I must be getting alittle paranoid

[DRDS]

With all these new scientific articles that make the popular press like the recent one about the hybrid sharks, or the ones about a new earth like planet, or scientists creating life in the lab. Even though all of these have been throughly answered by Christian apologists, I get this sick feeling in my stomach that scientists who happen to be atheists, atheist organizations, and especially the well known "new atheist" authors like Dawkins and so on are trying to "size us up" sort of what a boxer does to his opponent before he delivers the knock out punch.

I was wondering if they really had our number (had enough or more than enough evidence and things to disprove Christianity and a creator God) would they have already used it on us?

Or are they either waiting on the right time or are hard at work currently to deliever that potential knock out blow to Christianity?

Because these artices I keep seeing are becomming more frequent, more aggressive and more wild like the ones about the multiverse, life on other planets and humans interbreeding with neanderthals.

Let me know what you think. Thank you all and God bless.

[Danieltwotwenty]

Nothing science can deliver would deal a "knock-out blow" to the existence of God, science deals with the natural, God is supernatural.
They are just looking for excuses to continue to reject God.

Dan

[DRDS]

I HOPE you're right.

[Gman]

With all these new scientific articles that make the popular press like the recent one about the hybrid sharks, or the ones about a new earth like planet, or scientists creating life in the lab. Even though all of these have been throughly answered by Christian apologists, I get this sick feeling in my stomach that scientists who happen to be atheists, atheist organizations, and especially the well known "new atheist" authors like Dawkins and so on are trying to "size us up" sort of what a boxer does to his opponent before he delivers the knock out punch.

I was wondering if they really had our number (had enough or more than enough evidence and things to disprove Christianity and a creator God) would they have already used it on us?

Or are they either waiting on the right time or are hard at work currently to deliever that potential knock out blow to Christianity?

Because these artices I keep seeing are becomming more frequent, more aggressive and more wild like the ones about the multiverse, life on other planets and humans interbreeding with neanderthals.

Let me know what you think. Thank you all and God bless.

Not to worry... If you understand their philosophy then you will understand their science..

[Paul_AK]

Personally, I view things like the things you've mentioned as the bricks in our very own modern Tower of Babel. As fascinating as one or two of them may be, when combined they seem to show an overwhelming desire to BE God. Specifically the reference to creating life in a lab. As to dealing a knock out punch? It won't happen.

[KenV]

I sincerely doubt there is any hidden science (or an intellectual atheist league of scientist that are collaborating to destroy religion, for that matter) to fear. Science simply builds and progresses with time, what you are seeing is just the human species gaining more knowledge. There is no conspiracy, just reality.

I'm curious though, what scientific knowledge can you imagine the human race obtaining that would debunk religion to you that doesn't already exist? I figure if you can be religious with today's knowledge you could maintain that level of faith with any amount of scientific progress.

[Stu]

With all these new scientific articles that make the popular press like the recent one about the hybrid sharks, or the ones about a new earth like planet, or scientists creating life in the lab. Even though all of these have been throughly answered by Christian apologists, I get this sick feeling in my stomach that scientists who happen to be atheists, atheist organizations, and especially the well known "new atheist" authors like Dawkins and so on are trying to "size us up" sort of what a boxer does to his opponent before he delivers the knock out punch.

I was wondering if they really had our number (had enough or more than enough evidence and things to disprove Christianity and a creator God) would they have already used it on us?

Or are they either waiting on the right time or are hard at work currently to deliever that potential knock out blow to Christianity?

Because these artices I keep seeing are becomming more frequent, more aggressive and more wild like the ones about the multiverse, life on other planets and humans interbreeding with neanderthals.

Let me know what you think. Thank you all and God bless.

Actually it's the complete opposite in my view; the new atheists had their moment during the late 90's. Since then it is in fact scientific progress that has been their downfall.
With each new discovery, the more we come to understand about life, the more things seem designed. Antony Flew is testament to this. I still hold to the view that the more science improves the more it will destroy the atheistic worldview.

For instance, for all our scientific knowledge and understanding we still don't know where the body plan (blueprint) for an organism resides. We're pretty sure it's not located within DNA. This in itself delivers a killer blow to the central dogma that "DNA makes RNA makes protein makes us", and so Darwinian thinking.

The multiverse is simply the latest in a long line of attempts to cling to a chance universe. According to their own "scientific" standards it is a God of the Gaps view, as a multiverse is beyond the boundary of science! Yet they have made an exception for it in the hopes it will validate their wordview.

I was also very impressed with men like Dawkins before I actually started doing a little research for myself. Just what is it that gives them this sense of command? Their confidence. He seems so certain, so convinced, so determined in his views that it makes you think that he just might be onto something.

But I wouldn't worry too much though, Dawkins' has already attempted to deliver his knockout punch; he's nothing but an old boxer on the ropes, his best punches already thrown, repeating old arguments, they're nothing but bluffs and most importantly he thrives on dumbing it down for the general public.

The main danger the new atheist movement presents is fundamentalism; shouting down the opposition, attempting to make your voice the only one heard, silencing the opposition. It's the number one reason they don't want to teach both the weaknesses and strengths of evolution in American schools, it would be devastating to it's legitimacy.

[sandy_mcd]

Then try this one on http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Rich ... #IDCThread No mainstream scientists even mentioned.

WEST RICHLAND, Wash. (AP) - A swirling, twisting sandstone formation in northern Arizona is evidence of Noah's flood, says a West Richland man who recently visited the unusual geologic phenomenon.

Greg Morgan, a nuclear safety engineer at Hanford, said he was amazed to see sandstone resembling waves, whirlpools and reversing currents that appear to have been frozen in place.

Morgan's photographs of The Wave and his article, "Flood Currents Frozen in Stone," are in the latest issue of Answers magazine, a quarterly publication of Answers in Genesis, a Christian creation research organization based in Petersburg, Ky. The nonprofit organization's 70,000-square-foot facility also houses the Creation Museum.

Mike Matthews, editor of Answers, said the way the layers of sandstone came to rest at Paria Canyon "fits with the viewpoint that these are flood layers."

But the strongest evidence of a global flood is in the sandstone itself, he said.

"It's that the layers themselves have been traced out worldwide, even to Europe and the Mideast," Mathews said.

The Wave at Paria provides a little more -- what Matthews called important "signature details."

Morgan, who is a mechanical engineer and worked in the aviation industry before coming to Hanford, said he was shocked when he first saw a picture of The Wave because it contradicted his original thinking about an ancient Earth and evolution.

Morgan, who became a Christian as an adult and takes the Bible literally, said the convoluted formations at Paria Canyon forced him to consider there must be another explanation.
...

[wrain62]

The book The Language of God is both 100 percent intellectually and religiously harmonious. He does talk about the validity of darwinism which I know some of you guys don't agree with but it was my favorite writing on the subject of faith and science anywhere. I heavily recommend it.

[Proinsias]

The main danger the new atheist movement presents is fundamentalism; shouting down the opposition, attempting to make your voice the only one heard, silencing the opposition. It's the number one reason they don't want to teach both the weaknesses and strengths of evolution in American schools, it would be devastating to it's legitimacy.

I think this applies to more than just atheism. I would argue the issue is more to do the fundamentalist component than the atheist component. Islam, Christianity, atheism and other viewpoints all seem to have militant fundamentalist wings. As Christian, atheist and Islamic fundamentalists set each other in direct opposition there is a danger of things kicking off.

I do have some sympathy with the views of Karen Armstrong in regards to the source of fundamentalism being predominantly based in fear.

Here's little snapshot of her pov but if it is of interest she can go on seemingly forever about this stuff, a paragraph is probably enough to decide if you can stomach her views and tone. I warm to her. She does tend to focus on fundamentalism within the Abrahamic traditions but by changing a few words here and there most of it applies to atheist fundamentalism:

Q: Please tell us how you would define religious fundamentalism.

A: The militant religiosity that we call fundamentalism has surfaced in all the major faiths in the twentieth century. It constitutes a reaction against and a rejection of modern Western society, but it is not a monolithic movement. Each fundamentalist movement has emerged independently and is a law unto itself, sometimes differing from (or in violent opposition to) other fundamentalist movements within a single faith tradition. The fact that fundamentalism has erupted in almost all cultures indicates a widespread and worrying disenchantment with modern society, which so many of us experience as liberating, exciting and empowering. Countries such as the United States, Egypt and Israel are deeply polarized, split into two camps, one which feels positive about secular modernity; the other passionately hostile to it. As the century draws to a close, these two camps appear to be in an incipient state of war, as witnessed in such incidents as the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma; terrorist attacks on foreign tourists in Egypt, designed to bring down Mubarak's government; and the assassination of President Yitzak Rabin in Israel. One of the most dangerous aspects of the fundamentalist phenomenon is that it seems incomprehensible to the liberal or secular world. The two camps within the same society scarcely speak the same language and have few values in common. Projects that can seem self-evidently good to a liberal -- such as democracy, peace-making, concern for the environment, the liberation of women, or freedom of speech -- can seem evil or even Satanic to a fundamentalist.

Fundamentalism often expresses itself violently, but it springs from deep fear. Every single fundamentalist movement that I have studied in this book is inspired by a dread of annihilation. Fundamentalists are convinced that the secularist establishment is determined to wipe them out, even in the United States. Hence, it is an embattled form of faith; fundamentalists believe that they are fighting for their own survival, the survival of the religion, and the survival of civilized society. They feel that their backs are to the wall and that they must fight their way out of the impasse in which they find themselves.

http://www.bookbrowse.com/author_interv ... -armstrong

In short any fundamentalism you don't personally agree with is likely to be a worry.

[zoegirl]

The book The Language of God is both 100 percent intellectually and religiously harmonious. He does talk about the validity of darwinism which I know some of you guys don't agree with but it was my favorite writing on the subject of faith and science anywhere. I heavily recommend it.

i liked it

[Canuckster1127]

I enjoyed it too. It's got a lot of similar themes with C.S. Lewis and Collins is a Theistic Evolutionist. Not quite on board with that but I respect that it's a legitimate option to consider and he clearly can't be accused of being unqualified to put forth his views in either realm.

[Stu]

I think this applies to more than just atheism. I would argue the issue is more to do the fundamentalist component than the atheist component. Islam, Christianity, atheism and other viewpoints all seem to have militant fundamentalist wings. As Christian, atheist and Islamic fundamentalists set each other in direct opposition there is a danger of things kicking off.

I do have some sympathy with the views of Karen Armstrong in regards to the source of fundamentalism being predominantly based in fear.

Here's little snapshot of her pov but if it is of interest she can go on seemingly forever about this stuff, a paragraph is probably enough to decide if you can stomach her views and tone. I warm to her. She does tend to focus on fundamentalism within the Abrahamic traditions but by changing a few words here and there most of it applies to atheist fundamentalism:

In short any fundamentalism you don't personally agree with is likely to be a worry.

I would agree.

Perhaps I was a little vague in my post, covering too much ground, but the thrust of my argument was that we must not mistake the New Atheist movement for the atheist's of old.
The new atheists make no apology for their aggressive tactics, in attempting to force their secular religion on the public. Which has by and large taken center stage in both the media and education through their "fundamentalist" approach. Christians have dropped the ball IMO, and for the longest time have seen fit to just sit back and watch. That has changed in recent times, but the damage is done.


I was actually discussing this topic with someone on Facebook the other day:

Thought I'd share something that's probably obvious to you but has really been reinforced for me personally over the last few weeks.

Recently been doing research into the Young Earth Creationism (YEC) view.
Something I've come to realise over this time is that (bad) science is quite possibly THE largest factor in driving people away from God.

As a pastor, do not underestimate the important role science can, and must play IMO, in modern day Christianity. From childhood, through our teenage years and even as adults in university we are swamped with the molecules-to-man mantra; it grows and continually influences / shapes our worldview. In fact I believe it is the largest influence today in people losing faith.

New Atheism has a poweful tool at it's disposal and should not be underestimated.
I'm not denying the power of Scripture. Rather that the atheistic outlook has such a tactile and pervasive message that one needs to confront it at the scientific level. Scripture complements that perfectly, but IMO shouldn't fight the battle on it's own.

Case in point. For a long time I've been an old earth creationist, and considered folks like Jonathan Wells somewhat eccentric for still holding to an YEC perspective. I would judge him because I never thought that YEC was that plausible, because much of what influenced me was from an old earth perspective. Granted I probably should've done a little more studying on the subject, but that's the point though isn't it, I thought I had. When you've been (scientifically) stuck in "Plato's cave" you feel you do have the answers.

Point is, the ever present secular worldview (including textbooks, Nat Geo, Animal Planet, media, etc.) has in many ways brainwashed society into thinking a certain way. I think Christians have failed on this one. We have ignored the new atheistic movement for too long, brushing it aside and plodding on as normal hoping for the best. That is changing now, but we are pretty late to the party. Perhaps it's a sign of the times.

Bad science can sow seeds of doubt; and those seeds can grow unwillingly at times; and that doubt is like poison to ones faith, I can tell you first hand. Been doing a lot of pruning and felling lately though, feels great.

It's a slightly odd liberating experience, I'm not saying I'm sold on the idea of a young earth, but my perspective has shifted.

Anyway just thought I'd share as I know that you deal a lot with kids and young minds. Heck you might even be an old earth creationist yourself, all I'm saying is don't underestimate the importance of science in combating the atheistic message in this day and age.

[musician]

Not to worry... If you understand their philosophy then you will understand their science.

I've never seen it put better. Bravo.

- N

[MarcusOfLycia]

Just an off-topic question... but after reading the comments it came across my mind. Who hijacked the term 'fundamental' and made it into a bad word? Shouldn't we all want to be true to the fundamentals of our belief system?

Hating other people who disagree with you is not 'fundamental' to the Christian worldview, and is more like a heresy. Heretics would be a better term I would think....