|March 2, 2009||Posted by Anthony under atheism, Blog, book reviews, evolution, General, morality, original sin, politics, spirituality, theism|
Due out on Hitler’s birthday (April 20th, 2009), Joe Keysor’s book, Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible: A Scriptural Analysis of Anti-Semitism, National Socialism, and the Churches in Nazi Germany is an important book counteracting the growing clamor that Christianity was the driving ideology behind Hitler, the Nazis, and the Holocaust. It is very important- for obvious reasons- for secular humanists and atheists to show that brutal tyrants were not operating on their principles but rather on Christian principles. In some cases such as Mao and Pol Pot the operation cannot even be attempted. In others, such as Lenin and Stalin, more headway is made. In Hitler, secularists consider the matter a slam dunk.
|February 25, 2009||Posted by Anthony under atheism, Blog, Christianity and Culture, General, holmen cross, politics|
I was shocked today to read of the unanimous Supreme Court decision asserting that governmental institutions do not have to place an entity’s monument just because that city, state, or municipality has placed others. That this was the decision isn’t what shocked me. What shocked me was that it was unanimous. I’m glad: it restores new faith in the left side of the bench because I had trouble seeing how any sane person could think otherwise. A victory for sanity!
This is going to have some big implications. One of the secularist’s chief arguments concerns fairness. According to them, in order for there to be fairness under the constitution, either all religious monuments must be allowed or none of them. In affirming the right for cities to have monuments at all and decide which ones (if any), we are spared the nonsensical situation where we must allow a contrarian monument to go up whereever there is any other monument. Imagine, for example, that next to the Vietnam Memorial it was required to erect a memorial to Ho Chi Minh. Absurd. If it came to that I reckon that our veterans would prefer not to have any monument at all. That is the only other alternative in the name of ‘fairness’ if the secularists are right.
|February 21, 2009||Posted by Anthony under atheism, Blog, General, morality, theism, theology|
So you see, either way you go, either rejecting the existence of the Christian God or accepting it, the atheist possesses some sort of moral standard by which to measure the conduct of God and the terms he lays out. But I find this all very ironic. After all, the whole point of disgust has to do with people being eternally punished by God and how unfair and indecent that is but when it is pointed out that the Bible further describes this eternal punishment as an eternal separation from God (relationally), shut out from his presence forever, they are not satiated? I mean, isn’t that what they wanted? If God turns out to be real and they hate him so much don’t they actually want there to be something like ‘hell’ where God will leave them to their own devices?
Yes it is. Here you see one of those classic “there is no pleasing them” scenarios. Even if there is a God they don’t like him and would rather in that case spend eternity separate from him, but when that actual opportunity is presented to them from the same texts they reject God as being unloving and Christianity (and religion in general) as fear mongering. Dudes. You’re getting what you want. Why complain?
Of course, we Christians understand that getting what you want isn’t all it is cracked up to be.
|February 18, 2009||Posted by Anthony under atheism, Blog, Christianity and Culture, General, philosophy, theism, theology|
Below I have the ‘video’ of my online presentation on the ‘death of Christianity.’ I have been developing a line of thought and the corresponding presentation for about a year. I adapted by presentation for the uniquness of this format. My adaptations reflected the fact that it was a virtual presentation, that it was predominantly a ‘professional’ church work Christian audience, and that it was predominantly a Lutheran Christian audience. Also, the outline of my presentation (unadapted) is about 45 mins, here I only had 30 mins to work with.
I am hosting the video on my ministry’s new Christian file sharing service, emphasizing apologetics videos. The site is www.apologeticsvideos.net. At this time, I am allowing anyone to post apologetics related videos so if you have got them feel free to upload them. (The chief advantage is that there is no time limit on a video. There is, however, a 100mb file size limit)
With no further ado, here is the video of the presentation:
|February 13, 2009||Posted by Anthony under abortion, atheism, Blog, Christianity and Culture, General, morality, original sin, philosophy, politics, theism, theology|
Atheists and secular humanists quite obviously argue that we humans are all alone and that humans themselves determine their worth, their value, their ‘intrinsic’ dignity. The problems with this ought to be self-evident but atheists are crafty folks. History reveals clearly that humans can change their minds about the ‘worth,’ ‘value,’ and ‘rights’ of humans (usually other humans). For example, the Nazis depersonalized the Jews with consequences I need not expand on. Atheistic communist regimes depersonalized dissidents and capitalists with consequences I need not expand on. The atheistic apologetic on the point is that actually this goes to show the dangers of ‘religion.’ For, you see, anyone who ever does anything nasty, no matter what their ideology, is, by definition, acting religiously. In this way, atheists can always keep their hands clean.
However, it misses the point. The fundamental point has to do with our basis for decrying what the Nazis and communists did. If humans themselves are the sole and final arbiters for determining and dictating human value then no one can complain about what humans decide. Oh sure, the do complain. But in doing so they betray the inconsistency of their position.
|February 12, 2009||Posted by Anthony under abortion, atheism, Blog, Christianity and Culture, General, morality, politics, theology|
My blog is racking up some nice numbers lately and much of that can be credited to a recent post about the California Octuplets. I’d like to make some clarifications.
In the first place, I stand by my general assessment that as Christians and pro-lifers, since we believe embryos are real persons, the Octuplet outcome is much better than the alternative, which of course is death.
While it is true that the mother in this case probably doesn’t deserve charity, again, as pro-lifers our concern isn’t exclusively for the mother, but also for the children. It is difficult to understand why they don’t deserve charity. They are in this world and so we should care for them. Let the secularists say, “They cost the state 1.3 million dollars, so screw them!” That option is not available to us.