Saving believers: Former Christian finds calling to preach the good news of atheism
2. Comment #26664 by GBile on March 21, 2007 at 3:00 am
3. Comment #26665 by DavidMarsh on March 21, 2007 at 3:09 am
4. Comment #26667 by keith on March 21, 2007 at 3:31 am
5. Comment #26668 by BaronOchs on March 21, 2007 at 3:39 am
6. Comment #26680 by tieInterceptor on March 21, 2007 at 5:08 am
7. Comment #26690 by AtheistJunkie on March 21, 2007 at 7:12 am
8. Comment #26691 by Insomniac on March 21, 2007 at 7:12 am
It's nice to see a fellow de-convert arguing for rational though and against faith in Texas (where I live). All of you people in Europe have it easy, you don't know what it's like to be surrounded by all these people waiting to "tell you about Jesus" at any chance they get, let alone what happens when you open your mouth to disagree with them. Granted that Austin is the only liberal city in the state, but much credit is still due to this man for going on television every week to argue against religion.9. Comment #26696 by TranshumanAtheist on March 21, 2007 at 7:38 am
Dillahunty's father reportedly said,he regretted that his son would never be able to love anyone because atheism is a selfish belief.
10. Comment #26700 by freestateofmind on March 21, 2007 at 7:52 am
11. Comment #26701 by freestateofmind on March 21, 2007 at 7:54 am
12. Comment #26705 by Jack Rawlinson on March 21, 2007 at 8:07 am
13. Comment #26717 by severalspeciesof on March 21, 2007 at 9:36 am
14. Comment #26723 by ghostbuster on March 21, 2007 at 10:54 am
A good site is www.jesusneverexisted.com. I always thought the best way to discuss religion is to analyze the sacred writings; while it is almost futile to argue the non-existence of god (and Dawkins/Harris do their best) showing how scriptures are in error scientifically, historically, and even psychologically with the liberal addition of say, biblical inconsistencies, should rattle the sensibilities of anyone, at least anyone NOT involved in cults which pretty much includes all fundys.15. Comment #26761 by Ixodes on March 21, 2007 at 2:21 pm
ghostbuster16. Comment #26763 by kkant on March 21, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Another similar website breaking down the myth of a historical Jesus:17. Comment #26764 by kkant on March 21, 2007 at 2:37 pm
And, on a side note... :) Great to see the non-prophets making the news!! For those who haven't listened to them, it's a great atheist show. Lots of irreverent blasphemous fun. They have mp3/podcast archives at http://www.nonprophetsradio.com/audio/18. Comment #26766 by TranshumanAtheist on March 21, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Thinking more about Dillahunty's dad's claim that atheists have to renounce love, I wonder if the old man has confused atheism with the Rhine Gold or something.19. Comment #26773 by Corylus on March 21, 2007 at 3:28 pm
20. Comment #26806 by cassdenata on March 21, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Caveat - below are some ideas for discussion. I bring up these comments because I am seriously interested in this issue. I am open to your comments and I haven't made up my mind. Isn't an open-mind great.21. Comment #26816 by Shuggy on March 21, 2007 at 8:14 pm
22. Comment #26836 by MelM on March 21, 2007 at 10:34 pm
"Saving" wingnuts? When someone completely rejects reason, he can't be reached. Believers erect mechanisms that lock them out of reality. Re this from AiG:"Time and time again, we have insisted that it is essential to understand that all evidence is interpreted on the basis of 'pre-suppositions.' As Christians, we must recognize that all of our thinking—in every area—should be built upon the history revealed in God's Word. By doing this, you then have the correct 'big picture' way of understanding the universe so that the evidence of the present can be interpreted correctly.
Sadly, many Christians often succumb to the non-Christian's challenge to provide evidence for the existence of God, creation and the Christian faith, etc., without using the Bible. When you agree to these terms of the debate, however, then you are answering a person 'according to [i.e. within the terms of] his folly.'
In other words, the Christian has accepted the non-Christian's presuppositions (that thinking is not to be built on the Bible), and thus, by default, he has only the non-Christian's way of thinking to interpret the evidence. Such a person cannot 'win' the argument because he has no true foundation (God's Word) on which to correctly (and differently) interpret the evidence. The Christian might try to use a different interpretation of the evidence (consistent with a Biblical foundation), but without acknowledging the foundation, the argument will likely fail."
23. Comment #26956 by Riley on March 22, 2007 at 3:06 pm
24. Comment #26996 by MelM on March 22, 2007 at 7:41 pm
Riley,thanks for your response.25. Comment #27177 by Riley on March 23, 2007 at 11:17 am
26. Comment #29960 by imperatoromnium on April 5, 2007 at 6:35 pm
27. Comment #29964 by chrisrkline on April 5, 2007 at 6:50 pm
Imperatoromnium,
1. Comment #26654 by drive1 on March 21, 2007 at 1:58 am
"And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them".
Nice one, god!
Other Comments by drive1