When Atheists Attack (Each Other)

The squabble between Darwin lobbyists who openly hate religion and those who only quietly disdain it grows ever more personal, bitter and pathetic. On one side, evangelizing New or "Gnu" (ha ha) Atheists like Jerry Coyne and his acolytes at Why Evolution Is True. Dr. Coyne is a biologist who teaches and ostensibly researches at the University of Chicago but has a heck of a lot of free time on his hands for blogging and posting pictures of cute cats.

On the other side, so-called accommodationists like the crowd at the National Center for Science Education, who attack the New Atheists for the political offense of being rude to religious believers and supposedly messing up the alliance between religious and irreligious Darwinists.

I say "supposedly" because there's no evidence any substantial body of opinion is actually being changed on religion or evolution by anything the open haters or the quiet disdainers say. Everyone seems to seriously think they're either going to defeat religion, or merely "creationism," or both by blogging for an audience of fellow Darwinists.

Want to see what I mean? This is all pretty strictly a battle of stinkbugs in a bottle. Try to follow it without getting a headache.

Coyne recently drew excited applause from fellow biologist-atheist-blogger PZ Myers for Coyne's "open letter" (published on his blog) to the NCSE and its British equivalent, the British Centre for Science Education. In the letter, Coyne took umbrage at criticism of the New Atheists, mostly on blogs, emanating from the two accommodationist organizations. He vowed that,

We will continue to answer the misguided attacks [on the New Atheists] by people like Josh Rosenau, Roger Stanyard, and Nick Matzke so long as they keep mounting those attacks.

Like the NCSE, the BCSE seeks to pump up Darwin in the public mind without scaring religious people. This guy called Stanyard at the BCSE complains of losing a night's sleep over the nastiness of the rhetoric on Coyne's blog. Coyne in turn complained that Stanyard complained that a blog commenter complained that Nick Matzke, formerly of the NCSE, is like "vermin." Coyne also hit out at blogger Jason Rosenhouse for an "epic"-length blog post complaining of New Atheist "incivility." In the blog, Rosenhouse, who teaches math at James Madison University, wrote an update about how he had revised an insulting comment about the NCSE's Josh Rosenau that he, Rosenhouse, made in a previous version of the post.

That last bit briefly confused me. In occasionally skimming the writings of Jason Rosenhouse and Josh Rosenau in the past, I realized now I had been assuming they were the same person. They are not!

It goes on and on. In the course of his own blog post, Professor Coyne disavowed name-calling and berated Stanyard (remember him? The British guy) for "glomming onto" the Matzke-vermin insult like "white on rice, or Kwok on a Leica." What's a Kwok? Not a what but a who -- John Kwok, presumably a pseudonym, one of the most tirelessly obsessive commenters on Darwinist blog sites. Besides lashing at intelligent design, he often writes of his interest in photographic gear such as a camera by Leica. I have the impression that Kwok irritates even fellow Darwinists.

There's no need to keep all the names straight in your head. I certainly can't. I'm only taking your time, recounting just a small part of one confused exchange, to illustrate the culture of these Darwinists who write so impassionedly about religion, whether for abolishing it or befriending it. Writes Coyne in reply to Stanyard,

I'd suggest, then, that you lay off telling us what to do until you've read about our goals. The fact is that we'll always be fighting creationism until religion goes away, and when it does the fight will be over, as it is in Scandinavia.

A skeptic might suggest that turning America into Scandinavia, as far as religion goes, is an outsized goal, more like a delusion, for this group as they sit hunched over their computers shooting intemperate comments back and forth at each other all day. Or in poor Stanyard's case, all night.

There's a feverish, terrarium-like and oxygen-starved quality to this world of online Darwinists and atheists. It could only be sustained by the isolation of the Internet. They don't seem to realize that the public accepts Darwinism to the extent it does -- which is not much -- primarily because of what William James would call the sheer, simple "prestige" that the opinion grants. Arguments and evidence have little to do with it.

The prestige of Darwinism is not going to be affected by how the battle between Jerry Coyne and the NCSE turns out. New Atheist arguments are hobbled by the same isolation from what people think and feel. I have not yet read anything by any of these gentlemen or ladies, whether the open haters or the quiet disdainers, that conveys anything like a real comprehension of religious feeling or thought.

Even as they fight over the most effective way to relate to "religion," the open atheists and the accomodationists speak of an abstraction, a cartoon, that no actual religious person would recognize. No one is going to be persuaded if he doesn't already wish to be persuaded for other personal reasons. No faith is under threat from the likes of Jerry Coyne.

To me, ["born again"] is a useful and important term that differentiates those who are Christian in name only from those who have taken hold of the glorious gift of grace through faith and have committed their lives to the Lord.

Amen! ... beautifully, eloquently said!

Thank you so very much for pointing out that both the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Rites fully embrace this term, which signifies (to me) the idea of a man "reborn" in the Image of Christ implicit in his own unique, God-given soul; redeemed from his personal sins and the inherited Original Sin imputed to him, by the Sacrifice and Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Logos Alpha and Omega. To me, a wonderful symbol or analogy from the Holy Bible describes this born-again, or "turned around" state: The return of the Prodigal Son to the House of his Father.... In the now and the hereafter.

Of course, the "turned-around state" just alluded to is what Plato described as the perigoge, where the bound man living in the darkness of the cave finds a way to slip his bonds, step outside the cave, and see the Light shining in the sky for the first time in his mortal life....

That even "pagans" can have had such insights!

All praise and glory be unto God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost!

Thank you so very much for your outstanding essay/post, dear sister in Christ!

I think Cronos is hampered by a stereotypical caricature of "born again" folks as snake handlers and/or given to speaking in tongues, etc. To me, this is a sign of crude bigotry at work. In light of the above passages, perhaps he may wish to rethink his position. I certainly hope he will....

Ironically, and unfortunately, for Cronos, the verses about being born a second time and handling snakes are Jesus own words.

He can criticize all he wants, but the long and short of it is, he's passing judgment on Jesus, who said it all.

John 3:3-8

3Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." 4Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?" 5Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.' 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."

John 3:

Mark 16:14-18 14Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. 15And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover."

Ironically, yet again, this is the very passage some people appeal to to declare that baptism is necessary for salvation. It seems that many want to pick and choose what words of Jesus' they want to believe, even as far as doing it within ONE sentence.

Salvation is as Christ, Himself said he who believes, is baptised (in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) for the remission of sins, who truly repents of his/her sins, who eats of His flesh and who endureth to the end, they shall be saved. If not they will perish I don't see how one can not see this said very clearly by Christ Himself.

1.He who believes
2.and is baptized will be saved.
3.[U]nless you repent you will all likewise perish
4.[H]e who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day
5.he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved

Except you are paraphrasing and adding your own interpretation to it. Yes, Jesus says "he who believes and is baptized will be saved" but he does not say "water" baptism. We are baptized in the Holy Spirit when we accept Chirst. Jesus says we must repent, but he does not say "repent of your sins", does it? Repentance is "changing your mind", turning from your old way of thinking and receiving the truth of the Gospel. Eating the flesh of Jesus and drinking his blood, is receiving him as Savior. That is what is meant by it. When we place our trust in Jesus Christ as our Savior we are receiving him. He is our bread of life. And, finally, all who trust in Christ SHALL endure to the end because we are sealed with the Holy Spirit until the day of redemption. No man is able to pluck us out of God's hands and he will NEVER leave us or forsake us nor will he cast us out or lose even one. We are his children and will dwell with him for all eternity. We can KNOW we have eternal life because we have trusted in him.

Andrewc: Those are my beliefs.

And yet, what does the Bible say?

Mk 16:15-16

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

John 3:5

5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

1 Pet 3:20

20Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

Remember, Andrew, The blood and water that flowed from the pierced side of the crucified Jesus are types of Baptism and the Eucharist, the sacraments of new life.
Jn 19:34

34But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

1 Jn 5:6-8

6This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

From then on, it is possible "to be born of water and the Spirit" Jn 3:5

5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

in order to enter the Kingdom of God.

Eph 5:26

26That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

From the time of the apostles, becoming a Christian has been accomplished by a journey and initiation in several stages. This journey can be covered rapidly or slowly, but certain essential elements will always have to be present: proclamation of the Word, acceptance of the Gospel entailing conversion, profession of faith, Baptism itself, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and admission to Eucharistic communion.

The message is consistently repeating what Christ said that baptism is for remission of sins

Acts 2:38,

38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 22:16;

16 And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.

Rom. 6:1–4;

1 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

1 Cor 6:11,

11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God

1 Cor 12:13;

13 For we were all baptized by[a] one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

Gal. 3:26–27;

26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ

Eph. 5:26;

to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word,

Col. 2:11–12;

11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh[a] was put off when you were circumcised by[b] Christ,
12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Titus 3:5;

5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,

One cannot even say this was a symbol -- look at all of the examples above, look at the language, consistently same the same in each, that in baptism we are saved and buried with Christ, washed of our sins by this and born again

Remember, the words of Jesus Christ Himself in Matthew 28:19

19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

and/or given to speaking in tongues,

oh, I have no issue with speaking in tongues -- as long as it is from God. The Apostles were given the ability to speak in different languages of the world so that they could be understood by Parthians, Axumites, Malayalees etc. etc. and there's no indication that these gifts to talk to other people in their native tongue ceased with the end of the Apostolic age.

It's only some of the Presbyterians who say that the OPC and reformed churches in general do not view Pentecost the ways "charismatic" or "Pentecostal" churches do. and what they say is

Now the New Testament brought to the final conclusion the revelations of God to His people throughout previous ages. With the death of the last apostle, there was no more prophecy, including tongues (which were prophecy in another language). We still get illumination from the Spirit through the Word, but no new revelations of the Spirit (see the Westminster Confession of Faith chapter 1, paragraph 6).

These words warning of plagues to those who added to "this book" and damnation to those who took away from it are exceedingly solemn. I do not say that these literally apply to those who profess to speak in tongues (they are not intentionally adding to the Word of God), but the passage does speak to the absolute sufficiency of Scripture as we have it.

Now, I don't agree with this Calvinist viewpoint shutting off the miracles today

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.