Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
For an atheist spokesperson, how about George Carlin?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o
Psalm 14:1 “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none who does good.”
The Fool: who and what is he? He is a man signified by the extinction of life within him. The Hebrew root for “fool” in this usage communicates a plant having lost all the life or sustenance making it useful or lovely. The fool is a man who has lost his wisdom and correct understanding of God and supernatural things communicated clearly to him by creation. Romans 1:19-20 unpacks it, “For what can be known about God is plain to all men, because God has shown it to them. For God’s invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So men are without excuse.”
God gives men up to a debased mind because they do not see fit to acknowledge Him as God. God does not remove men’s rational faculties, such would violate free will and as a result accountability. Rather God withholds his grace in men’s faculties. Men void of grace are not without reason, or even desiring it, but rather abusers of reason. Such is the Atheist.
Says in his heart: Why does he speak there? The thoughts of a man’s heart are to himself and to God alone. He says, “there is no God” not as an absolute claim or because of assurance, but heinously as an attempt to blot out the knowledge of divine accountability. He corrupts and meddles with his own heart to coerce it. Deity is plainly evident in creation. A man must strip God of his wisdom, goodness, tenderness, justice, and glory in his own heart, murder God in his heart, harden himself against God in his heart to call himself an atheist.
Hey thats pretty funny Zelo. Too bad it’s pathetic to quote the bible as if it would be regarded as a legitimate source. Welcome to the Internet.
You have left out the parts about god commanding rape and genocide. What the incest? Did you know the bible never once condemns slavery? It sure sets clear rules to maintain it. Funny how the word of god doesn’t contain even a hint of a world beyond that known to it’s real authors in the desert 1500 years ago.
Here’s my favorite bible verse. I can’t help but hear the screams of the children as they are torn apart by god’s vicious bears.
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.–2 Kg.2:23-24
Does god hate children? Wow, that seems unamerican.
Speaking of the atheist, #62 Zeloeistotheo wrote, “He says, ‘there is no God’ not as an absolute claim or because of assurance, but heinously as an attempt to blot out the knowledge of divine accountability.”
This arrogant attitude may be what irks me the most with many Christians. They (and you) imply that we nonbelievers really know of your god’s existence and authority, but deny it in a disingenuous attempt to avoid any responsibility attendant to an admission of that knowledge. Even with your incredible powers of belief, you simply cannot believe that we don’t have this innate, completely extrasensory knowledge of this thing you call “God.”
Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps we’ve read the stories of your god, and as an act of moral courage, we simply refuse to worship the demon who did the many evil things described in the Bible? You worship the god of torture, terror, and ethnic cleansing. Whatever happened to your conscience?
I consider my own conscience to be proof that I was not created in the image of the god described in the Bible. His erratic sense of justice and willingness to kill innocent people prove to me that your god did not create my conscience, and thus did not create me.
By the way, I love how you use Biblical references to prove how bad atheists are. Quoting from the Bible always resonates with nonbelievers đ
*****
And of course, julieb beat me to the punch on a few of my themes — cheers, julieb!
Claiming that one can scientifically determine what someone believes, is about as unreliable as polygraphs are at measuring truthfullness. And anyone who claims that they can, is a colossal liar. Little doubt that they’re already an atheist. Truth doesn’t hold much value for them either. Just their own ego. People typically believe all sorts of things, in all sorts or flavors (if you will), colored by their own life experiences. It would be inpossible to nail down what is and isn’t religion, based on any simple poll or test. And I’ve heard enough so-called atheist scientists say that they “believe in life out their in space” without the slightest crumb of evidence for it. So tell me how it is that they to aren’t deluded by their own baseless convictions? Simply saying that “it’s science so it’s superior to religion” doesn’t cut it. Most of the science we know today, came from hinky notions like alchemy and astrology. And they’re only more factual and infallible now because they say they are. Right up until they stumble over some facts they chose to ignore, and have to correct themselves again. Like it took them 30 some years to acknowledge Alfred Wegener’s theory of Continental Drift. All the scientist believed they knew better than he did, for 30 years, until they didn’t. QED
# 65 Glenn E. said, on April 8th, 2008 at 12:55 am said:
“Most of the science we know today, came from hinky notions like alchemy and astrology.”
This is just sad.
Science looks for evidence. Faith just makes claims. Educate yourself my friend.
#56 – You obviously can’t read very well.
“âGod who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God?”
Very much on his mind when he was helping form the gov’t…
#59 No. I’ve read everything of his writings that have been published. Have you?
#65 – Glenn E.
It is not science that is the result of astrology. It is Christianity. You worship the ancient Egyptian sun god. Jesus == Horus.
Watch part 1 of this. Parts 2 and 3 are a tad over the edge. But, fast forward through the first 5 minutes or so of music then watch the section that discusses the astrology that is Christianity.
http://zeitgeistmovie.com/
#68–Pat==the number “20” sticks in my mind as the number of Volumes in Jeffersons Collected works. Came across that while touring his wonderful home and looking at his replicating pen machine.
I’m sure you’ve read all of “something”–but all of Jefferson?
As a complete – – – -reader – – how could you know Jefferson so intimately, and yet post only a very narrow unbalanced view of what this great man thought and wrote?
You might follow his example more, rather than your own.
#70 – 2 bookshelves full. Yep. How about you?
I remember reading his letters about the polygraph he just purchased. He loved that machine.
#71–pat==that is fascinating==so why did you truncate him so? Kind of dishonest to knowingly only quote half of the substance of what he said??
Or–indeed, not knowing the mind of the man, is it fair to quote him in any context except to show he talked out of both sides of his mouth?
I thought scholars were called to a higher duty than tourists such as myself.
I have a theory as to why freedom spouting founding fathers had slaves, but I haven’t figured out why the richest people in America, knowing how likely it was they would lose, put their fortunes and necks in the noose “for freedom.”
Any clues?
#72 – I truncated the 2nd time I posted it.
If you want to know his mind better you should study everything available that he wrote and the letters & communication he received. Also, study his earliest years in public service and what he was trying to do via legislation. It takes a while but when your done (in a couple years?) you’ll know his mind much better.
It’s also a good idea to study his family and upbringing, including the subjects and major works he loved.
#73–no clues huh?
I have a good idea as to why. Do your study and you’ll a good idea too. Hint, Washington & Jefferson had different reasons…
So Pat, why do you hate America so much? You democracy haters are really something. You live it up and take full advantage of our secular gov’t yet at the same time work to destroy it and put theocracy in it’s place. I think you hate our freedom.
#76 – Interesting, since I never voiced anything like that. I simply listed some quotes from Jefferson, who it sounds like you hate.
Take 100 sleeping pills and call me in the a.m.
Do you guys know that Jefferson spent a great deal of effort creating a text on Jesus and his works with all the religious claptrap edited out?
Jefferson did believe in Jesus, but as a man, not a God. Maybe he felt that we as a culture are above deifying humans.
Jesus was a great man and visionary, and if we actually followed his teachings instead of paying hypocritical lip service to them we would be much, much better off in every aspect. Why does Jesus have to be God too?
#78 – Yes, I am. Apparently, not too many on this thread know that.
Production values are low.
The preparer of this piece needs to work harder on conveying information over time and space. Running optical interference behind walls of text that stay on screen too briefly to be read equals poor communication.
God or no deity, if you wish to throw out a bunch of interesting, informative, perhaps controversial information, Job #1 is to do it clearly.
We give him/her a D-
#80–Peter==well, a poorly crafted graphic available to all that makes an atempt to explain is better than what God and Pat have done.
Just tell everyone you are the way, and then keep mum.
That old saying; “Better to keep your mouth shut and let people wonder if you are an idiot than open it and remove all doubt.” (from memory).
Yes, “some people.”
The founding fathers of the USA were deists. That is, they believed god created the heavens and earth, then left.
Basically we are on our own.
#82, Rick,
The founding fathers of the USA were deists.
Nope. Wrong. There were a couple of reasons for the First Amendment, but most of the Continental Congress were religious followers even if not firm believers.
The Church of England was the established church and a person usually had to belong before they could be a public official. Most of the low level Anglican priests were American born or of the people. The Bishops and leaders, on the other hand, were English nobility. For the same reason Washington couldn’t get a commission in the British Army, American Priests couldn’t become Anglican Bishops.
The revolution’s leadership were mostly the wealthy landowners (Jefferson, Washington) and business classes (Adams, Franklyn, Hamilton). They didn’t want their activities being governed by religious doctrine, nor did they want to share power with a church as was done in Britain and Europe. Remember, most of the causes of the revolution can be traced to power sharing between the colonies and Britain.
Then there was the small matter that not all the colonies had a majority of citizens of the Anglican Church. Some, such a New Jersey were majority Presbyterian with large portions of Baptists and Anabaptists. Pennsylvania and Delaware were noted for their religious tolerance and diversity.
Since they couldn’t satisfy everyone with just one State Church, they gave equal footing to every religion and superiority to none. Of all the Bill of Rights, this is the one section that had the most difficulty in gaining acceptance. It is also one of the smartest moves the framers could have made, even if for another reason.
#83–Catshit. You are equating the founding fathers with the Continental Congress? The fathers were a groupd of 12-15 or so, with Congress much larger?
Nothing inconsistent with deist being intellectually removed enough to fashion political terms that would be acceptable to the masses–just as they did with federalism and slavery.
You raise a good point though, I wonder how much of “Founding Fathers were Deists” is just claptrap and the Constitution is pure politics? Thinking loosely about it, every issue I can think of seems to favor politics.
#84, Bobbo,
The fathers were a groupd of 12-15 or so, with Congress much larger?
Most of the Continental Congress became members later of the First Congress. The actual writing of the Constitution was done committee style but approved by the whole Congress. There was considerable debate and discussion about the document too. It was only after ratification by the various States that it became the founding document of the country.
… being intellectually removed enough to fashion political terms that would be acceptable to the masses
That is a misconception most people have with the origin of the nation. Nothing was done âfor the massesâ. The masses, for the most part, were better off before the revolution then they were afterwards. The Constitution was crafted to suit the rulers. The large landowners, merchants, and industrial types. The Constitution was not ratified by the people. It was done by the individual States assemblies.
Most of the representatives were rich or at least well to do. The power struggle was between them and Britain. Britain refused to allow the colonials any power. For example, George Washington was not allowed to join the British Army simply because he did not come from aristocratic stock. That same requirement held for Church of England bishops. The American colonies were prohibited from trading directly with West Indies colonies as that was reserved for British merchants. So the whole power shift was to empower the American upper class.
Don’t forget. Most American men couldn’t vote before or after the revolution. Qualifications included age and net worth. Dirt farmers were usually too indebted to make the cut. They were expected to pay taxes though afterwards.
Yes, yes, this is not what Americans are taught in school. They are also not taught that the Revolutionaries only comprised 1/3 of the population, 1/3 was pro-Britain, and 1/3 was totally ambivalent or just too constipated to give a shit. It has been suggested that the ambivalent were even more numerous. These proportions do not include slaves or immigrants.
I’ll cut this short so I don’t write a book.