Imagine...

Imagine

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today... Aha-ah...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

John Lennon (1971)

John Lennon invites us to imagine what it would be like if there were no heaven or hell. Let’s do just that.

Why does God need a sacrifice?

Richard Dawkins has asked the question, “If God wanted to forgive our sins, why not just forgive them without having Himself tortured and executed in payment...?” Now Richard Dawkins was voted one of the top three intellectuals in the world, and although I am not one of the other two I think the answer is fairly simple and can be stated in three words, “God is righteous.”

Dawkins fan?

I spoke to a man recently who told me he was an atheist and a follower of Richard Dawkins.

Atheism proven wrong...again.

Atheists very often say that belief in God is a science-stopper, that is, when Christians see something they don't understand they just say, "God did it" and proceed no further. Now this is just factually wrong and historically naive. Modern science got off the ground because of a Christian worldview that led men to investigate creation to discover its order and laws. Christianity was actually the science-starter! Atheism is actually more guilty of stopping science than Christianity!

Dawkins' soft-headed, hard-hearted comments

This is not news, the story has receded but I still want to point out some things from Dawkins' comments about the "immorality" of allowing children with Down's Syndrome to be born.

Richard Dawkins vs Richard Dawkins

Richard Dawkins has engaged in a fourth debate with John Lennox, which I have yet to see.  But it is very interesting to see Professor Dawkins getting involved with Professor Lennox.  This is obviously a different Richard Dawkins who refused to debate William Lane Craig last year!

Dawkins, determinism and dominoes

I listened to Richard Dawkins' dialogue with the Archbishop of Canterbury recently.  The most interesting thing about the whole exchange was Dawkins admitting that his atheistic, materialistic worldview provides no grounding for believing in free will.

Funny but meaningless; Sad but meaningful

You might have heard about the Radio 4 fuss the other morning. 

Double standards?

I have written before on the God of the gaps accusation, and how the atheist frequently falls back on an atheism of the gaps.  I just want to enlarge on that a wee bit in light of some things I have heard recently.

The pot calling the kettle black?

I recently heard Richard Dawkins encourage believers in God to grow up and stop believing in God just because the belief gives them comfort.

History denier!

Richard Dawkins, in his usual measured way, has described those who deny Darwinian evolution as being on a par with those who deny the Holocaust.  However, it seems that Dawkins is the history denier!

Dawkins just doesn't get it

He says he can see no logical link between atheism and acts of violence.  How about this:

The strawman takes another beating from Dawkins

Tip to winning an argument - define your opponent's views to suit yourself, then tear them apart.  That seems to be the tactic Richard Dawkins takes.

Hitchens' unanswerable challenge...answered!

Christopher Hitchens stated that he had issued this challenge to many people and had yet to get an answer to it, here it is: Name one moral action a religious person would do that an atheist couldn't also do.  He added this supplementary - if one such action can be named, then he could name any amount of immoral actions committed by religious people that atheists would not do.

Now this challenge is so confused and groundless that I am amazed he ever verbalised it.  The challenge can be answered in a superficial way, but it can be demolished in a foundational way. 

The Facial Hair Congregation and the Church of Knitters

It's very worrying that he thought it was a good point, but even more worrying that his audience did too.  They actually applauded the point!  I'm referring to a statement by Richard Dawkins in response to a question about evil done by atheist dictators in the 20th Century.  I will tell you what he said in a moment, but how anyone could deem it an intelligent response let alone adequate and applaudable is beyond me.  Maybe they were the type of people who would accept and applaud anything Richard Dawkins said - great examples of "free-thinkers", hmmmm.

Sorry doesn't remove the stain

Richard Dawkins, straying outside his field of expertise (noticeably), has made many dogmatic but juvenile and mistaken assertions about religion in general and Christianity in particular.  In one of his attacks he asked the question, If God wants to forgive people why doesn't He just forgive them, why does He need blood?  Now Richard Dawkins was voted one of the top three intellectuals in the world, and it may surprise you to know that I am not one of the other two, but I can answer the question - the answer is because God is righteous and sin matters.