… I think of myself as an agnostic on deities and ultimate meanings and that sort of thing. With respect to the main claims of Christianity – loving god, fallen nature, Jesus and atonement and salvation – I am pretty atheistic, although some doctrines like original sin seem to me to be accurate psychologically….

I am not a devout Christian, yet if anything, the things said against me are worse. Richard Dawkins, in his best selling The God Delusion, likens me to Neville Chamberlain, the pusillanimous appeaser of Hitler at Munich. Jerry Coyne reviewed one of my books (Can a Darwinian be a Christian?) using the Orwellian quote that only an intellectual could believe the nonsense I believe in. And non-stop blogger P. Z. Myers has referred to be as a “clueless gobshite.” This invective is all because, although I am not a believer, I do not think that all believers are evil or stupid, and because I do not think that science and religion have to clash. (Of course some science and religion clashes. That is the whole point of the Darwinism-Creationism debate. The matter is whether all science and religion clash, something I deny strongly.)

Let me say that I believe the new atheists do the side of science a grave disservice. I will defend to the death the right of them to say what they do – as one who is English-born one of the things I admire most about the USA is the First Amendment. But I think first that these people do a disservice to scholarship. Their treatment of the religious viewpoint is pathetic to the point of non-being. Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion would fail any introductory philosophy or religion course. Proudly he criticizes that whereof he knows nothing. As I have said elsewhere, for the first time in my life, I felt sorry for the ontological argument. If we criticized gene theory with as little knowledge as Dawkins has of religion and philosophy, he would be rightly indignant. (He was just this when, thirty years ago, Mary Midgeley went after the selfish gene concept without the slightest knowledge of genetics.) Conversely, I am indignant at the poor quality of the argumentation in Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, and all of the others in that group.

You can read the whole article by Michael Ruse… HERE!

Ruse has also just recently released a new title that may interest you, titled… Science and Spirituality: Making Room for Faith in the Age of Science

Here is the product description from Amazon…

In Science and Spirituality: Making Room for Faith in the Age of Science, Michael Ruse offers a new analysis of the often troubled relationship between science and religion. Arguing against both extremes – in one corner, the New Atheists; in the other, the Creationists and their offspring the Intelligent Designers – he asserts that science is undoubtedly the highest and most fruitful source of human inquiry. Yet, by its very nature and its deep reliance on metaphor, science restricts itself and is unable to answer basic, significant, and potent questions about the meaning of the universe and humankind’s place within it: Why is there something rather than nothing? What is the ultimate source and foundation of morality? What is the nature of consciousness? What is the meaning of it all? Ruse shows that one can legitimately be a skeptic about all of these questions, and yet why it is open for a Christian, or member of any faith, to offer answers. Scientists, he concludes, should be proud of their achievements but modest about their scope. Christians should be confident of their mission but respectful of the successes of science.

To read this page, and check out a place to purchase this from… Go Here!

Until Next Time

I am Jonny King

H/T: Manawatu Christian Apologetics

My [Peter S. Williams] paper ‘The Emperor’s Incoherent new Clothes – Pointing the Finger at Dawkins’ Atheism’ has just been published in the latest edition of Think (Number 24, Volume 9, Spring 2010).

Think is a Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy, edited by Stephen Law and published by Cambridge University Press.

I argue that Richard Dawkins’ ‘new atheism’ proffers self-contradictory ideas about moral value, knowledge and responsibility.

Is this man claiming Dawkins’ ideas are digressions from the Truth?  Therefore, if impressive, will Dawkins’ ideas not set the reader free?  It could well be so!

You are just going to have to continue and read this portion from the conclusion that deals to Dawkins and his cadre…

The purpose offered by the new atheism is counterfeit because naturalism is the pre-eminent metaphysics of nihilism. William Provine proclaims his atheistic creed: ‘There are no gods, no purposes, and no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death… There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning in life, and no free will for humans, either’.5 Dawkins likewise rejects God, inherent cosmic purpose, life after death and any objective value, as well as libertarian free will and responsibility:

As scientists, we believe that human brains, though they may not work in the same way as man-made computers, are as surely governed by the laws of physics. When a computer malfunctions, we do not punish it. We track down the problem and fix it, usually by replacing a damaged component, either in hardware or software.6

But how can anyone (e.g. a religious believer) be responsible for not living up to their intellectual obligations if they aren’t free to be responsible for anything in the first place? If everything about a person is ‘governed by the laws of physics’, blaming them for their intellectual failings would make as much sense as Newton blaming gravity for giving him an apple-sized bump on the head. Indeed, if all beliefs are caused by nothing but the laws of physics, how can we rationally privilege one effect of these laws (e.g. belief in atheism) over another (e.g. belief in theism)?

The Emperor’s rhetorically fine new clothes are logically incoherent; which is as much as to say that they have no substance in the land of truth. Despite appearances, the Emperor is naked. Agnostic John Humphrys is ready to take up the call of Hans Christian Andersen’s innocent child in the crowd:

The atheists… must prove, rather than merely assert, that mainstream religion is a malign force in the world [but how can they do this whilst denying any objective reality to moral malignancy?]. They cannot rely on a small minority of religious extremists to do that for them or hark back to the brutality of earlier centuries. And they must offer an alternative to the millions who rely on their beliefs to make sense of their lives [but how can they do this whilst denying any objective reality to our intellectual obligations?]. Unlike the militant atheists I do not think people are stupid if they believe in God. For vast numbers of ordinary, thoughtful people it is impossible not to. Of course, this may be the result of indoctrination at a very early age – but it may also be a considered reluctance to accept that the material world is all there is.7

In Anderson’s fairytale, the Emperor allows himself to be deceived by the swindlers who sell him a delusion of grandeur. In the case of the new atheism, it is the Emperor (Dawkins) who is both selling and buying his own delusion. Dawkins’ atheism rests upon self-contradictory claims about rationality, morality and responsibility. The Emperor of the new atheism has nothing on at all.

5. William Provine, ‘Darwinism: Science or Naturalistic Philosophy?’ @ http://www.arn.org/docs/orpages/or161/161main.htm

6. Dawkins, Richard, quoted by Beauregard, Mario & O’Leary, Denyse, The Spiritual Brain, (New York: Harper One, 2007), p. 118

7. Humphrys, John, In God We Doubt, (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 2007), pp. 16–17

I am sure you are going to want to go and read the complete article, and you can do so by visiting the linked EPS blog post, or by heading to the following page, where you can read the article in full (in HTML)… HERE (I also believe this can be downloaded as a PDF)!

Its Been Special

I am Jonny King

In the words of Bobby Brown… “WHO?“… If you don’t know, you’re just not too hot to handle, too cold to hold… Yes, it is my prerogative to form sentences with words without reason that you are reading!

Okay, take a look at this…

What?  You weren’t born in 1990… Do’h!

Well, take my word for it… There was a time when that look and that sound was cool… and as is the case, the circle is turning-to-returning!

The subject of cool is also the context for an up-coming book, that should I refrain from informing you, such would not be… you guessed it… cool!

Hipster Christianity: When Church and Cool Collide

Here are some details from the Publisher…

Insider twentysomething Christian journalist Brett McCracken has grown up in the evangelical Christian subculture and observed the recent shift away from the “stained glass and steeples” old guard of traditional Christianity to a more unorthodox, stylized 21st-century church. This change raises a big issue for the church in our postmodern world: the question of cool. The question is whether or not Christianity can be, should be, or is, in fact, cool. This probing book is about an emerging category of Christians McCracken calls “Christian hipsters”–the unlikely fusion of the American obsessions with worldly “cool” and otherworldly religion–an analysis of what they’re about, why they exist, and what it all means for Christianity and the church’s relevancy and hipness in today’s youth-oriented culture.

Here are some words about the Author…

Brett McCracken is a graduate of Wheaton College and UCLA. His day job is managing editor for Biola University’s Biola magazine. He regularly writes movie reviews and features for Christianity Today, as well as contributing frequently to Relevant magazine. He comments on movies, media, and popular culture issues at his blog, The Search, http://stillsearching.wordpress.com/. He lives in Los Angeles.

If you want to read if you fit this description, McCracken has a post, where outlines what this looks like in practice…

I wrote a book about Christian hipsters. It’s called Hipster Christianity: When Church and Cool Collide and comes out in August. But many people have asked me: what exactly is a Christian hipster? Am I one? Are you one?

Well, first of all: it’s just a funny label, and we all know that hipsters hate labels. So if you are still reading this post, eager to know what it all means, chances are you are not a Christian hipster. Or maybe you are, and you’re just intrigued by the whole thing (like I am!). In any case, the following is an excerpt from Ch. 5: “Christian Hipsters Today,” and perhaps it will give you a bit of a better sense as to what Christian hipsters are all about…

Christian Hipster Likes and Dislikes (By No Means Exhaustive… Just a Sampling)

Things they don’t like:

Christian hipsters don’t like megachurches, altar calls, and door-to-door evangelism. They don’t really like John Eldredge’s Wild at Heart or youth pastors who talk too much about Braveheart. In general, they tend not to like Mel Gibson and have come to really dislike The Passion for being overly bloody and maybe a little sadistic. They don’t like people like Pat Robertson, who on The 700 Club famously said that America should “take Hugo Chavez out”; and they don’t particularly like The 700 Club either, except to make fun of it. They don’t like evangelical leaders who get too involved in politics, such as James Dobson or Jerry Falwell, who once said of terrorists that America should “blow them all away in the name of the Lord.” They don’t like TBN, PAX, or Joel Osteen. They do have a wry fondness for Benny Hinn, however.

You should read the rest of this post, where McCracken will provide more information to test your hipsterist!

I wonder if they should add reading I am Jonny King?

Mmmm…

Until next Time

I am Jonny King

H/T: Justin “He’s No Tomato Source” Taylor

]]> http://iamjonnyking.com/hipster-christianity-are-you-hype-and-out-dude-and-cool-for-christ/feed/ 0 http://iamjonnyking.com/april-7-debate-dsouza-vs-hitchens/ http://iamjonnyking.com/april-7-debate-dsouza-vs-hitchens/#comments Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:06:36 +0000 Jonny http://iamjonnyking.com/?p=2759 It’s time to get it on, cause these guys don’t get along (presuppositionally speaking, of course)

Step Right Up, Step Right Up…

In a Heaving weight of Intellectual Discourse, the said two gentlemen will be engaging in some thrust, parry… and even some debate… and the details are as follows…

Atheist and author Christopher Hitchens and Catholic conservative Dinesh D’Souza will present a public debate on the topic “Is Religion the Problem?” on April 7 at the University of Notre Dame.

The debate will be at 7:30 p.m. in Leighton Concert Hall in the DeBartolo Performing Arts Center.  [Emphasis Mine]

To read more about this, you…

Yes, none other than Richard “Atheism’s Present Top Model” Richard, will be touching down, bringing the gagging kool-aid drinkers out of their parents basements from Cape Reinga to the Bluff!  Now if you are feeling all hot and bothered by I am Jonny King’s jocularity, this could mean a number of things… Consult your Doctor… However, such surely shows that the Dawkins behemoth is something that delights your rationale functions… or so you would like to think!

I know, I Know, I am a man not a mouse, but I am not above taking the Mickey, and such a context seems worthy of such a riposte, as I find the overtly warming fuzzies and impervious prognosticating defined interaction on issues like this, which have been observed on CNNZ before Man of Spin’s time, to be as pointless as asserting… (fill in the presupposition)… I was thinking of… trying to justify not debating William Lane Craig, when one thought the search for truth in the world of ideas would be motivation enough!

Am I joining the party?!

Now, you may be wondering what the point of all this posturing is all about, and I am getting there!

There!

Recently, Ray “This man can provide Southern Comfort”, after all, he is from Christchurch, and he does know Christ… Anyway, it has made the airwaves that Comfort is out to dis-comfort the coming of the Delusion-Dissing-Dawkins.

ChristianNewsWire, after detailing how Comfort has stalked, in a scientific manner, Dawkins activities, affirms that Comfort is saying, “Not in My City,” with the following details…

When asked about the giveaway to 170,000 university students in the U.S., he called Comfort “an idiot” on international television.[2] Comfort said, “And then he began to use my comedy routine, and was getting quite a few laughs when doing it.”[3]

But when the author heard that Professor Richard Dawkins was going to his home town of Christchurch, New Zealand, it became even more personal. “This is a city where I (almost daily), for 12 years, poured my heart out in the local ‘Speaker’s Corner.’ Over 3,000 times I climbed onto a soapbox and spoke to crowds in an effort to turn people’s thoughts to God, and if the learned professor thinks he is going to walk right in and undo that without any opposition, he has another thought coming. All I want is for people to know that the theory of evolution is bogus science. Charles Darwin lamented the lack of species-to-species transitional forms, and 150 years later, the missing link is still missing.”

Comfort maintains, “Man, with all his technology can’t create a grain of sand from nothing, let alone a leaf, a flower, or a frog. So how intellectually dishonest is it for Richard Dawkins to say that nothing created everything (something he believes). Add to that the fact that the professor has a weird belief that we may have been created by aliens,[4] that we are cousins of bananas,[5] that nothing did create everything,[6] and he does it all in the guise of science. Then he says that anyone who doesn’t believe as he does is ‘ignorant, stupid or insane.’[7] He turns 70 next year, so I hope that he comes to see the difference between the hypocritical religion he so despises, and God, before he goes to meet His Maker.”

You can read the entire article… HERE!

The ChristianNewsWire site also provides the links to these two Youtube video’s, where, Dawkins calls Comfort an “Idiot“…

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

With Dawkins even taking the arch-angel of Comfort’s Banana Splitting Humour…

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

You can also visit the following site about the title that will be given away… and, if you are so inclined, you can purchase these for only $1.00 each (Minimum of 36 purchases)… and you can also download the “Introduction”… for FREE… which you can all find on this website… HERE!

This debate has also made it into the mainstream news, in NZ,  with TV3 having a piece on this context, on their nightly news… with the Video available HERE… and the Manuscript available HERE!

NOW…

What do you think about this?

I am particularly thinking of thoughtful Christian or otherwise commentary…

Is this the right approach?

Is this the right individual who should be viewed as the leader of the righteous riposte?

Is the context of these events put on by ThinkingMatters… HERE and HERE, a much more effective response?

Is an all hands on deck approach, from various Christian sources, fine with you?

Will you buy a load of these titles?

What say you?  TYPE!

Please note that this post will be moderated, so if you feel like throwing your pamphlets out of the basement, and assert your fidelity to the Dawkins, leave your Presuppositional Pom Poms, at the door… Yes, I know that such is really impossible, but do your best to change for good… or seek the grace of God, while He can be found!

You can Save the Whales at some other destination… Jonah’s God Need Not Apply, as He is the Boss, and He knows Best

Until Next Time

I am Jonny King

Don’t ask me how that got into my head!  I said, Don’t Ask… Okay, maybe one could put that down as proof-positive evidence of the Fall!

I think it’s time to move on… Ah-hem

For the rest of the March on, the common gracing of the people at Christian Audio is once again on show, as this month, they are offering a deuce of FREE audiobooks for willing attendees.

To redeem this offer, you need to go to the right destination, which will be forthcoming, where you can download… 50 Reasons Why Jesus Came to Die, by John Piper… and… The Cost of Discipleship, by Dietrich Bonhoeffer… for FREE, as long as you pass or have passed over your details, of course!

To make the most of this time… GO HERE!

Note: Christian Audio are also offering all OTHER Piper and Bonhoeffer downloads for $4.98 (US), for each title, for this month.  To view the Piper potential, go HERE… To view the Bonhoeffer bonanza, go HERE!

That is all… Now You Must Go…

…To Christian Audio, that is!

But please, return when I blog-call!

It’s Been Special

I am Jonny King

H/T: VitaminZ