With a major atheist revival meeting currently being held in Melbourne, all the true unbelievers have come out in force, emboldened to proclaim their faith. Plenty of media attention is being given to their religion, with its high priests given a very good run indeed.
Thus Richard Dawkins (‘There is no God, and Dawkins is his prophet’) is getting a dream run with Australia’s mainstream media. No wonder that, since so many of the MSM are themselves card-carrying atheists and God-haters.
Even before the weekend conference began, the Dawkins’ disciples were pushing their creed. For example, on Wednesday a Herald Sun columnist felt empowered to push her anti-God agenda. With a piece strangely entitled, “We atheists are not all godforsaken,” Cheryl Critchley seeks to enlighten us all on the wonders of misotheism.
It is a rather silly and shallow piece, but because it has appeared in the most widely read newspaper in Australia, it is worth responding to nonetheless. And a response is not very hard to produce, given how vacuous and trite the whole piece is.
It did not take her long to get things wrong – big time. She begins by bewailing religious education, referring to it as something out of the “dark ages”. That phrase of course is a pejorative term, used by Enlightenment figures to refer to the Middle Ages.
But the truth is, this was a very important feature of Western history, in which Christians primarily were holding back the darkness of the barbarian hordes, preserving learning, knowledge, books and education. Indeed, medieval monks and monasteries almost single-handedly kept Western civilization going during this period.
She says if we must have religious education in schools, then teach them all: “If all children understood all religions the world would be a much more tolerant – and hopefully peaceful – place.” Sorry Cheryl, but no dice. Just the opposite is the case. Never have we had greater understanding of all the world’s religions than now, but conflict still abounds.
Indeed, the more one does understand the various world religions, the more one finds them to be so very incompatible with each other. But that is not really the issue here. If peace and tolerance is the main concern, then we need to remind our writer that it has been the secularist and atheist religions of last century that have unleashed the most bloodshed and death.
She goes on to whine about miracles as found in the Bible (such as feeding the crowds) and then says, “Why didn’t Jesus come back and perform miracles like that in Africa?” Actually he has Cheryl, in the form of his followers. Countless Christians over the centuries have gone to Africa and other parts of the world to do that very thing: help the poor, the marginalised, those in distress, those in need, etc.
Please inform us all Ms Critchley just how many atheists are doing similar things in Africa or anywhere for that matter. I am not aware of any hospitals or aid organisation established and promoted by those of the atheist religion. But I know of thousands which have explicitly been set up and run by dedicated disciples of Christ.
She then offers us a moral absolute which we all should adhere to, claiming that we should respect the rights of others to hold their own beliefs – but then she immediately retracts this by making an exception to it. She says we must not respect those who disagree with homosexuality, or put down women.
So she is demanding that millions of people who may have concerns about the promotion of homosexuality must respect her views, but she will not respect their views. Sounds like a great way to get a new religion off the ground, one that promotes tolerance and will lead to peace. Heaven on earth will be achieved if we simply all think exactly the same as the divine Ms C.
She concludes by saying that one day she might start her own “atheist religion”. Sorry Cheryl, but it sounds to all of us like you already have. And she gives us her ten commandments of atheism. Sorry again Cheryl, but nothing very original here: this has all been done before. For example, your fearless leader Richard Dawkins has a very similar listing in his The God Delusion.
But let’s go through her rather juvenile list anyway:
All men and women are created equal. Um, what? Created? But who did the creating then Cheryl? And yes, Christianity already teaches that very thing anyway. Christianity treats all people equally, but your atheism cannot. Blind evolution, as Darwin said, will always favour some races over others. That is how life operates in a godless, purely naturalistic world.
Live your life according to what is right, not what is written in a 2000-year-old book. And just who decides, in such a world, what is right and why? Indeed, morality is a concept which only makes sense in a personal world, but makes no sense at all in an impersonal, material world. Morality makes sense if there is a universal moral law and a moral law-giver.
Treat others as you want them to treat you. Again, that comes straight out of the Bible and the teachings of Jesus, Cheryl. Why is it that most of your ‘morality’ is basically pinched from the very faith that you reject? You cannot even write about these issues without stealing from the moral universe made possible by the Judeo-Christian worldview.
Respect difference in others. But why, given your worldview, should we? And as you just wrote earlier, you want others to respect your point of view, but you reserve the right to not respect those who disagree with you. Your double standards are showing here big time.
Watch out for those less privileged. Yep, we have had that happening now for two thousand years, thanks to all those followers of Jesus Christ. And what exactly are you and your fellow atheists doing about the less privileged Cheryl? Anyone can pontificate about these matters, and seek to take the high moral ground here. But in this case, the proof is indeed in the pudding.
Never judge people based on their religion, gender, race or sexuality. What!? You have just spent an entire article doing that very thing. You have been judging religious folks in general and Christians in particular this whole time, and now you dare to tell everyone else not to judge? There is a word for this Cheryl: it starts with ‘h’ and ends with ‘ypocrisy’.
Respect relationships between consenting adults that do not hurt others. Oh, so I should respect polygyny, group sex, incest, and all sorts of other kinky sex acts, simply because people agree to them? Sorry Cheryl, but no society would last long following your immoral and amoral advice. Fortunately most nations know better than to follow that sort of idiocy.
Question authority if it unfairly oppresses you or others. OK, so can I question your authority as well? Indeed, why should I buy one word of what you are saying, or those of Dawkins or any of the other atheist guru authorities?
Never compromise what is right for money or promotion. Agreed, and that of course also can be found quite clearly in the New Testament, and other religious writings. By the way, does your morality say anything about theft – at least the theft of other people’s ideas and concepts which are not at all unique to you or atheism?
If and when God shows him or herself in person we will believe. Will you Cheryl? Will you really? Somehow I think you are just bluffing us here. The truth is, God already has done the very thing you have demanded of him: he has revealed himself. But you have simply rejected him. Two thousand years ago God came to earth and lived amongst us. Just as so many back then rejected him, so people like yourself are still doing so today.
I am afraid all your lame excuses and pseudo-rationalism here impresses very few of us. It certainly does not impress God. But this is the usual superficial and mushy drivel that atheists come up with time and time again. It is logically incoherent, intellectually flimsy, and polemically weak.
I find it quite hard to see how atheism can win many converts based on this sort of secular silliness.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/we-atheists-are-not-all-godforsaken/story-e6frf7jo-1225838884008
[1398 words]