The New Atheist Crusaders and their quest for the Unholy Grail
Hey all. It's been a while since I've been on. I appologise, I've been busy.
The title of this forum is the title of a book I just finished reading. It's a catchy title, so I figured it'd be a good way to grab someone's attention on here. The book is written by Becky Garrison.
If her name doesn't sound familiar, that's fine, it shouldn't. So why am I wasting your time telling you about this book? Well, I'm glad you asked. This is a book written by a True Christian. HUH? For all of you who have discussed with me in the past, you understand what I'm talking about and for those of you who haven't you can research my blogs. Caposkia is my name.
Anyway, It's written from the viewpoint of how a true Christian feels about of course the atheists in the world today, but more importantly for you, how she feels about Christians in the world.
This is for all of you arguing with me about how Christians have to be black and white. How you have to follow a religion and there's nothing outside of religion etc. She touches on all of this. I truly think you'll enjoy reading this book and I would like to hear from those of you who have read it if anyone. If not, I"ll wait till someone finishes it. It's not a very long book.
When I first came onto this site, I wanted to discuss directly with those who were involved in the infamous television debate that RRS was involved in about the existence of God with Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron. They didn't have time and the other non-believers I came across were too opinionated to involve themselves in a conversation that made any progress. Instead I got into other debates which for the most part were a lot of fun, but I digress.
Becky mentions this debate as well in her book at the end. This is for all of you on here I've talked to who would not believe me or had other personal issues with the fact that my opinion didn't flow with their idea of a Christian. I will breifly say that I hold her viewpoint when she says that if she was at that debate, she would have "crawled out of that church in shame. "
Simply put, we both agree that both sides put forth deplorable excuses for their side and did not defend their side succesfully. I know I know, many of you will disagree and say that RRS did disprove the existance of God in that debate, but enough with the opinions, I'm saying the other side did just as good of a job proving God. This debate is a poor excuse to not follow Christ and this book talks about those types of Christians.
This book should clarify many misunderstandings of how True Christians are and I hope bring light to a new understanding of our following.
It is written differently than most books, but is an informational peice and uses a lot of researched information. It does focus on the "New Atheists" and is not a book preaching to the masses. As said, it is from the point of view of a True Christian.
enjoy, let me know your thoughts. I would also request, please be respectful in your responses. I'm here to have mature discussions with people.
Quote:no, of course you didn't... are you going to use any of them in your defense, other than points like things evolved and were not created? I mean legitimately pull out the meat in each and use it to defend your point of view
No it does not work that way.
Your "meat" is wishful thinking.
The "meat" of science is based on fact backed up by prior data.
I am not "defending" a "point of view" because it is not a "point of view". It is fact. The earth being a globe is a FACT that was PROVEN through testing and observation. The claim that the earth was flat required no testing and was merely "defended" because people liked the idea and falsely thought it was true.
"Point of view" would be "Chocolate ice cream is better than strawberry ice cream" "Republicans vs Democrats"
FACTS are. Entropy, DNA, mitosis.
And YES we evolved, we were NOT created. Just like a hurricane is not created by an ocean god but evolves because of non cognitive conditions.
...and yet, I'm STILL waiting for you to defend that with "the 'meat' of science"... I would LOVE to have that conversation with you... I don't think you can do it. Wait... I know you can't do it because I've been trying to pull that out of you for years. Come back when you have something to back youself up with.