of the debates by many atheists (note that not all atheists are like this) this is often not taken into account when analysing issues at hand.
Dr Lennox is looking at the issue of information and being qualified in mathematics this places him well in assessing the theory of design. He point out that even though most people will go cold as soon as you mention word Intelligent Design, when properly addressed this issue could and should help us understand better complexity we find in nature. He deals with number of issues raised by the famous Scottish philosopher David Hume and tackles him head on showing that frequently much of what he said has been taken out of context. He gives credit to Hume and accepts that lack of scientific data could reasonably justify his position stated so long ago. But he also points out that not only the universe but nature itself still proclaims the glory of God.
I would only add one word of caution, it will require some thinking and will demand your full attention. Many points could easily be missed if you are not paying attention. Don’t approach this book with preconceptions, try to read it in the way that you would listen to any new idea and you will find that much of what is said is not contradictory to what we find in scientific world today but expanded and explained in the way that could explain many reasonable faiths that exist amongst Christian intellectuals in this country.
This is very enjoyable book that deals with the problems of scientific pretensions amongst New Atheists. These unjustified claims served as facts tend to be too bold and frequently overstated and deliberately twisted “facts” by those who call themselves bright’s. David Berlinski chooses to treat them with ridicule and dishes out plenty of subtle put downs. Book is extremely enjoyable; if you are one of these people who like to read comments on other people’s blogs you will find this book very interesting. It is written in a way that anyone with even a limited knowledge of science could grasp and understand David’s reasons behind his desire to show their ignorance. He demonstrates how incorrect and illogical reasoning is often used when modern anti theists are attempting to make their arguments sound plausible.
Dr Berlinski is an agnostic, but this is exactly what makes his arguments that much more reasonable. He is not advocating religion, what he is doing is using his substantial knowledge of Mathematics, Biology and Philosophy (He holds two PhD’s) to show how irrational modern day aggressive atheist are. He is profound in his understanding of the subject and thoughtful in his approach to the topic of religion and is well loved writer.
I have read this book in 5 days as I have two young children that need entertaining, but with anyone with time to spare these 226 pages will feel very short / quick. The only thing I found disappointing about this book is that, like with any other great book it ended way to soon. It will leave you wanting more, I would not be surprised that once you finish this book like me you will be going back to Amazon looking for more great books by the great David Berlinski.
…David Berlinski is a distinguished academic mathematician and philosopher, who was also a post-doctoral fellow in molecular biology at Columbia University.
By Dr Gary R. Habermas
Originally published in Bibliotheca Sacra 146:584 Oct-Dec (1989): 437-450.
p. 437
Idealism was the dominant philosophy in the Western world in the early 20th century, a holdover from its prominence in the previous century. Stressing the metaphysical reality of mind or spirit and the epistemological centrality of ideas, idealism stood in stark contrast to naturalism, which took its position as the dominant school of thought in the middle of this century. Naturalistic convictions often included the supreme reality of matter, the belief that nature could potentially explain all phenomena, and faith in the empirical, scientific method as the chief means of discovering facts. Such beliefs continue to exercise control on many areas of study.
One interesting facet of the history of ideas is the possibility that either new data or new ways of interpreting the data will encourage new paradigm (or world view) shifts in thinking.1 Many trends indicate that just such a major shift may now be taking place. Just as idealism gave way to naturalism earlier this century, naturalism may now be losing its position of supremacy as a world view.
Physicists Puthoff and Targ, after research at Stanford Research Institute, published Mind-Reach, whose first chapter, “When the Paranormal Becomes Normal,” appropriately asks, “Where will you be standing when the paradigm shifts?”2 The authors consider that a shift in thinking may be occurring.
1. Of special interest is Thomas S. Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2d ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970). The present article uses the term “paradigm” to denote a world view, or an interpretive model for explaining reality.
2. Harold Puthoff and Russell Targ, Mind-Reach (New York: Dell Publishing Co., 1978).
This text was sent to me recently by a friend and I thought it to be very relevant even though I may not used same words to share same points.
Same notion is true that our culture has given up on its roots and frequently this is costing us dearly. Our society has been looking down for far too long on bad things that church was responsible for. But at the cost that is just too high, we have thrown the baby out with the bath water and that is the sad part. Most of us desire to go to good old time where we felt more secure, our children could play in the streets and we did not worry about their safety.
Sense of community is almost completely lost, and values that are used today are all based on self preservation rather than community. The only things we share today is fear and sorrow for the lost innocence. I hope that you will find these interesting and even helpful in choosing what is important to you, and what you should concentrate your efforts on.
Kind regards
Defend the Word
Remarks from CBS Sunday Morning - Ben Stein
I Only hope we find GOD again before it is too late ! !
The following was written by Ben Stein and recited by him on CBS Sunday Morning Commentary.
My confession:
I am a Jew, and every single one of my ancestors was Jewish. And it does not bother me even a little bit when people call those beautiful lit up, bejeweled trees, Christmas trees. I don’t feel threatened. I don’t feel discriminated against. That’s what they are, Christmas trees.
It doesn’t bother me a bit when people say, ‘Merry Christmas’ to me. I don’t think they are slighting me or getting ready to put me in a ghetto. In fact, I kind of like it. It shows that we are all brothers and sisters celebrating this happy time of year. It doesn’t bother me at all that there is a manger scene on display at a key intersection near my beach house in Malibu . If people want a creche, it’s just as fine with me as is the Menorah a few hundred yards away.
I don’t like getting pushed around for being a Jew, and I don’t think Christians like getting pushed around for being Christians. I think people who believe in God are sick and tired of getting pushed around, period. I have no idea where the concept came from, that America is an explicitly atheist country. I can’t find it in the Constitution and I don’t like it being shoved down my throat.
Or maybe I can put it another way: where did the idea come from that we should worship celebrities and we aren’t allowed to worship God as we understand Him? I guess that’s a sign that I’m getting old, too. But there are a lot of us who are wondering where these celebrities came from and where the America we knew went to.
In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a little different: This is not intended to be a joke; it’s not funny, it’s intended to get you thinking.
Billy Graham’s daughter was interviewed on the Early Show and Jane Clayson asked her ‘How could God let something like this happen?’ (regarding Hurricane Katrina).. Anne Graham gave an extremely profound and insightful response.. She said, ‘I believe God is deeply saddened by this, just as we are, but for years we’ve been telling God to get out of our schools, to get out of our government and to get out of our lives. And being the gentleman He is, I believe He has calmly backed out. How can we expect God to give us His blessing and His protection if we demand He leave us alone?’
In light of recent events…. Terrorists attack, school shootings, etc. I think it started when Madeleine Murray O’Hare (she was murdered, her body found a few years ago) complained she didn’t want prayer in our schools, and we said OK. Then someone said you better not read the Bible in school. The Bible says thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbor as yourself. And we said OK.
Then Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn’t spank our children when they misbehave, because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock’s son committed suicide). We said an expert should know what he’s talking about. And we said okay..
Now we’re asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don’t know right from wrong, and why it doesn’t bother them to kill strangers, their classmates, and themselves.
Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, we can figure it out. I think it has a great deal to do with ‘WE REAP WHAT WE SOW.’
Funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the world’s going to hell. Funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but question what the Bible says. Funny how you can send ‘jokes’ through e-mail and they spread like wildfire, but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing. Funny how lewd, crude, vulgar and obscene articles pass freely through cyberspace, but public discussion of God is suppressed in the school and workplace.
Children at the Togetherness School in Ukunda, Kenya, now have a secure future
Cher: Saved orphanage
