SOMETHING OF INTEREST!!

Terry

A 100-year-old Baptist church in the heart of New York was the venue
Saturday for an ABC debate on the existence of God. Actor Kirk Cameron and
best-selling author Ray Comfort "faced off" against two atheists from the
"Rational Response Squad," in a debate moderated by ABC Nightline's Martin
Bashir.

"We were delighted ABC gave us the opportunity to present our case," said
Comfort, "but we were taken aback by the aggressive nature of the debate.
The audience was evenly divided between believers and atheists. The
believers were very polite and quiet, while the atheists were extremely
vocal. 'Nasty' is an appropriate word. We felt life a couple of goldfish in
a pool of hungry Piranhas, and were getting a sense of what the early
Christians must have felt in a Roman coliseum."

In the debate, Comfort presented proof for the existence of God, while
Cameron offered evidence to show that the theory of Darwinian evolution is
unreasonable and unscientific. They pointed evolutionists to
www.IntelligentDesignVersusEvolution.com, where they're offering $10,000 to
anyone who can provide a genuine, living transitional form supporting
evolutionary claims. The debate also addressed such questions as "Who made
God?" and "What about the heathen in Africa who've never heard about God?"

"The atheists made it very clear they didn't like what we said," Cameron
explained. "They were full of mockery and sarcasm, belittling the many great
scientists and intellectuals who recognize the existence of a Supreme Being.
But the average American isn't viciously anti-God. In fact, polls show that
more than 90 percent believe in His existence. Our hope is that the program
will cause people to think deeply about the evidence presented, and
challenge them to consider this most important issue of life."

While Comfort and Cameron will have to wait until Wednesday to see what the
public thinks of the debate, they report that they've already received
encouraging email from one audience member who commended their presentation:
"Good job last night! Although I received my invitation to the show via the
atheist camp, I must confess that I was impressed with the two of you (and
that I was embarrassed by at least two atheist audience members, whose
hostile questions bordered on heckling--I admired your calm and courteous
responses). ...I find the 'Design means there was a Designer' argument to be
perfectly logical. I just have yet to come across convincing evidence that
this Master Designer of the Universe inspired the Judeo-Christian Bible.'"

Another encouragement, Comfort added, was that both mothers of the two
atheists in the debate are Christians--one of whom was in the front row of
the audience. Comfort stated, "Both sincerely thanked us for our stand, and
said that they were earnestly praying for us."

The entire debate will be streamed Wednesday, May 9, at 1:00 p.m. EDT (
10:00 a.m. PST) on http://abcnews.go.com/nightline/, then again at 2:00 p.m.
EDT (11:00 a.m. PST) on http://abcnews.go.com/abcnewsnow/, and an excerpt
will be aired that night on ABC's Nightline.

We will have the debate available for viewing online from our video sharing
accounts. The videos will be available for viewing after ABC streams it live
on their website Wednesday, May 9. You can visit the following link to find
the video when it is available. Keep checking after ABC streams it live.

http://www.wayofthemaster.com/abc_debate.shtml

I find the 'Design means there was a Designer' argument to be
perfectly logical. I just have yet to come across convincing evidence that
this Master Designer of the Universe inspired the Judeo-Christian Bible.'"

Who designed the designer. And yes, there is no convincing evidence that the Bible is from a designer.

Blueblades

Gerard

...they're offering $10,000 to anyone who can provide a genuine, living transitional form supporting evolutionary claims.

Of course, the pannel of judges is creationist so don't expect decades of scientific proofs and hard facts to be aknowledged.

Phil

The answer is very simple. There is NO proof of a supreme being. If people think that we humans have all the answers to all questions eminating from the smartest person that has ever existed on this planet had better think again. I would say , of all the "actions" performed by we humans, 80% have been and will always be wrong. That percentage would probably go up in Washington.

People tend to forget that religion of any kind is a FAITH and as such is man made. Evolution however , is a THEORY, and as such is subject to change over time. The true theorist, will and should welcome change to his or her theory as time passes and new evidence is uncovered. Faith is rigid as it is alleged to be the word of God who is all mighty and cannot and does not make mistakes. The Bible being the word of God. Faith has its place in our society as long as it is moderated with reason. I think God would agree with that.

theinfamousone

I've been to some of these creationalist/atheist debates at my university. I was once or twice asked to be a speaker on the atheist side, since i tend to ask the questions that the theists cannot answer. the truth is, i see debates such as these to be pointles... neither side will convinced of the others and when we are using examples like a Banana to prove that god exists, well, we are not really thinking rationally! I don't care what you believe, as long as you believe something....

the infamous one

Ingenuous

Was Comfort the guy in the video w/ Cameron who said the banana was the atheist's nightmare? (He opens his bananas wrong-way-round, too, depending on what country you're in.)

Terry

http://www.wayofthemaster.com/abc_debate.shtml

Watch the 1st half of the debate here.

abbagail

Here's another one for you, Terry. Matt of the C.A.R.M. website attended the 33rd Annual Atheist Convention recently, and this is his report from his April newsletter...
/ag

--------------------------------------------------

CARM NEWSLETTER (www.carm.org)
Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
April 12, 2007
http://www.carm.org/newsletter/2007/04-12-07.htm

[...]

33rd Annual Atheist Convention

This past weekend two friends of mine and myself, attended the 33rd annual atheist convention in Seattle, Washington. I have written a specific article about my impressions. It is located here. http://www.carm.org/atheism/33atheist_convention.htm . Basically, I wasn't impressed with the content or the behavior of the lectures and atheists. I was a little disappointed. If you read the article, you will see more details and you can read several quotes from atheists that I think are very revealing.

Gerardo, a Christian friend of mine, used his video camera to record several other dialogs I had with atheists. He is planning to release them on youtube.com pretty soon. When he does, I'll put a link to them in the next newsletter.

Finally, it is because of your support and I was able to go to Seattle. Thank you.

[...]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.carm.org/atheism/33atheist_convention.htm

33rd annual Atheist Convention

The 33rd annual atheist convention took place from April 5-7, 2007, Easter weekend, in Seattle, Washington. It is a yearly event that is held in different cities. There were oral presentations, lectures, entertainment, books for sale, lunches, a state directors meeting, and a movie. Since it is my business to stick my nose in other people's belief systems, I thought I would attend. After a short flight to Seattle, and rather difficult navigation through the complicated one-way street system of downtown Seattle (how do they do it?), I finally arrived at the venue on Thursday evening for preregistration. Two friends, John and Gerardo, decided to join me from Southern California and the three of us managed to get our name badges. With that accomplished, we ventured out into the baffling city streets in order to get lost once again.

The next morning we returned to the convention at 10:30 a.m. in order to hear Julia Sweeney (a.k.a. androgynous "Pat" from Saturday Night Live), give a lecture titled "Why I am an Atheist." Though the presentation was full of wit and humor, I found absolutely nothing of any serious consequence. There were no logical disproofs of God's existence, no critical questions asked and examined, no deep philosophical points to ponder. I was disappointed. But, I need to give Julia the benefit of the doubt. After all, she's an actress not a theologian (atheists can be theologians), not a logician, and not a philosopher. She's an entertainer who happened to be an atheist. After I accepted the fact that the lecture wouldn't contain any meat, I relaxed and turned my attention to the crowd. They laughed and applauded as Julia briefly described her journey to atheism. Okay, so that was an interesting start.

Later on there was a panel discussion solely inhabited by atheists and the topic of their image was raised. They spoke about how they wanted to change how they were perceived by society as a whole. They were tired of being called "devil worshipers" (something I've never heard them labeled as), to a more wholesome image. They talked about doing good works and various forms of activism to "raise awareness" of their cause. I agree with them; they definitely should be concerned with their image. But, when I went into the room where the books were for sale along with various bumper stickers I noticed that they were rather insulting and condescending. There were also some book titles that would offend the average Christian, and let's not forget the promotion of "The Blasphemy Game" that would be played later on in the main room with atheists in gleeful attendance.

I spoke to the national communications director for the atheist organization, David Silverman, about the offensive bumper stickers for sale, the condescending and insulting comments that were often thrown from the lecture podium, and, of course, the blasphemy game, which was, to say the least, very offensive. I told him that if the atheists were so concerned about their image, perhaps he might want to behave differently. Mr. Silverman was polite and respectful and told me that though he didn't agree with certain bumper stickers, that the convention was a place where the atheists would let off steam -- he nodded towards the blasphemy game poster. He explained that they don't expect Christians to be in attendance. He also told me that atheists are ridiculed in society and that they were simply venting. All right, fair enough. But do two wrongs make a right? I told Mr. Silverman that if they were really serious about their image, they should begin working on it at their convention.

But back to the discussion panel. They spoke about how they did not like being misrepresented, vilified by Christians, and how they wanted proper representation politically and socially. But, I couldn't help notice that there were no Christians on the panel to provide a fair and proper representation of the Christian faith that they were so frequently ridiculing and often misrepresenting. Was I the only one who noticed this inconsistency between word and deed?

Dialogues

I had several conversations with atheists. The first one began with the issue of homosexuality and David Fitzgerald (the blasphemy game show host and action coordinator for San Francisco atheists) jumped into the conversation and aggressively tried to shut me down. Maybe it is just me, but I noticed that he was very close, a little too close for comfort. Anyway, we spoke for about five minutes before he left. I had the impression he didn't want to continue the discussion when he found out I wasn't a typical Christian who wouldn't back down. I challenged him on homosexuals wanting special rights. He didn't like that. He said they wanted only to be able to marry who they wanted. I responded that marriage is lawful for anyone (of consenting age) and that they wanted "special" rights to marry someone of the same sex. It went down hill from there and he left rather abruptly shortly afterwards. Maybe he had better things to do.

I then had a discussion later on with Bob, a man who could be Steve Martin's twin. Bob was a very polite atheist who tried to have a fair and honest discussion with me on the validity of atheism. I have to hand it to Bob for staying in there and offering polite discourse. We discussed abortion, atheism, Christianity, morality, rationality, etc. They all seem to be intertwined in atheistic conversations.

There were a couple of other discussions with atheists at the convention that I thought were productive. Of course, I didn't convince an atheist to give up his belief system, but I do hope I put some cracks in their atheist walls they have constructed to block out the light of truth. You never know.

Tabash
Though I was a bit disappointed at not seeing more cogent and competent defenses of atheism at the convention, Mr. Edward Tabash, a Los Angeles lawyer who supports abortion and legalizing prostitution between consenting adults (tabash.com), presented a lecture giving several reasons why God could not exist. Mr. Tabash has been involved in numerous debates and my understanding is that he is touted as one of the better defenders of atheism. His lecture consisted of a handout (which I have since misplaced) listing various arguments against the existence of God. Now, I am trying to be fair here and not be disrespectful to Mr. Tabash since he is not in the room with me as I write this article and cannot offer a defense against my generalized criticism. But, I found his arguments to be weak. In my opinion, if someone wants to present arguments against God's existence he should, at least, deal with some of the answers to the objections raised instead of parroting standard arguments without addressing competent responses. This seems one-sided and insincere. I was, once again, disappointed.

Dr. Robert Price

Robert Price has a degree in New Testament and a Ph.D. in systematic theology from Drew University. He's an atheist and a member of the Jesus seminar. I had the privilege of interviewing him on my radio show in 2006. He was articulate and polite. But, I found his lecture on "Damnable Syllogism: The Logic of the Christian Atonement©˜ to be substandard -- no offense meant to Dr. Price.

His lecture began with a fairly accurate description of Protestant theology dealing with Adam's fall and the substitutionary atonement of Christ. But I thought his lecture went awry when he tried to raise possible problems with the Christian atonement teaching. He mentioned the problem of future sins and how were they atoned for? (CARM's answer: the same way past and present sins are, by Jesus on the cross.) He asked if there was a rebirth and regeneration, then why do Christians still sin? (CARM's answer: Because we are not yet glorified in our resurrected bodies and are at war with our sinful natures.)

Dr. Price delivered his message with an occasional ridiculing tone that was peppered with sarcasm. I noticed in one particular instance he assigned motives to Christians and then attacked those motives. There were several straw men arguments that he constructed and then destroyed. In all, I think Dr. Price tried to represent Christianity fairly, but he failed to deliver a challenge to the Christian atonement theory.

Quotable quotes

Amidst the cacophony of anti religious rhetoric, I managed to extract a few quotes from various speakers. These are the ones I was able to write down accurately. A lot of others were spoken so fast that I wasn't able to capture them accurately. But, these six I managed to get amidst the applause and approving mumbles of the audience.

* "Religious indoctrination of children is the cause of mental illness."
* "Supernaturalism leads to brain damage."
* "Christianity created the problem in order to provide the solution."
* "The atonement doctrine has nothing to do with justice."
* "If logic works, then everyone would be an atheist."
* "Atheism is the cure for Christianity the disease."

What do you think? Would you like your elected officials to hold these views? Would you feel comfortable if you knew the people in power held to such strong anti-Christian opinions? I wouldn't. It is a good thing that we have a Bill of Rights which prevent those in power from hoisting their views upon the backs of those over whom they rule.

But, aren't there already liberal judges in power? Aren't there liberal politicians running for office? Aren't there people who trample the constitution under foot to suit their agendas? Isn't society moving more and more towards the secular and carrying along with it the opinions of those who are now in power and will soon be in power? Of course!

Remember that in the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson said,

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

He said that our rights come from God, not from the state whose whims sway in accordance with the ebb and flow of social opinion. If the state is run by secularists, it becomes the servant of the opinions of those in power. If the state is run by those who know they are subject to a supreme God from whom our rights derive, then they become the servants of the Almighty and the watchdogs of the people because they fear divine retribution if they misuse the power with which they were entrusted. Therefore, our government is best run by those who fear God, not by those who do not. This is why President John Adams said on Oct. 11, 1798,

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."1

Conclusion

In all, I enjoyed mixing it up with atheists in their own environment. I'm glad I went and the more I think about it, the more I suspect I might want to attend another. I also like to add that I was treated politely. Though there were a few people in small groups who threw glances my way and apparently spoke about me under their breath, no one called me names (to my face), no one yelled at me, and no one was rude -- well, one guy was when he walked away in the middle of a discussion. But, it was a good experience and I recommend it for well grounded Christians.

Is anyone interested in joining me in attendance at their next conference?
_____________
1. Federer, William J., America's God and Country, (Amerisearch, Inc., PO. Box 20163, St. Louis, MO 63123, page.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

abbagail

[quotes]

"Atheism (the denial of God) is a modern human belief. Artifacts in ancient burial sites reveal that humans have always believed in a life after death and a Creator God. Humans have a natural belief in God. Brainwashing by books, schools and the major media is required to make a human atheistic."

"Brainwashing is Done on the Basis of Feelings, not Logic."

http://www.biblelife.org/brainwashing.htm

[...]

vitty

I have just finished watching the video.......................... Its incredible how the 2 Christians were absolutly stumped with the simple queston of "who created the creator"

They became embarissingly quiet........

Terry can you give us the link to the next programme please

SOMETHING OF INTEREST!!

Share this