Atheists acting like Children
Sometimes atheists critiques of Christianity (or religion in general) amount to a child sayng "poo poo" and waiting for the adults to react. It is, in fact, one of the reasons it is difficult, if not impossible, to have any useful dialogue with an atheist. (HT Extra Nos) Consider this:
"When I'm accused, 'Why are you going after easy targets, the fundamentalist nutbags, why don't you take on the real theologians?', well, the real theologians like Pope Nazi [that would be the current occupant of the chair of St. Peter ed.] believe in miracles.'
Pope Benedict XVI, formerly Joseph Ratzinger, was conscripted into Hitler Youth, as were all German boys, when he turned 14.
'It's just surreal and completely gives the lie to the claim that the sophisticated theologians should look down on fundamentalist wingnuts. They are all the same."
"I can give you a devastating argument against religion in two words," Williams said in his introduction.
'Senator Fielding.' Richard Dawkins said his IQ is lower than an earthworm, but I think earthworms are useful."
Har dee har har har. So, to critique religion Mr. Dawkins is allowed to dehumanize another man who happens to believe in Creationism. All par for the course for the morally and intellectually "superior" atheist--Stalin--a famous atheist--would approve I am sure. Just snuff the useless worm out as he just gets in the way.
And this from one of his acolytes:
"Broadcaster Phillip Adams and Melbourne ethicist Leslie Cannold urged atheists not to be too strident or fundamentalist as it could alienate moderate believers who shared their aims for a more secular society."Ah yes, the rationalist/fundamentalist atheists. From the article it is clear that most speakers just mocked religion. As i said, this is th ebiggest tool in the atheist toolbag. Mockery has a place, but when it predominates it more or ess shows that there is really not too much of an argument behind it.
There was one commenter who said something which rang a bell:
"Melbourne atheist philosopher Tamas Pataki attracted little applause for suggesting the organised atheist movement was taking on the appearance of a religion 'with its priests, apostles and disciples, and this is the worst that could happen'."
Yup, just another religion, only this one asserts there is no god and the universe is ruled by heredity and necessity instead.
I wonder if Mr. Dawkins (and his most vociferous friends) has the stones to critique a Muslim theologian, say in Iran, the same way he does pope Benedict. After all, all believers in miracles are the same, right? I mean, he is so much smarter than all us rubes, and Muslims believe in a host of miracles. So when will he bring his mockumentary to someplace where Christianity is not the default religion and have a go? I think I know why. And I ask this because of his childish "critique" of Christianity. If all you can do is act like a child, then you are only going to preach to the choir, aren't you?
4 comments:
Correct Ed, good point. Let's see him replace the word God with Allah, let's see where he gets up to.
LPC
Dawkins may be a fool...but he is not stupid.
Steve,
It is possible to be very good in a particular area and over all be rather stupid. Consider a heart surgeon who is overweight and smokes, or a mathematician who cannot balance a checkbook. In the case of Dawkins we have someone who thinks facile arguments a teenager uses constitute intellectual vigor. I think the dictionary definition bears me out here.
You may be right, Ed.
In any case, Dawkins will be a believer in the near future.
"Every knee shall bow."
Post a Comment