Skip to comments.BEWARE THE NEW ATHEISTS
Posted on 11/16/2010 10:21:55 AM PST by pastorbillrandles
Did you know that the English-speaking world is in the midst of an Atheistic revival? It is fueled by a small but widely celebrated group of authors and thinkers who call themselves the Brights, and who lecture, debate and write best-selling books which have a wide following among young college and University students.
These are not your fathers atheists either. They are articulate, impassioned, and effective at the use of the media, and the internet. The new Atheists believe that the old atheists were too tolerant of religion, and not aggressive enough in their attacks upon it. To them, religion is not benign it is a retrograde evil which society can no longer afford to tolerate.
They also insist that one doesnt need God to be moral, and in fact they posit that morality without a fear of punishment or hope of reward is purer and more virtuous than that which is motivated by religion. Be good for goodness sake was the slogan put on atheistic advertising on public transport in London England.
The danger to beware of is not their arguments, which are not much different from the worn out , long discredited talking points of everyone from Voltaire, Hume, Nietzsche, down to the bitter village atheist of yesteryear. All have been and hopefully will be rebutted by Christian apologists for this generation.
The reason I say we should beware of them, is twofold; first because of their suave packaging and sophisticated use of multi media and internet. These people come across like they know what they are talking about.
Secondly, to put it bluntly, the youth for the most part, are all too ill-equipped to think through these specious arguments, and are proving to be vulnerable to these modern sophists. Frankly, the decay in standards of education, the shift from Logos centered thought, antithesis,logic, facts and reason, to consensus and image based education has left many open to these attacks at the University.
Shockingly it is almost a fad for young people raised in traditional christian homes to come out as atheists at university, and there are websites and you tube videos that teach them how best to break it to their parents.
There are popular you tube videos such as What if Im Wrong, in which young people rationalise that if their choice to become an Atheist turns out to be wrong, they would still reject the christian God on philosophical and moral grounds, marshalling accusations against the God of the Bible, such as His command to slaughter Canaanites, or his statutes against homosexuality.
More shockingly, there is a video blasphemy challenge , in which students are offered a DVD of the Atheistic documentary, called THE GOD WHO WASNT THERE, to anyone who makes a DVD of themselves deconverting- specifically calling upon them to renounce the Holy Spirit!
Here is the challenge from the website :
The Rational Response Squad is giving away 1001 DVDs of The God Who Wasnt There the hit documentary that the Los Angeles Times calls provocative to put it mildly.
Theres only one catch: We want your soul.
Its simple. You record a short message damning yourself to Hell, you upload it to YouTube, and then the Rational Response Squad will send you a free The God Who Wasnt There DVD. Its that easy.
INSTRUCTIONS:You may damn yourself to Hell however you would like, but somewhere in your video you must say this phrase: I deny the Holy Spirit.
Shocking, isnt it? I am showing you this not to shock you but to alert you to the reality of the assault upon your children and the naive.
But furthermore I show this to also pull back the covers on the underlying spiritual essence of this movement. There is something more going on here tan just free thought and humanism. Here is the given reason for the specific instruction to deny the Holy Spirit, by the so-called Rational Response squad,
Why? Because, according to Mark 3:29 in the Holy Bible, Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin. Jesus will forgive you for just about anything, but he wont forgive you for denying the existence of the Holy Spirit. Ever. This is a one-way road youre taking here.
The point is that this movement is spiritual in its essence. This is Satanic,it is an assault on the faith by the Father of lies, designed to blaspheme God and to damn souls. They have free rein on our campuses and places of higher learning. Unfortunately a good many young people are seeing these New Atheists as rock stars, they are emulating them mimicking their arguments, and renouncing their faith. Hopefully these reports will strengthen those who are tempted by this phenomenon, giving them arguments and the answers that have stood the test of countless similar attacks and accusations over the centuries. Always be ready to give a reason for te hope you have in you with respect and gentleness(I Peter 3:15) We will be looking next at the so-called four Horsemen of the Atheistic revival, the Brights as they call themselves, Christopher Hitchens , Sam Harris,Richard Dawkins, and the lesser known Daniel Dennit.
Today’s “atheists” are tomorrow’s bloody fascist butchers of humanity.
Meet the new atheists...
...same as the old atheists.
Then who gets to decide? A Hitler? A Stalin? An Aztec?
“These are not your fathers atheists either. They are articulate, impassioned, and effective at the use of the media, and the internet.”
Nevertheless... Though you grind a fool in a mortar, grinding them like grain with a pestle, you will not remove their folly from them.
Dangerous folks, these.
Take away morals and meaning, and all that’s left is who has the power.
A humble bunch of jerks, aren't they?
This is not a new notion. About the time of the first Great Awakening, this was a sort of college fad. Guys would get themselves into all sorts of bondage by muttering some such formula as this under their breath, thinking it was better to have all the doubt over with than wonder if they would ever "make it" into heaven.
Only it doesn't work that way.
One of the biggest mistakes we make is handing our kids over to our ideological opponents and letting them educate our kids all throughout their youth.
Not only do they largely fail in the basic task of educating them, they also have free reign to undercut everything we believe. Its amazing that any of our kids come through it with their souls intact. Many that do, it takes years of living to find their way back to the faith of their youth and the faith of their fathers.
The most important thing churches can do is take the lead in educating their kids. Sending missionaries to the third world is great, its necessary, but its also pointless if at the same time you lose your own kids.
If churches will get involved in education, their reach goes farther than just their own, as non-members also enroll their kids, looking for something better than the disastrous public schools, and in so doing the door opens for you to reach people you otherwise would not reach.
More churches are doing this, and its good, and more need to.
It seems that with this challenge to “damn yourself to Hell”, the atheists are in a way admitting there is something beyond this life...
Every generation going back to the start of the 17th century has had it’s “Brights” who believed that they alone understood reality, and that the rest of humanity were benighted superstitious idiots.
If the fools in question were happy with just themselves being in the mortar & pestle, there would be no problem. The problem is they want to take everyone else with them. They delight in stripping young people of their beliefs in God and making them hate Him and all those who believe on Him.
Perhaps. But I would suggest that one needs a God in order to be happy.
How does an Athiest even know what is moral beyond their own personal preferences?
So who decides what's "good"?
Last Summer,I had a discussion with a 73 year old liberal who is also an atheist.
He was kicked out of a local atheist group for actually defending religion. He believe organized religion was very good in helping many people with it’s emphasis on food distribution,homeless programs and counseling services.
Although not a believer in religion and not anti-religious at all,he recognized the positive aspects of organized religion.
he claimed The group that kicked him out was more interested in bashing religion, especially Christianity then discussing ‘philosophy of life’.
The fact that they call themselves “Brights” is a sure sign they are morons. What a ridiculous crew of idiots.
The only sin that cannot be forgiven is not wishing to be forgiven.
I would argue that it goes back further than that:
“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in Gods sight. As it is written: He catches the wise in their craftiness” 1 Corinthians 3:19
I agree, I was just quoting them- we are going to have to prepare to re-iterate that because there are going to be people who did what the “Rational Response team” challenged them to do, who will later be driven mad because of what they think they have done!
You almost have to believe in evolution to be an atheist, and everybody who’s been following the discussion over the last few decades knows by now that evolution is a bunch of bullshit. The biggest group of people proportionally who don’t believe in evolution is probably mathematicians and not Christians; the doctrine is not compatible with modern mathematics and probability theory.
Sorry PastorBill, I realise now that I sounded cross in my reply. I was annoyed with the “Brights”, not with you.
A humble bunch of jerks, aren't they?
Most atheists I've met were narcissists.
I’m sure that prenatal infanticide (abortion), euthanasia, sexual perversion, and pornography are perfectly moral to these atheistic mavens of morality.
That pretty much describes most religions too. One person's religion is another person's superstition.
“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” 1 Corninthains 1:18
> INSTRUCTIONS:You may damn yourself to Hell however you
> would like, but somewhere in your video you must say this
> phrase: I deny the Holy Spirit.
Whether these self-acclaimed “brights” are wittingly or unwittingly satanic, they are satanic nonetheless.
There is an opposite (and positive) side to the new atheism and that is its potential adherents have to exercise a significant degree of introspection and critical thinking to accept fundamental arguments of the movement. That in itself will lead to much rejection and commitment to the alternative of belief. Even Hitchens recognizes there is another argument of some merit and in doing so, sounds sometimes more agnostic than atheist. The real problem is not so much the aggressiveness of the new atheism, but the lukewarm resolve of the millions who call themselves Christians.
There is nothing new under the sun.
Until Kingdom Come, there always have been, and always will be, threats to Christian faith. If atheists weren’t threatened by Christianity, we’d have to be doing something wrong.
Every knee will bow ... eventually.
It is quite compatible. It is mainly incompatible to those who do not understand probability. But the largest group of people who accept natural selection are probably Christians, since most don't have a problem with it.
Yes, it is the education of our young. Atheists like Lenin knew you had to destroy family so you can convince young women to hand over their young to daycares....all to mold the thinking of the children—get them away from the parent’s ideology.
Mothers need to understand the supreme importance of the formative years. The first seven years should never be handed over to strangers and godless people. Never! The Founders of the past—true geniuses—had a solid foundation in their home for their first seven years and NO formal “education” which is nothing more than indoctrination in public schools and to learn social conformity and collective thinking. For emotional stability young children need to NOT be separated from the people that love them in their first seven years.
“They also insist that one doesnt need God to be moral”... said the homo
With the body of a lion and the head of a social worker...
“The new Atheists believe that the old atheists were too tolerant of religion, and not aggressive enough in their attacks upon it.”
In other words, the new Atheists are going to make Hitler and Stalin look like pussy cats.
I would venture to say that the Golden Rule, which cuts across religions and cultures, might be a good start. And the Wiccan Rede: Do what thou wilt, an it harm none.
Articles(and some of the responses here) like this do more to drive people to Atheism and/or away from Christianity than Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins or any other “New” Atheist (whoever they are) could ever dream of doing by themselves.
Please explain how an article like this could “send anyone into atheism”? I am truly curious
Actually they aren't. The new atheists are not nearly as intelligent or intellectually forceful as the old atheists. Russel, Hume and Flew were brilliant (but wrong) and used metaphysically consistent arguments strongly grounded in logic. The new atheists are nothing of the sort. Dawkins book makes clear that he has never been schooled in basic logic at all and virtually none of his conclusions follow from his premises. (and he doesn't even attempt to quantify his premises in the first place) His, and most of the other new athiests', arguments are nothing more than angry polemics against religion. Hitchens was beaten so badly when he debated William Lane Craig that he gave up and waived his closing statement, electing to just take questions where he could fall back on his glib sophistries in an vain attempt to win back the audience who had just watched him get stomped. This too will pass and it shouldn't take long at all.
I would also note ever since the Hitchens debacle Dawkins has pointedly refused to ever debate William Lane Craig. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why.
If they chose to obey the golden rule that would simply be their personal preference. Or they can chose Power, per Nietzche, and that would also be a personal preference. Neither one is better than the other, its simply a choice, and in the end who cares what the choice is as we all end up in oblivion anyway.
In any case, Athiests are responsible for the worst genocides of all time, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro etc. And that makes sense given that, in an Athiest world, anything goes to get the job done, and getting the job done is considered “good” and “moral.”