High life

We need Christianity more than ever in this Age of Atheists

A knife used to give me peace of mind; now I find solace in prayers

12 December 2015

9:00 AM

12 December 2015

9:00 AM

Have we ever needed Christianity more than we do today? It’s a rhetorical question, for sure, because the loss of our faith and the inability to confront Islam have never been greater. When I was a little boy during the war, my mother assured me that if I believed in Jesus everything would be OK. This was during the Allied bombing on Tatoi, the military airfield near our country house where the Germans concentrated their anti-aircraft guns. My Fräulein, the Prussian lady who brought me up, was more practical. She handed me a beautiful carved knife that made me feel safer than my prayers ever did.

Today, of course, 74 years later, my prayers are far more likely to give me peace of mind than a knife in my pocket. That’s the difference between being five and 79 years of age. Mind you, now I pray only for the safety and welfare of my children and their mother. My soul I sold to the devil long ago. No prayers will save that loser. At times, during Christmas and Easter, when I go to church, light a candle and sit alone in a pew, all these memories come flooding back, especially my fear of the noisy Anglo-American bombs that rained down around us, and how only the steel in my pocket gave me courage.

Atheists seem to be le goût du jour. Our celebrity culture has no room for faithful people, especially Christians; only Islam enjoys that privilege. In 1966 Time magazine shocked its readers with a cover that asked whether God was dead. I remember it well because Henry Luce died soon after. Was there a hidden message somewhere, I wondered? But Luce was a devout Christian and a great believer in the Almighty, unlike Christopher Hitchens, whose favourite targets were priests, Mother Teresa and God, a Christian God whose followers turned the other cheek. The Hitch had very little to say against Allah because he knew the latter’s followers did not take kindly to cheap remarks against him. Hitchens deplored Christmas, ‘the collectivisation of gaiety’ and ‘compulsory bad taste’, as well he should have, being an opportunist. Atheism gets you in through the front door, Christianity is reserved for the trade entrance. He hated the ‘confessional drool’ that families mailed to each other, especially simple people who believe in love and forgiveness.


The evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is an atheist hard to dislike. He’s charming, learned and intelligent, and never a bully. Ditto some ancients — here I rely on the ancient Athenian Taki and his epigrams — such as Socrates and his ilk. Also Voltaire and Mill, and so on. The first modern to go atheist and announce that God had had it was Nietzsche, who predictably went bonkers. Terrific shits like Freud and Picasso were atheists, as were French fries like Michel Foucault and Jacques Lacan, and our very own H.G. Wells. And James Joyce and Philip Roth. One thing all these talented writers and thinkers have in common, apart from their disbelief in the Almighty, is great physical ugliness. That alone should explain it.

The great 20th-century theologian Paul Tillich wrote that to believe that God is active at all times, being out there somewhere, dwelling in a special place and being affected by events, is a shallow supposition: ‘Literalism deprives God of his ultimacy.’ That’s where ‘there is no God’, the cry from the heart of those who have lost a loved one, comes from. Ditto the old saw that you need God in order to be good. God is what makes us understand the difference between good and evil, take it from Taki.

The ultimate irony, needless to say, is that Charles Darwin said he believed in God. Let’s face it: most intelligent people believe in God, as did most world leaders in the past. My uncle, a war hero in the Albanian campaign when we wiped out the Italians, once told me that he had never seen courage like that shown by priests and medical orderlies in the thick of battle. Unarmed and without helmets, they would give the last rites to the dying and tend to the wounded. While soldiers dived into their foxholes, they would go out in the open field and make the sign of the cross over the fallen. God, in most cases, protected them. Go figure, you non-believers.

This is my 38th Christmas column, and of course it seems like yesterday that I wrote the first one. It was in my father’s London office in Albemarle Street. I used clichés galore and didn’t mention God once, just Christmas parties. I have probably come full circle. When Thomas Jefferson wrote that ‘all men are created equal’ he called the proposition self-evident. It was a very Christian thing to say because not all men are created equal. They have equal rights under God, and it is only a Christian God that ensures the latter. Just look at what Islam is doing to its adherents, how it has cheapened life to the extent that people volunteer to blow themselves up in order to get some rice and some virgins, and compare that to Christianity. The idea of the preciousness and equal worth of every human being is largely rooted in Christianity. Have a very happy Christmas and defend our faith. And, if need be, carry a knife.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • JDale

    “This is my 38th Christmas column…”

    Have the other 37 been packed full of hatred and lies too?

    • King Kibbutz

      Hatred of what?

  • Marcus

    How does one write a few lines to summarize to all backgrounds and faith perspectives why one is so utterly convinced of God’s presence, and sense of purpose for our lives? For me it’s simple: I’ve never experienced greater love, which is bound only by my own limits to receive it.
    The mystery is wrapped up only in the simplicity of reaching out on your own, with nothing to lose and everything to gain. There’s no level of intellectualism that – in place of this approach – will answer questions that begin with existentiality (His and ours). If that doesn’t do it for you, go type “Near Death Experience” in YouTube. Allowing for exception, it won’t take too long to find consistency and too many stories of a u-turn from people who can gain little from lying about it, and would have to be world class actors to pull off the earnestness expressed, were it unreal. He loves you. Ignore the nutters in our faith (Christianity, like bureaucracies, revolutions, capitalism, and socialism, can bring out the worst in people – which serves to turn heads away), and find your own, if you want to. Nothing is more intensely invigorating and yet so utterly peaceful, and fulfilling. Enjoy it.

    • KevinWarren

      I was on deaths door once. Too much partying and too little personal attention. Anyways, in those moments when death was imminent, I was more acutely aware of the reality of an afterlife than I can ever begin to express. Sure, you may argue that it was simple chemical reactions or neurons firing but I swear to you, person to person, that I knew in that instant that there is more to this than the reality we see around us. Thinks of it like the Matrix if you will but we live our lives completely oblivious to a greater reality just out of reach.

      I’m grateful that I was allowed to continue. But I also find great comfort in knowing that one day, regardless of what consumes my earthly body, my soul will find a peace so complete and wonderful that human thought cannot begin to comprehend.

      This experience I share is not the basis of my faith. It simply reinforces it. My faith has always been strong. I’ve always known, in my heart that God exists. I can see His handiwork all around. Everything and everyone is wonderfully and purposefully made by a loving Creator. You and me and everybody that ever was or ever will be.

      • Christopher R Weiss

        Hitler? Stalin? Mass shooters? All wonderfully and purposefully made? Hmmmm……

        • KevinWarren

          Yes, and unfathomably tragic that they succumbed to the dark and evil forces around us.

          • Christopher R Weiss

            Since you believe your god created everything, this means he/she/it created the conditions under which dark forces could rise, resulting in “fallen brother and sisters.” The conclusions are inescapable.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            If an omniscient God exists, the future is preordained, and free will impossible. Everything that occurs HAS to occur. If you agree, God knew from the beginning of time that you would agree. You MUST agree. You have no choice. If on the other hand free will does exist, then God cannot know what you will decide to do with it. Hence, God cannot be omniscient.

          • Christopher R Weiss

            The argument actually extends further. To be perfect as so many Christians claim, a god would have to be all knowing, all powerful, and all good.

            A god cannot be all good and simultaneously omniscient as you point out because then free will is impossible and all evil is preordained.

            A god cannot be all good and all powerful or he could have created a universe where evil was impossible.

            Consequently, a god cannot be perfect as defined by so many Christians.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            True. Boethius tries to wriggle out of this one in the final pages of his ‘Consolation of Philosophy’. He fails, but his attempt to do so is quite amazing, and takes thought to the edge of what it is possible to comprehend.

          • Stephen Henry

            God does not have to create the best of all possible worlds. In a world containing created beings with free will, there is the possibility of evil; but with out that, where is the possibility of moral choice? God wants free people who choose to love.

          • Christopher R Weiss

            Did he make us or not? Did he make the world or not? Why create a world with so many natural disasters? How does free will cause all the unnecessary suffering and death in the world? The answer is quite simple – either your god is not perfect or it does not exist.

          • Stephen Henry

            Suffering is an evil but not an ultimate evil. As a Christian I believe in redemptive suffering.
            I don’t have a full answer to the problem of evil. However, in the Christian view there can be meaning in suffering; but how do you cope with suffering as an atheist?

          • Christopher R Weiss

            There is no meaning in suffering – it is just suffering. Most of it is random, unnecessary, and damaging. When Christianity arose in the Roman empire as another messianic cult, many people were drawn to it because it supposedly gave meaning to suffering. “This life is just a path to a better life…” For downtrodden people who were unable to resist their oppressors, it was very appealing.

            This life is all we have, and I try to make as positive as I can knowing my time is limited.

          • Stephen Henry

            I like your last clause.
            You assert that there is no meaning in suffering. I suffered in my 20’s through failure in my teaching career, and I believe this made me less of a prig, less self-righteous.
            Going back to the origins of Christianity, there is a real question – if Jesus’ resurrection did not happen, why didn’t the authorities produce Jesus’ body? And if it were a hoax, how is it that the perpetrators were prepared to be put to death in the AD 60’s?

          • Christopher R Weiss

            Why is the story of Jesus any more credible than the stories of the Homeric epics? Archaeologists found the site of ancient Troy, and they have records to validate many of the people, conflicts, etc. Homer wrote down oral histories just as the authors of the gospels did as well.

            No one who actually saw Jesus wrote any of the gospels. The authors were not eyewitnesses and some of the gospels were recorded decades after Jesus died. Is it more likely that the oral histories that became the gospels mixed with some historical fact are myths or that decades after Jesus died, people got the facts exactly right and the gospels are word for word true?

            If it were not for Paul, it is likely Christianity would have died out like so many other religions of the day. Read some mid to late Roman history, and you will read about many religions that came and went.

            There is a simple fact that is inescapable. As time has gone on the world has seen fewer and fewer miracles. Better education, better communication, and a healthy skepticism have allowed people to see through “spiritual events.” Going back to Harry Houdini and up to the “amazing Randi” people have shown that most stories of supposedly mystical events or happenings are simply false. While written in a polemic and deliberately insulting manner, the late Christopher Hitchens’ book “Missionary Position” exposed the modern Catholic Church’s fraudulent efforts to find miracle to justify the beatification of Mother Theresa.

            There is a reason why modern people see so few miracles – they aren’t fooled as often anymore.

          • Stephen Henry

            This has to be my final comment, as I’m pressed for time. I have to pass on Homer (& Hitchens) as unread by me. But the first three gospels were almost certainly written within living memory of Jesus’ death. Why would the authors bother, if they did not believe Jesus was risen from the dead, and couldn’t that have been disproved if he wasn’t?
            If this key miracle happened, then the subsequent miracle count matters much less. But for the record, claimed miracles at Lourdes are vetted by a panel of doctors including unbelievers. Over 60 have no human explanation and are regarded as miracles.

          • Christopher R Weiss

            Here is a nice article that summarizes issues around authorship:

            https://adversusapologetica.wordpress.com/2013/12/17/why-scholars-doubt-the-traditional-authors-of-the-gospels/

            Here is a discussion of Lourdes:

            http://skepdic.com/lourdes.html

          • Dr. Heath

            Good post. The reason that clairvoyants are not busy making millions on the stock market is the same reason that explains the absence of faith healers in oncology wards.

            Mencken, in his ‘Treatise on the Gods’, compiled a long list of names of forgotten deities. In their times, each would have had a fan club of deluded, gobby simpletons to argue for their favourite deity’s existence and to denounce unbelievers as unspeakably evil.

          • Woman In White

            If an omniscient God exists, the future is preordained, and free will impossible

            That was demonstrated as being a false proposal centuries ago.

            God’s omniscience is a consequence of His and our free actions, because He, unlike us, is not bound within time.

            He only knows in advance what our free choices are because from His point of view, we’ve already made them.

            (there have BTW been COUNTLESS episodes of Doctor Who on this very topic — it’s **hardly** limited to obscure mediaeval logic and philosophy)

            In a nutshell, the argument is false, because it tries to bind God within the rules of causality, thereby falsely supposing that the Creator must be bound by Creation as if He were a creature. The notion that the Creator is a creature is an intrinsically false proposal.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            God is unable to make 2+2=5, or to commit evil, or to be “bound by the rules of causality”, or to “be a creature”, or to be unaware, or to cause himself to vanish, or to make me believe in His existence.

          • Sanctimony

            Do you have an extremely large dung heap outside your back door ?

          • Woman In White

            It’s an intrinsic flaw to assume that your own faetid piles of faeces exist elsewhere than in your own corrupted mind, you ghastly stalker midget troll moronic anorak’d git.

          • Sanctimony

            Foetid or fetid are the correct spellings, I believe…. and to think that you could read and write at two-years old….

          • Woman In White

            Well done in the spontaneous demonstration of your own small-minded pettiness.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            God has a small and petty mind……

          • Sanctimony

            Good, well thought out answer….Alpha +

          • Woman In White

            Narcissist fool.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            That’s a real tongue-twister if ever I heard one!

          • Sanctimony

            Commas…. you frenzied lunatic !!!

          • Marvin

            Had a decent chat with any serpents recently? Don’t forget the apple.

          • Sanctimony

            My anorak is a Helly Hansen Men’s Odin orange high mountain jacket, available for £ 499.95 from most specialist mountaineering stores….

          • Zanderz

            I gave up trying to reason with online atheists, I’ve not come across a more closed minded and belligerent group of people. They’ll tell you black is white and say you’re the illogical one. It’s a fruitless exercise. My advice, knock the dust off your sandals and move on.

          • Giuseppe Cappa

            An old Chinese proverb says: do not try to teach philosophy to a pig; you would waste your time and annoy the pig.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I was just about to say that it is in her mind, not outside her back door, but have decided to refrain from doing so as it would be far too impolite….

          • Woman In White

            Unsurprised to see you closing ranks with the most deliberately obnoxious troll of these comboxes.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I am a loner. I never close ranks. Besides, you yourself are exhibiting trollish behavioural patterns…..

          • Woman In White

            Moany has been seeking out Catholics to troll for the past ten years and more.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Oh, I see……you are a Catholic. Well, all is explained.

          • Sanctimony

            I didn’t have a computer ten years ago…. idiot !

          • Woman In White

            Things really *did* use to be better back in the good old days.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            If everything I am to think , say and do on the 25th of February 2016 is already known to the Mind of the Creator of the Universe, then I have no choice in the matter. I MUST think, say and do it, as any apparent decisions I will make on that day are already known, and have always been known, since time began. There can be no true free will in a universe in which the future is preordained due to the foreknowledge of a Creator. I know you will disagree. You must. You have no choice. Do you disagree?

          • Woman In White

            That’s pure sophistry.

            Please demonstrate that God is subjected to causality.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            He may not be subject to causality, but I am. Hence my comment above– which, by the way, retains its validity and truth.

          • Woman In White

            No, you’re claiming that you lack Free Will because God is omniscient, which would require His omniscience to be absolutely subjected to causality.

            Please then demonstrate that God is subjected to causality.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I do NOT lack free will! However, if an omniscient God exists then I will be unable to use my free will. The cause of this inability to do so will be a God with foreknowledge of what I will do with it. He has known from the beginning of time that I would post these words, and that you would read them and disagree with them. Which would mean that we are not free.

          • Woman In White

            The circularity of your argument is sufficient to demonstrate its false logic.

            At the **very** least, even following your premises, God Himself must have Free Will — so if God is, then so is Free Will.

            Apart from that, I think you’ve just ignored the crux of my argument.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Belief in the existence of a Deity is also circular.

          • Woman In White

            erm, no, reality is not subjected to logic, circular nor otherwise

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Would this God of which you speak be able to choose NOT to have free will? Or is He just as subject to the rules of logic as we ourselves are? Are some things impossible to accomplish, even for God?

          • Woman In White

            You seem to be incapable of conceiving of God otherwise than in material terms, as if He were just another being within reality.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            How does one demonstrate that God Himself is not subject to causality?

          • Woman In White

            You’re the one claiming that a certain philosophical proposal is wrong.

            Your burden of proof, not mine.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I thought God was supposed to be ineffable, and far beyond the understanding of mere mortals. Yet the religious would appear to know a great about Him–His wants, needs, plans, desires, capabilities, purposes, likes, dislikes, and so on and so forth. How so?

          • Woman In White

            I thought God was supposed to be ineffable, and far beyond the understanding of mere mortals

            I’m not the one suggesting that His omniscience is inextricably linked with ordinary material causality so that human free will couldn’t exist simultaneously.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            To claim that a God exists and that this God is not subject to causality is itself sophistry.

          • Woman In White

            That is a false statement.

            I’m not the one claiming that generals are obedient to particulars.

          • hobspawn

            But God gave us the free will to pull the trigger. That is his greatest gift to us. The alternative would have been a majestically dull crystallised universe. Which is a greater universe: one where things can go wrong but we can choose right, or one where there is no right and wrong and nothing can ever change?

          • Christopher R Weiss

            Our choices are already limited. I cannot chose to float off the ground unassisted. I cannot exercise mental powers like telepathy or telekinesis. I cannot choose to be taller. It would seem there would be many ways that a god could restrict our choices to make life better while still giving us free will.

            Free will is not unrestricted. Why not direct it ways that makes life better?

        • freddiethegreat

          Genesis 3

          • Christopher R Weiss

            Great…. a collection of myths considered true because they say they’re true as well as having some historical connections. Since archaeologists found the site of ancient Troy, does that make the Homeric epics true?

      • Miss Floribunda Rose

        But do you WANT an afterlife to exist? If so, why? If you had a choice between an afterlife without a God, or a God but no afterlife, which would you choose?

      • Bonkim

        Not many believe in a soul – even the Bible talks of eternal darkness – not a soul searching to come back into another body.

      • Marvin

        If you lot believe so definitely of the existence of god and the beuties of the after life, why waste time on this horrible planet?

    • Miss Floribunda Rose

      But what if you’re wrong, eh?

    • GoJebus

      Prove it.

    • Marvin

      Not enough to go forth and find the truth. There is nothing there.

  • Wolfgang Amadeus

    Right, just what the world needs, more indulgence of superstition.

    • KevinWarren

      Let me ask you Wolfgang, in all earnestly, what do you replace God with? I mean, if God did not create everything, how did everything come into existence? Chance? Where does chance come from?

      • Christopher R Weiss

        The simple answer is that we don’t know. I am comfortable with uncertainty. Why do you have to indulge in myths and superstition?

        • KevinWarren

          Recognizing the presence of my Creator completes me and gives me hope for the future.

          But you didn’t answer my question. It’s not uncertain at all. Think it through. When you do, you’ll realize, like so many other brilliant minds, that there absolutely has to be a creator. The fact that we are communicating today is testament to it.

          Something can’t come from nothing.

          I’m sure you’ll flippantly reject God but I invite to to consider it. If I’m wrong, I end up in the same place/state as you. If I’m right, you have a terrible prices to pay for rejecting your creator.

          • James Morgan

            You are already complete! Ha. Why do people insist they are incompete and then have to find the most bizarre beliefs that they then say ‘complete’ them? Funyy things human beings. Fer sure.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            You are correct. To explain exactly why you are correct would take pages and pages and pages of closely argued reasoning…..I think I’ll have another pink gin instead. Cheers. (Alcohol always makes me feel ‘complete’.)

          • Orion Jones

            “If I’m wrong, I end up in the same place/state as you. If I’m right, you have a terrible price to pay for rejecting your creator.”

            Well, you started off trying to sounding quite reasonable and thoughtful, but it didn’t take long for you to descend to that well tried Christian intimidation tactic of eternal hell-fire and torture. Have you considered that even if there is a god (or gods) he/she/it/they might not care less whether people believed in him/her/it/them or not, and just wanted people to be good to each other, think rationally and critically for themselves, and not to unquestioningly accept any old superstitious nonsense they are fed. In that case you might be the one in trouble, and atheists safe.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            He wants salvation. But salvation from what? Salvation is not necessary. Besides which, a God cannot give salvation. An omniscient God, realising this, would disappear up its own fundament.

          • freddiethegreat

            Intimidation or warning? If someone warned you that your building was on fire or that there was a bomb, would you regard it as intimidation?

          • Orion Jones

            If there’s no fire or bomb, then yes, it most definitely is intimidation.

            And when Christians use the terror tactic of eternal hell-fire on children, it’s particularly sickening.

          • CockneyblokefromReading

            The brainwashing really starts at 4 years old, with the Nativity play. Very often, it’s not intended brainwashing, by nursery workers, but it sometimes is. Likewise, there are NO Muslim children, or Christian ones, or Jewish ones. They are not capable of reasoned thought on the subject of a deity. They are children of religious believers, not religious believers themselves.

          • Woman In White

            The brainwashing really starts at 4 years old, with the Nativity play

            Nativity plays have been pretty much banned by the Church (Catholic, that is, to provide unnecessary clarification to the slow of mind) since the 16th Century, and whilst the current Liturgy of the Midnight Mass has some historic links with the old Nativity Plays of Mediaeval times, neither is/was centred on 4-year-olds nor their brains.

            Likewise, there are NO Muslim children, or Christian ones, or Jewish ones. They are not capable of reasoned thought on the subject of a deity.

            You’re just parroting Dawkins.

            And can you even remember what it was like to actually BE a 4-year-old ? I can, though I realise that most people can’t, or more simply don’t.

            Nobody was “brainwashing” me. Not even my anticlerical dad nor my overly laconic mum. Not the useless playschool girl “teachers” who hadn’t a clue what to do with me. Nor any non-existent priests in my life at the time.

            When I was a 4-year-old I’d already known how to read and write for a year, and thinking that nearly everything written for kids under 7 was stupid. (the poetry of Bill and Ben was a major exception, as it captured the infans state of understanding more than one knows how to say with great pertinence)

            I began examining individuality when I was 4, the problem of death when I was 5, and for whatever strange reason, one of my Primary school teachers (a rather beautiful young one BTW) one day instructed our class in some basics of Apollonian/Dionysian dichotomy before I was 6 (I have *no idea* if anyone else in the Class understood it as I did, but I do remember that she put the case forward with intriguing elegance). One big reason why I remember that particular class so vividly (it was a beautiful sunny Spring day) is because I can distinctly remember being intrigued by her black & white notions, whilst simultaneously doubting and rejecting their validity as true “always”, as she claimed.

            Your “brainwashing” of 4-year-olds idea is just nonsense in my experience. Most children start to forget their infancy as they start to enter into puberty or pre-puberty — but the usual reason why most forget is because there’s little of interest worthy of remembrance in what most of even the best-meaning adults may say, as the child’s mind grows in experience and knowledge and understanding but without prejudice or belief or wisdom. But what people also forget is quite how sparklingly ALIVE the mind is at that age, how slow the adults seem, and how ponderous and complicated their ideas, how abstract anything except the most primary perception of what concerns us and our learning experiences at the most basic and primary level that no brainwashing could ever hope to reach — because quite simply, brainwashing is a technique that can only ever work on a less intrinsically inquisitive mind than that of an infant.

            Brainwashers never seek to indoctrinate a 4-year-old … they start with 9-10 year olds and older.

            Meanwhile sorry, but there are FAR too many cases of even VERY young children having an independently strong Faith (I didn’t myself) to accept the validity of your ideological statement.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I can remember when I was two. I lived in Dinas Powis in South Wales from the age of two years and five months to the age of three years and one month, and all of my earliest memories, of which there are hundreds, are of this particular place. I can also remember making a few simple moral choices at this period.

          • Sanctimony

            In the hope and belief that you are taking the Michael, your response is quite brilliant and apposite…. This lunatic banshee is seriously deranged and self-obsessed…

          • Woman In White

            I can remember when I was one. South Wales was better than West.

            Thanks anyway for reinforcing my point in this matter.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I once wouldn’t have thought it possible for a person to remember events which happened when they were one year old. However, my brother also lived in Dinas Powis, until the age of one year and eleven months old; and he told me a few years ago of a particular event which occurred there which I myself had completely forgotten, but which immediately came back to me. So now I do believe that memories can be retained from such an early age. I have the evidence for it.

          • Woman In White

            There are some extremely rare cases of people remembering their own birth.

          • Sanctimony

            I bet that in your case, your parents wished that they could forget your own….

          • Woman In White

            You are a genuinely despicable moron, Moany.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I suspected that you would say this…..Ah well, at least YOU don’t claim to remember yours. (I wonder if the Lord remembered his?)

          • Sanctimony

            I can remember that when I had been six months in my mother’s womb I received a visit from Euclid, Pythagoras and Archimedes who gave a discourse on higher mathematics and upon which I based my profound knowledge of the subject… six weeks later, as I was preparing for my emergence into the world I had a yet another visit from Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, who tuned up my skills in the field of philosophy or the theory of knowledge….

            Following my birth, my godfathers, Bertrand Russell, Albert Schweitzer and Jean-Paul Sartre gave me valuable lessons in the art of spotting a b……..er , fraud and pseud and I believe this was the most valuable advice that I ever received…

            Sadly, unlike your good self, I have never received any divine interventions to banish my agnosticism and restore my faith… but I live in hope…Did the beings who visited you have harps and wings… or were they from the other place and equipped with horns and tridents ?

          • Woman In White

            As stated already multiple times, Moany, you are an anorak’d troll seeming to lack even basic rational independence from the indoctrinated word-stew that you confuse with intelligence.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            According to Islam it will be YOU who will be in
            H
            E
            L
            L
            (The H word causes moderation to occur. Titter!)

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            The religious have wasted their lives. The revenge of the angry atheist is guaranteed, should he or she feel the need for it…..

          • Woman In White

            The revenge of the angry atheist

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiqZaFkpH9E

          • Wolfgang Amadeus

            “Believe or else” … compelling and rich.

          • Christopher R Weiss

            The void is the need to connect. If you invested a fraction of what you describe into the life around you, including your friends, family, job, etc., there would be no void. Purpose is built by doing things, and not “believing in a creator.” I live a very fulfilling life without having to invent outside beings to worship.

            With respect to “paying the price,” how do you know your version of worship is the right one? There are thousands of groups claiming just to be Christian, and they can’t all be right. Some of the differences are dramatic. How do you know that your interpretation of faith is correct and you won’t “pay a terrible price” if you are mistaken?

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Purpose is also built by knowing things, not just by doing things. Besides which, why should a sense of purpose be necessary? I do everything entirely for its own sake. I have no need of a sense of purpose.

          • Christopher R Weiss

            Purpose by its very meaning implies doing. “Knowing” for the the faithful means what they believe based on unsubstantiated claims from the bible or derivations of religious tenets.

            If you doing something for its own sake, you are identifying your purpose – for its own sake.

            My point, which I don’t see you disagreeing with, is that faith in supreme beings is not necessary to find purpose, to connect with people, and to enjoy what you do.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Why do you need hope? Why does uncertainty and doubt disturb you? Why does your void need filling?

      • Wolfgang Amadeus

        I see no need to “replace” God with anything. We are merely ignorant of what happened “in the beginning” (assuming there was one).

        Ignorance is simply ignorance – until you rectify it with knowledge or evidence, there’s no need to create a story to “fill it”.

        And even assuming there was (and is) a Creator, why should I be compelled to worship it? What sort of being would it be, if it required worship? An all-too-human one, in my opinion. I made a mighty fine omelette this morning … I certainly did not expect it to worship me.

        • KevinWarren

          Thanks for the response Wolfgang.

          If I may, I would argue that uou didn’t make an omelet, you assembled one. All of the matter and energy used was made by our Creator. And that’s the thing. He created all that is from nothing. He holds it all together by His mere will. It’s not that he wants to be worshiped so much as it’s us that should be in awe of Him.

          I mean, why would you not be in awe of a being that is not constrained by time, energy or matter. A being so powerful He simply spoke and everything that was, is, or will be simply became.

          And yet as all powerful as He is, He also made you and desires a personal relationship with you. How wonderful is that?

          I don’t expect to change your mind but I do hope I’ve given you something to think on if only for a moment. Peace.

          • CockneyblokefromReading

            How do you know, Kevin, how do you know? The point is, you don’t. Man created god, not the other way around. I appreciate how your god makes you ‘feel’, Kevin. But some of us would rather look at life as we see it, not in some fabricated way that has no basis whatsoever in ANY evidence. The problem with your stance, is that you will always wonder who or what created your god. You would be in an ever-decreasing circle there.

          • freddiethegreat

            There’s no way I could dream up the God I know.

          • CockneyblokefromReading

            But you’ve done exactly that!

          • freddiethegreat

            Nope. He keeps surprising me

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            In what way?

          • Woman In White

            Surprise requires a manner of open mind that you appear to lack, Anti Flori.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I am surprised at the frequent vehemence of your comments. You seem to entirely lack a sense of humour. Still, perhaps this is only to be expected…..

          • Woman In White

            Your comments exhibit evidence of sockpuppetry, so I’m somewhat doubtful of your claim of “surprise”.

            May I point out anyway that your claims of “I am surprised” and “this is only to be expected” are intrinsically demonstrative of hypocritical dishonesty on your part, given their blatant & direct self-contradiction ?

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Humour. Lack of. I rest my case. This matter is now closed.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Don’t let the others know, but I’m not really a bird. I’m a bloke. At least, I probably am. It’s so difficult to tell nowadays, isn’t it?

          • Woman In White

            It may surprise you to learn that I’m neither Carrie Fisher, nor the Holy Virgin, nor a Space Gangster giant slug, nor a black-garbed Jedi Knight nor Mark Hamill — but my point stands that your comments exhibit evidence of sockpuppetry. You simply confirm it.

          • Sanctimony

            At last you said something true… you are certainly not the Holy Virgin ….

          • Woman In White

            You however are most certainly a ghastly internet troll.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Aw shucks, it’s nothin’…..

          • Cyril Sneer

            I think for religious folk it’s more a susceptibility for bullsh t.

          • SunnyD

            As a catholic born and bred person (I had no say in the matter, being just a few months old at the time of baptism) and out through catholic primary, secondary and sixth form schools, I was fortunate enough to take the question of god seriously enough to one day ask my mum why I have to go to church on sundays. You don’t, she replied, but when I baptised you, I promised to bring you up in the catholic faith, which means sending you to church on sundays (my mum was CofE) – however, now you’re old enough to question it, it is entirely up to you if you want to go. Needless to say I stopped going on sundays (although I still had to endure mass with my school). Around the same time, my mum (who I now realised was no more a churchgoer/believer than I was) also planted a lovely thought in my head: ‘ask yourself this Dave’ she said ‘What sounds more probable? Did man make God? or did God make man? I asked myself that question over and over and over until the answer became glaringly (and dare I say ashamedly?) obvious…. I always read these theological posts with great interest – especially liking the varying responses and petty squabbling and your post reminded me of what my mum told me, something which I’m eternally grateful for as it brought me out of the clutches of the “who is god? where is god?” questions that gripped me in early adolescence.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            It isn’t possible for an omnipotent, omniscient being to exist. That goes without saying. Such a being cannot be.

          • freddiethegreat

            And you, of course, know that as fact.

          • CockneyblokefromReading

            Freddie, what we do, is to take things as being possible if they have some sort of evidence. Some things are even probable, not just possible. What Miss Floribunda Rose does is to state that such a thing is so unlikely, that we can state it isn’t possible. I admit some have a problem with this, and say that we should state that it isn’t probable, rather than say it isn’t possible. But there’s such a thing as Russell’s Teapot (Google it), that states if something is so unlikely, and an omnipotent, omniscient being is so unlikely (as she says), then we can state that it is impossible, that it is so ridiculous as to be not worthy of consideration, and impossible. I therefore can state that it is impossible for a teapot to be currently orbiting the Sun. ‘Just because you can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t there’ is a false argument. If you, Freddie, state that it is possible that there is indeed a teapot currently orbiting the Sun, then you might as well believe anything at all, with absolutely no evidence to support it – and you thus lay yourself open to any and every possible belief – which is an absurdity.

          • Woman In White

            Russell’s Teapot

            cripes, the tedious clichés keep rolling up …

            Might be worth making a Kickstarter project and put one there, just to rid everyone of at least one of these irrelevant atheist inanities …

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Belief in the existence of a Deity is the biggest cliché of them all.

          • freddiethegreat

            Exactly. But as I asked someone above, do you have a mother? How would I know? I know nothing of her. You must have, since you exist (unless you are a ‘bot), but how would I know anything about her? And, of course you could simply be a clone. The personal knowledge makes the difference.

          • Woman In White

            of course you could simply be a clone

            To clarify, mammalian cloning requires a mother.

            It’s one among several reasons BTW why perfect recreation of existing individuals in every detail is a technical impossibility.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            This is an absurd argument. The sun will rise tomorrow. 2+2=4. There are trees in china. There are bacteria on your keyboard. All dogs bark. Stars are hot. There are zillions of things we can be certain of. Personal knowledge of all things is unnecessary.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            It’s a question of logic. It has nothing to do with me.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            It isn’t possible to “hold things together” by an act of will. Besides which, nothing needs to be “held together”. The universe is complete at any given moment in time, and functions according to its own rules. No God is necessary for this.

          • Woman In White

            It isn’t possible to “hold things together” by an act of will

            You can doubtless demonstrate the validity of this claim by means of laboratory evidence, published theory, and exhaustive peer review ?

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I worked it all out by myself whilst eating a bowl of sugar puffs earlier on this morning. It seems to me to be correct. I am arrogant enough to trust the products of my own reasoning, as I have a tendency to use logic.

          • KevinWarren

            Can you prove the theory that there is no God? No, of course you can’t,

          • KevinWarren

            You must be the smartest person to have ever lived. That or the most arrogant.

            Science has yet to prove or disprove the existence of God. So that makes your claims that there isn’t a creator as fanciful as you claim that mine are. Your belief that there isn’t a God is faith, just as mine is that there is.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            I have no faith, in anything.

          • KevinWarren

            Then you have faith in nothing which is something.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Erm…….

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Science has not yet proved that the Yeti, dragons and fairies do not exist. The existence of Allah is just as impossible as these. Whilst the existence of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) is unprovable, though likely, the existence of Allah is so unlikely that His non-existence should, for all intents and purposes, be taken as certain. But even if Allah does exist, so what? The existence of a God cannot confer absolute meaning, value, and ultimate purpose on the universe. How could it? A God is not necessary.

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            “……………..”

          • Jethro Asquith

            Why would science need to prove or disprove god any more than it needs to prove or disprove Father Christmas. If you believe such a thing exists YOU need to provide proof. Until then it is a figment of your imagination.

          • Woman In White

            Well, if science doesn’t “need to prove or disprove god“, why then in your very next sentence do you demand that scientific proof be provided ?

            This sort of double standard is endemic to the idiotic arguments of tedious online militant atheism, which are as foreign to science as they are to religious spirituality.

          • Cyril Sneer

            Do you not agree that it is much easier to prove something exists provided it does exist than to prove the non-existence of something.

            Your response was essentially a huge cop out.

            The deal is this, you can’t prove that any god exists, if you could you would.

            Neither can you prove that Father Christmas does not exist but you don’t believe he exists and you need no proof of his non-existence to have this belief.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Sure, the Atheist cannot disprove the existence of God, but it does seem desperately unlikely.

          • Cyril Sneer

            Science doesn’t have to do either, it’s religion that has to prove there is god, the onus is on religion as it is religion that is claiming some few hundred different gods have existed since the dawn of humanity.

          • Cyril Sneer

            You see this is why I don’t do religion, the level of delusion is really quite scary.

        • Woman In White

          Ignorance is simply ignorance – until you rectify it with knowledge or evidence, there’s no need to create a story to “fill it”.

          A more reasonable agnostic attitude than the evangelical atheist rubbish that gets tossed around so frequently in here.

          It’s true — only knowledge, evidence, or experience can convince any agnostic, but that’s because agnosticism absolutely requires enough of an open mind to accept the truth of any of the three when they may be encountered.

          Atheist radicalism is OTOH entrenched in the belief that anything contrary to the core dogmas of atheism must be false.

          • freddiethegreat

            Thanks – very good (btw what is OTOH?)

          • Woman In White

            Save yourself some trouble and look up the basic internet-speak acronyms for future use — in this case, On The Other Hand

          • freddiethegreat

            Ah! There’s me trying “over the ..” variations!

          • Sanctimony

            This BFD is in desperate need of a BOB and she needs to brace and BOHICA !

      • James Morgan

        So you think God created everything? Ok – well who or what created God? You don’t solve anything by thinking like you do. Read some of the latest Physics – the question is not how did something come from nothing – that assumes the universe is material. Which it is not. They’ve been looking for matter since time began – the scientists I mean – and they still can’t find any. All they find when they really look – though only a few will admit it – is consciousness. Therein lies a whole new conversation.

        • CockneyblokefromReading

          Indeed, so many believers would find physics enthralling. I can see why it might make some even more spiritual, rather than less, but you have to look deeper. The many-universes ideas are absolutely fascinating, and I now find it almost impossible (almost) to believe that this is the only universe. But we don’t know.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Astrophysics and organized religion are not just incompatible, they are irreconcilable.

          • Woman In White

            ????!!!???!!?

            Have you been confusing the Bible with your Astrophysics for Dummies book again ?

            Anyway, Father Copernicus, Catholic Priest, and Father Georges Lemaître, Catholic Priest, would be very unlikely to agree with this preposterously false claim of yours …

        • Miss Floribunda Rose

          The only way that the universe can become (unintentionally) aware of itself is through the minds of complex living entities?

        • Woman In White

          So you think that deliberately choosing make-believe pseudoscience as the core of your beliefs is the solution ? LOL

          the question is not how did something come from nothing

          Nope — it’s “why is there something rather than nothing ?”

          Or, as I like to paraphrase it, what is the origin of causality ?

          The “how” question is typically answered by “the Big Bang”.

          that assumes the universe is material

          Nope. Your consciousness is “something” too …

          • Chris Hall

            What caused the BB is a question that relies on the fact that there was a “before the BB”, time is part of this universe, there was no before.

            Also, the entire energy content of our universe is theorised to be exactly zero, the energy that makes up everything we can see and the dark matter we can’t is exactly counteracted by the gravitational energy pulling it all back together again. As Lawrence Krass said the universe is the ultimate free lunch.

            I don’t pretend to understand how it all came about, and I am quite happy to say I don’t know. I’m not happy to say “I don’t know, therefore God”, that’s just sloppy thinking.

          • Woman In White

            As Lawrence Krass said the universe is the ultimate free lunch

            That’s “sloppy thinking”.

            Nothing = nor force, no matter, no energy, no time, no space, no dimension, nothing to cause the consequence of everything, let alone something.

            Not even zero. The zero-sum proposal assumes that zero exists. Zero is “something”.

            I don’t pretend to understand how it all came about, and I am quite happy to say I don’t know

            Then you share at least one notion with orthodox Christian cosmology — anyone who pretends to know God is either wrong or lying, just as we can’t pretend to understand “how” nothing became something.

            Possibly you don’t fully understand that the Christian belief that God created the Universe is a consequence of Faith in Him, not its prerequisite nor its pre-condition.

            The question of the cosmic origins is in other words fundamentally separate to the question of Faith.

            Ordinary people are not generally mad or stupid — sure, there are some of them who believe in the Christian religion for some basically conventional or social reasons, which are BTW perfectly good on their own merits ; fundamentally though, ordinary, reasonable people are only going to believe on the basis of some knowledge or evidence, whatsoever that evidence and the nature of that evidence may be.

            And evidence is not restricted in its nature solely to the data that is provided by laboratory experimentation. If it were, we’d never have entered even the stone age.

            “I don’t know, therefore God” is just as sloppy as “I don’t know, therefore no God”.

            The Christian says “I know God through Faith, and if there is God, therefore He is the Creator” — Aquinas and others present a more detailed argument, but essentially that’s the core of it.

          • Chris Hall

            As Lawrence Krass said the universe is the ultimate free lunch

            That’s “sloppy thinking”.

            And you know this from all your years of studying theoretical physics, or because it contradicts your preconceived notions about the the existence of your god?

            Possibly you don’t fully understand that the Christian belief that God created the Universe is a consequence of Faith in Him, not its prerequisite nor its pre-condition.

            So you believe in God and that means that you believe that God created the universe? I’m pretty sure that’s not right; most arguments for the existence of God seem to be ‘I can’t believe X could happen without divine intervention, as X has happened the specific god I believe in must exist”. One of those X’s is a existence of the universe.

            “I don’t know, therefore God” is just as sloppy as “I don’t know, therefore no God”

            I didn’t say there are no gods; I just find the evidence presented to be unconvincing and until that changes I’m not going to be able to believe. Not that I wilfully choose not to believe, but I am totally unable to, my mind simply won’t allow me to believe unlikely things without strong evidence. As I said, I quite content to say “I don’t know”.

          • Woman In White

            And you know this from all your years of studying theoretical physics, or because it contradicts your preconceived notions about the the existence of your god?

            Because it’s the expression of some kind of philosophical absolute (I mean, in your own understanding), instead of being an actually relevant contribution to the question of the universals and the question of the cosmic origins.

            Zero-sum simply posits existence as a constant. It posits the formulation of the problem as its answer. And that’s intellectually dishonest.

      • Cyril Sneer

        So as you don’t know you invent an invisible being and call him ‘god’.

        The answer is we don’t know, the answer has always been we don’t know, this may not always be the answer though as we become more understanding of the universe around us.

  • Hitchens did actually attack Islam – just not as much as Christianity. HG Wells believed in God, but not in a conventional sense. An excellent article!

    • edithgrove

      is it an attack? twenty minutes in it feels more like wading through flood water

  • CockneyblokefromReading

    You show yourself to be a very poor writer. You are supposed to appeal to a broad readership, are you not? I have no idea what le goût du jour means. A sign of your extremely poor research is shown in your comments about Christopher Hitchens. Far from shy away from talking about Islam, he banged on about how absurd it is. Just ‘youtube’ it to see! You don’t even have to write ‘Hitchens Islam’. Just write ‘Hitchens’. But here is a pointer so that you may, in future, not make such a silly mistake:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCHHfBeu0QE
    Of course, your level of intelligence doesn’t allow you to be rational or logical, and I understand that. I presume you will be watching out of your window for Santa Claus to fly over your chimney in a couple of weeks.

    ALL religion is irrelevant, it is for people who seek a comforting explanation, and not the truth. It is for those that cannot bear the thought that this is all there is, and that there must be, surely, a theme park in the sky (Hitchens). If we are to progress at all, then we must shake of belief in ALL superstitions, in all their forms, and face truth. I can’t see that happening for at least a hundred years, I’m sad to say, while we are saddled with people in power who are well educated and knowledgeable, but not intelligent.

    • anka

      this link is also good – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tN75e5gtw4
      “I think all religions are wrong… but they’re not equally bad in the same time. If I would be writing in 1930, i would have said that roman-catholic church is the most dangerous religion, but at the moment is very clear to me that the most toxic form that religion takes is the Islamic form.”

      • patrickirish

        Worth looking at! Thanks for the link.

      • CockneyblokefromReading

        Yes, I think I’ve seen just about everything from Christopher on youtube. I never got to see him speak live, unfortunately. I have attended Dawkins’ lectures, but Hitchens was always in the US. What I really liked about him was his unapologetic, nothing held back, view of the religious and religion. We shouldn’t suffer such fools – you can see them here. Science offers such incredible wonders about the universe/s and I am always amazed at why people want to absorb a puerile idea of a Christian/Jewish/Islamic god in comparison. They all pale into total insignificance against science’s latest offerings on what may be. I could accept religious belief if it didn’t impact my life, but it does, or rather, they do. Not only is it holding us back, it threatens our very future existence. Hitchens was a shining light in a dark smog of total stupidity and gullibility. He is sorely missed.

        • anka

          Yes, he was one of my heroes. I often wonder what he would say or write. I miss his wit, especially nowadays. It was always a intellectual delight reading him, even when I did not agree with his point of view. Such an brilliant writer and thinker.I also love his other works. Mortality is one of my fav book ever.

  • edithgrove

    Thank you Taki. I shall return to read your Christmas column again during the next couple of weeks.

    • Chris Hall

      It won’t have improved

  • James Morgan

    Hitchens said nothing about Islam? Huh? And Dawkins is never a bully? Huh? Me thinks somebody ought to fact check such ideas.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Christopher or Peter?
      Chalk and cheese old fellow.

      • EUSSR 4 All!

        You might had a point if Christopher strictly stuck to arguing against Religion generally and not meddled in politics generally, but he didn’t, did he?!

        The Hitchens brothers are out of your class … and you are still some ex-scally from some estate in Billingham in North Teesside, Andy! Stop talking out of your hat!

    • EUSSR 4 All!

      What Christopher Hitchens said about “Islamic fascism” was an absolute SWP-ish, Guardianesque nonsense!

      You can’t deal with the more problematic aspects of Islam in a purely atheist or atheistic perspective! It just wouldn’t work! The Soviet Union made a right Hollicks out of appeasing the Muslim nationalities on the expense of the nominally-Orthodox Slavic majority! And neither do the Chinese really know how to deal with a few of their own Muslim groups within China, come to think!

    • EUSSR 4 All!

      P.S.: And Dawkins has no real solution on how to defeat ISIS (if at all, other than a general rant against Islam, THREE YEARS AGO!), other than essentially saying “Wouldn’t be the World be a better place without Religion?!” The man is not a true atheist. He is best described as an anti-Christian activist. If anything, he probably privately relishes the attempted extermination of the Yezidis and the Christians from the Middle East! What a bit of a pseudo-intellectual charlatan and also a coward he really is!

      • CockneyblokefromReading

        Who’s your dealer?

        • EUSSR 4 All!

          Can you explain why the NSS have virtually nowt, nothing to say about any other religion other than just Christianity and faith schools in England (which just happen to be mostly Christian schools)? When did you last hear them moaning about (on the radio) Kosher and Halal slaughter?! Ah, that’s right … that “waycist”! Sort of proving my point, doesn’t it?!

  • Sanctimony

    Nietzsche is rumoured to have died of syphilis and Joyce was tortured and tormented by the Jesuits, so both might have had an angle on their disrespect for convention and the establishment… and why does Taki always equate the intellect with physical appearances… he, himself, has a sort of Levantine, saturnine and simian appearance which many members of the Aryan supremacists of the Third Reich might have found a bit dodgy….

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Going through the motions to support a belief system you know is BS just because it’s a bulwark against encroaching Islamisation; now that’s what I call hypocrisy.
    What indepeñdent thinker could possibly buy into Jewish Book of Fairy Stories fiction hook, line and rapture?

    • Woman In White

      Going through the motions to support a belief system you know is BS just because it’s a bulwark against encroaching Islamisation; now that’s what I call hypocrisy.

      Well done for demonstrating the intrinsic flaw of militant evangelical atheism.

      • Miss Floribunda Rose

        True. Better to endure the hypocrisy of the fake religion of Christianity than to suffer under the fake religion of Islam. Christianity will act as a bulwark against it. I want Christians to be just as fanatical as Muslims, at least for a while.

        • Lagos1

          The religious, basing their existence on utter nonsense, have entirely wasted their lives. Good.

          That would imply a purpose to things. And if there really is a purpose to things, then maybe the religious are on to something..

          • Miss Floribunda Rose

            Well, they certainly give the impression of being ‘on’ something or other……Their beliefs make them ‘high’. They are high on religion. Personally, I prefer pink gin.

          • Mary Ann

            Well, religion is certainly a good way of controlling most people, but it’s not a moral use of it, it is playing to people’s need for a prop to lean on.

          • Woman In White

            You seem to be confusing materialist egotistic hedonism for religion.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            For the weak-minded that can’t handle mortality.

          • jeremy Morfey

            Seems a pity to go 60 years accumulating all this stuff, only to have the lot thrown into a skip as soon as I’m brown bread. What was the point of me being here?

          • Cyril Sneer

            “What was the point of me being here?”

            Why does there have to be a point?

          • Lagos1

            Actually I was commenting on the irony of an atheist talking about “wasting” a life as though there was some objective purpose to it.

            As for “moral use of it” in the context of control (about which I didn`t make reference to by the way), well, this is almost as ironic. Are you telling me that there is an absolute morality out there that makes it wrong? Or are you just giving me your subjective opinion of what is moral and what isn`t?

          • Woman In White

            Actually I was commenting on the irony of an atheist talking about “wasting” a life as though there was some objective purpose to it.

            Well said !!

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          Nice neutral Buddhist country, anyone?
          Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

      • Giuseppe Cappa

        Militant atheists target Christianity because they know Jesus is real and alive, and they hate Him because they love sin too much.

        • Mary Ann

          Oh dear, as my son once put it after an RE lesson at school, the problem with Christianity is that he was expected to believe in it. He was quite happy to learn about all the other religions, the comparison between them can be interesting.

        • CockneyblokefromReading

          No, they (we) target Christianity, Judaism and Islam because they are all absurd nonsense. Puerile, worthless and irrelevant, religion serves no useful purpose apart from keeping some deranged people in check.

          • Woman In White

            … whereas other deranged people are encouraged by atheism to go out and be as puerile, worthless and irrelevant as they jolly well like ?

          • Joey Feliney

            How can athiests be

            puerile, worthless and irrelevant?

            these are the ones inventign most of the products and science and engineerign and social development we see all around withtou the sexist homophobis sexaully histrically repressive witch b urning terorist bombing nonsense we see from the relgious

          • freddiethegreat

            Oh, what complete bollocks! Do you never do any research at all?

          • Woman In White

            Your spelling is honest testimony to the intellectual quality of such atheism as yours.

          • Cyril Sneer

            He could be dyslexic or any number of reasons. His spelling has no bearing on his Atheism.

          • Cyril Sneer

            Atheism doesn’t encourage anything but freedom from religion.

        • Joey Feliney

          No Jeus is long dead, was just a political activist of his day like Mertin Luther King, Gandi crossed with a cult leader and maybe somoen with scitzophrenia.

          And he startted and his followers continued and got more to form a very evil what you term sinful death cult of murder, sexsim, troture, homophobia, sexaul repression that held back science civilisation and medicine a good 1000 years, with anti birth control and girl bashing attiues following a pro rape and murder terrorist manula called the bible..

          • Woman In White

            With that much froth at the mouth, perhaps you should contact your GP for a rabies test !!!

        • Cyril Sneer

          So you’re essentially just like ISIS. As Atheists do not believe in your invisible sky god then we must be sinners, think infidels.

          It’s essentially the same thing.

          Religion does that, it divides on a superficial identity and in worse cases it regards those non-believers as essentially sub-human.

          • Giuseppe Cappa

            You seem to have no idea about what Christianity is. I suggest you put your rancorous feelings aside and see, for instance, [Mt 22:39] (“Love your neighbour as yourself”) or [Gal 3:28] (“There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus”), as well as the Catechism:
            http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P6O.HTM
            God loves you, and Christians do as well.
            Blessings

      • Mary Ann

        Better to argue that Abraham was wrong as there are no gods. Rather spoil it for Daesh if only we can convince them.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        Wouldn’t “anti-theist” be mor appropriate?
        More than simply not believing in any kind of God, but actually being glad that no such deity exists.

        • Woman In White

          Your weird permutations of words including the letters t, h, e, i, s, & t are of little real concern.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            I-pad. All I can get functioning in this hardship posting.
            Jack, Penang

          • EUSSR 4 All!

            And who likes to hear the moaning from a whinging Expat poor man, British or otherwise?! Why don’t you just take a hint?!

      • Joey Feliney

        Athiesim has morals based on fairness and equality. And no irrational nonsens eleadign to sexim witc burnign, suicide bombing, genital mutilation etc

    • voidist

      on the other hand a good work on zen would help..no doubt

  • Patrick Roy

    God Bless You, Taki.

    • whatever name

      Hopefully the representatives of God will stop raping the little boys.

      • Patrick Roy

        Yes. A total disgrace and why I insist my grandson go to a mixed private school.

  • ConcernedCitizen15

    Don’t you ever feel stupid believing in an invisible, imaginary sky-friend? Imaginary friends are best left to young children.

    • freddiethegreat

      Nothing imaginary. Question: Does / did your mother exist?

      • Joey Feliney

        We can test the mother thing on mythbusters… firat we can do a heat camera test, then a weight test then an organic matter test, dna test, x ray test etc.

        now apply to your non existant god… same tests

        • freddiethegreat

          I’m not nearby. So in fact, ALL I have to go in is your say-so – although with current technology, you could be a clone of course. No doubt you have a relationship with your mother, know her character and so on – and have 2 way communication. BUT – as an outsider, all I have is your assurance. (Plus, what would we have done prior to these tests being available?)

        • Woman In White

          It’s unusual to see such a pure category error.

          freddiethegreat is making a good point about the nature of evidence being intrinsically identical to that of a witness report — of whatever form — in contrast to your more direct experience of your mother.

          But you’ve somewhat unsurprisingly completely missed his point

          As for laboratory testing, any hypothesis requires verifiability, falsifiability, and an object to test

          So to start with, as you seem to think that God should be subjectible to lab testing, please then can you first of all demonstrate that God must necessarily either be an object inside material reality, or be non-existent ?

        • jeremy Morfey

          Done that, according to my definition of God (see above). Passed all the tests with flying colours.

    • Woman In White

      I dunno — you’re the kind who keep ranting on about sky-friends, pixies, spaghetti monsters and whatnot.

      Don’t you ever feel stupid typing out that sort of adolescent crap ?

    • jeremy Morfey

      When I was studying mathematics for A Level, we came up with the curious phenomenom of the square root of -1. It cannot exist, since all numbers squared, positive or negative, give a positive number. It is called an “imaginary number”.

      Square the imaginary beast though, and it springs back to life and very much exists.

  • freddiethegreat

    Thank you

  • Fasdunkle

    “The Hitch had very little to say against Allah”

    Seriously?

    • voidist

      well his main beef WAS with islam ….but he was too coward to really go for it like Trump…

      so he dragged christians into it as well……he was really a coward

      • CockneyblokefromReading

        Hitch, a coward? Jesus, you really have no idea what you are talking about, do you? It must be great being you, drifting along, ignorant in extremis.

  • Fasdunkle

    “God, in most cases, protected them”

    But didn’t protect the soldiers. That’s nice

    • Possibly in any case it wasn’t God protecting them but the common decency and humanity of the ordinary German soldier.

  • quotes

    “The Hitch had very little to say against Allah”

    I stopped reading there. Whatever the merits of your argument, this reveals that you didn’t do even cursory research before denigrating arguably the greatest man of letters of the post-war Western world.

    God Is Not Great, for Christ’s sake. Where do you think he got that idea?

    • Woman In White

      arguably the greatest man of letters of the post-war Western world

      What an utterly ludicrous claim.

      Are Jorge Luis Borges, Albert Camus, Virginia Woolf, Graham Greene, JRR Tolkien, Anthony Burgess, Lawrence Durrell, Italo Calvino, Umberto Eco, Gore Vidal, Georges Pérec, Joan Rowling mere footnotes to the absoluteness of your atheist worship of ideological “greatness” ?

      • Sanctimony

        Some great name-dropping there… presumably to bolster your claim, hereunder, to being able to read and write by the age of three …. You are one extremely sad individual… and a perfect cross of Private Eye’s Doris bonkers and Deirdre Spart….

        • Woman In White

          cripes you’re an idiot

          • Sanctimony

            An extremely profound declaration from a Walter Mitty in extremis… Why did you follow me to Taki’s blog… I’ve never seen you here before…. better get the exorcists in….

          • Woman In White

            Why did you follow me

            You are a moronic navel-gazing senescent drooling fool who imagines that the sort of decrepit trolling that you engage in might somehow be “normal” behaviour.

            The gross dejection that you provide, in your activity of hateful stalking madness, does not magically appear in any locations prior to my comments on this or that.

            The monomaniac gittery, hatred, trollery, unintelligence, and bile that you provide for your own selfish & grotesquely ill-witted purposes is abject in its sheer stupidity.

          • Sanctimony

            A seriously level-headed and rational response… and yet you failed to answer a simple question; why did you follow me to Taki’s column… you have not been here before ?

          • Woman In White

            Why did you follow me to Taki’s column

            Egocentric narcissist delusion in a nutshell.

          • Sanctimony

            Pulitzer Prize, anybody …. ?

      • voidist

        for some , hyperbole is Food of fancy

  • TrippingDwarves

    You’re not lost, old boy. Whilst you still live and breathe, there is still time…

  • Is God protecting the Christians in Iraq today? Go figure, you believers.

  • Christianity is going to save us from Islam?

    Why is it then that the bishops have been urging us to take more migrants from Muslim countries?
    Why was an archbishop not so long ago suggesting that Sharia law should be incorporated into our legal system?
    Why was a bishop welcoming the Muezzin’s call to prayer in his diocese (no doubt not in earshot of his own home I suspect)?
    Why do the bishops constantly object to any welfare reforms?

    • Mary Ann

      Because they believe in the teachings of Jesus for tolerance and charity?

      • Utopians will be the death of democracy and western nations.

    • Joey Feliney

      Christianity is just watered down islam, look up the bible and beleifs of buku harma and the taliban and isil, there is no difference others than christianity out of africa is not as poerful. its still sexist homophobic, fantical with big problems with birth control, female sexaulity iand independance

      • No, the two religions are not equivalent at all. Jesus’s message is consistent, even if the old and new testaments are at odds with each other. Also Jesus’s message comes after the old testament, so can be seen to abrogate the message of the old testament. Leviticus may call for adulterers to be put to death, but Jesus told the stoners, let him without sin cast the first stone.

      • Woman In White

        Christianity is just watered down islam

        /face-palm/

        The pig ignorance of your post is equalled no doubt only by your lack of even basic general education.

      • jeremy Morfey

        Reminds me when I suggested at a choir practice that Elgar had pinched one line of melody from Eric Coates’ Dambusters March, only to be reminded that Elgar wrote ‘They Are At Rest’ in 1909, and Coates wrote his rousing theme tune in 1955. Coates therefore pinched it off Elgar.

        Since Christianity predates Islam by some 500 years, maybe Islam is just watered down Christianity?

    • Cyril Sneer

      The archbishop is just a paid up member of the progressive nuttery.

  • Welby et al are your problem – not atheists.

  • Fraziel

    “Let’s face it: most intelligent people believe in God”
    err, no they don’t. It’s to deny science, evidence, logic, common sense and reason. Nothing intelligent about that. It’s people who have been indoctrinated as children,just like any cult member, or who despite being grown up are still afraid of the dark.

    Prayers, literally the least anyone can do.

    • freddiethegreat

      err, yes they do.

      • Fraziel

        Nope. If they were they would look at the science and evidence as well as just plain common sense to see its rubbish that most of them have been indoctrinated, brainwashed in many cases, into believing as children. Hundreds of millions of them in countries like Mexico, Honduras, Iran ,Malaysia, pakistan, afghanistan, somalia etc even the UK and the US, so poorly educated they hold the most bizarre views that belong in the middle ages. Its really very sad.

    • voidist

      science cannot prove or disapprove god….so leave science out of it…….

      can science say anything about beethovens 9 th symphony ?

      i suggest you read a good work on quantum physics before you make absolute statements

      like that

      • ohforheavensake

        Can you prove the existence of a god?

        • voidist

          how can you prove that which can not be measured ?

          the mind measures….the heart enjoys….

          you cant see a black hole …you know i ts exitstence by inference..how it sucks

          things in and distorts time ..so it is with ” the measureless “…anybody who says he

          has seen god is lying…..the true knower becomes forever still…

          ….be still and you will know what is there to know..

          self knowledge puts an end to all speculation

          • CockneyblokefromReading

            No, you don’t understand (I suspect, as usual). If you state something exists, then it is up to you to prove that existence. It isn’t incumbent upon the person listening to disprove what you just said, that’s absurd. If I say there is a teapot in orbit around the Sun, I wouldn’t ask you to believe it just because you can’t prove that it isn’t there. Do you understand? And Black Holes haven’t been proved either. In science, unlike your religion, we don’t believe something on faith, it has to be tested, replicated and proved. We have to have evidence. There is circumstantial evidence for Black Holes, but they’ve yet to be proved to be so. Same for Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Do try and keep up.

          • hobspawn

            You are not keeping up either. Don’t forget ‘Dark Flow’! It’s important to give your ad hoc theory modifications capital letters. Makes them seem more official. But the most important thing is this: don’t throw out your broken theory. So what if it doesn’t fit the experimental data? Who cares? Only we scientists are fit to decide when a hopelessly falsified theory ceases to be true.

            Look, science is great fun, but even if you understand it, which I doubt, don’t make the mistake of thinking that it is either (a) true, or (b) complete.

          • voidist

            listen you pathetic working class ….do you know what the heisenberg

            principle is ? no …you wouldnt ….now leave me alone and go back

            to your plumbers job

        • jeremy Morfey

          Yes. If you can read these words, then something put them there. Go far enough back, and the only explanation is God. If God didn’t exist, then there would be no words, no screen to read them off and no idiot twitching his fingers to make the connection.

          • CockneyblokefromReading

            So who or what created your god?

          • Cyril Sneer

            You see this is why I have little time for religious folk.

            You’re all nucking futz.

      • CockneyblokefromReading

        Of course you would like to leave science out of it! Science uses rationale and logic. It requires proof and evidence. You just require some bloke to have said something. Lol.

        • voidist

          so cockney working class …tell me .. what does science say about

          beethovans 9 symphony..?

    • Woman In White

      It’s to deny science, evidence, logic, common sense and reason

      No it jolly well isn’t.

      You’re just presenting the dogma of atheism as if it were absolute incontrovertible fact, except it’s just a collection of opinion and prejudice.

      Reality is not subjected to the contents of science, logic, common sense, or reason, which are just tools of cognition, not sources of absolute truth.

      As for evidence, your own attitude of selectively pick and choosing the evidence that you accept against evidence that you reject is simply a form of blinkered prejudice ; evidence that you reject does not simply vanish away in a puff of smoke, *whatever* your “reasons” might be for doing so.

      I’m afraid you simply don’t realise just how indoctrinated you actually are.

  • John Partridge

    I agree with the title, but I’ve only ever heard an atheist argue it well. A theist will get caught up in trite cherry picking and insults.

    • Woman In White

      Thank you for your lovely snide commentary.

      • John Partridge

        I’m not done yet love, pressed send too soon, keep your eye out for more.

        • Woman In White

          Glad to hear this expression of your desire to engage in “trite cherry picking and insults” as a means to defeat your own argument.

          • John Partridge

            I’m done, judge for yourself.

        • Sanctimony

          We are all waiting with bated breath…. but beware, this creature claims to have learned to read and write by the age of two, stomps 2000 + miles a year on far-flung pilgrimages, as a diversion from her pontificating and hectoring on these blogs…

          I gather that all in-patients in Broadmoor are now given Internet access; hence the explosion of homespun theology and philosophy that has erupted on these pages….

          • Woman In White

            Whereas you’re just another tedious internet troll, moany

    • Woman In White

      theists believe it is dead without faith, and atheists believe it isn’t

      Sorry, this doesn’t make any sense at all.

      The meat of religions are cultural and political norms

      erm, no, that is very exactly wrong.

      Religion is meaningless without spirituality. Your definition simply reduces religions to political/philosophical sects.

      You’re basically just making the same tedious attempt to remove Christ and Divinity from Christianity that the Arians did, and as far too many Modernists, Relativists, Protestants, and Atheist carry on attempting today.

      Spirituality and magic are two very VERY different things.

      It’s only god that’s dead not Christianity

      He died for us in Jerusalem about 2000 years ago.

      • John Partridge

        I’m not here to tell a theist what they believe, while it is my belief that religion can exist without spirituality or anything unexplainable, it’s my point that if you ‘need Christianity’ like the headline says, what you’re talking about are those cultural norms. Obtaining more spirituality without those accompanying norms doesn’t solve why you needed Christianity.
        You might think that the culture of Christianity comes by default with spirituality and I wont deny you that, but I mean to say that at least the culture of Christianity can exist independently from faith.

        I agree with the title, we need more Christianity. But, it is an age of atheists, you cannot preach to us like you would the choir, it doesn’t work.
        The only way to get more Christianity from atheists is to divorce it from faith,

        That’s the problem theists have making this argument, faith and philosophy are inseparable and it forces what could end in a compromise into an all or nothing argument that a theist cannot convince and atheist of.

        • Woman In White

          at least the culture of Christianity can exist independently from faith

          Regardless of your other points, you really can’t have Christianity without Christ.

          “Cultural Christianity” really isn’t any kind of Christianity at all, because any particular set of social norms will by definition be transient and mutable, and although even many Christians believe that they should indeed be so, history demonstrates that such attitudes simply lead towards atheism and then to the self-destruction of those norms as a common denominator. Certainly then it would lose the very religious characteristics that you have yourself pointed out.

          One really need look no further than the Church of England and Anglicanism more broadly to see that attempts to put social concepts up into the centre in place of Christ, whilst claiming Christian identity, leads to fragmentation, internal division, factionalism, schism, and the loss of any real common identity.

          That’s the problem theists have making this argument, faith and philosophy are inseparable and it forces what could end in a compromise into an all or nothing argument that a theist cannot convince an atheist of.

          Nice try, but it’s a flawed argument — because you could make virtually identical ones opposing socialists and conservatives, europhiles and eurosceptics, warmists and denialists, City versus United.

          The flaw is that if you treat religion as just like any other partisan social/political group, then it’s simply not religion any more, because the spirituality and the mysticism are central and necessary to anything that could honestly be described as religious in nature.

          And what makes you think that “arguments” should be how atheists are going to be convinced anyway ? The only thing one can really ask is for people to consider the Christian Faith seriously (I can’t speak for other religions — we’re not all part of some big cosy “theist” club), but true Faith and conversion can come only from God, not from man nor from anything that men can do or say. The teachings of Christ can convince — the only thing that Christians can do is to help make them known, and ask others to have an open mind, not a closed one.

          That doesn’t prevent one from attacking the more overtly stupid claims of the online militant atheist brigade, in their smug and blinkered, indoctrinated self-importance, and frequently ill-educated confusion.

          • John Partridge

            We’re at ultimate odds, there’s nothing in faith itself that is convincing and there is plenty of smugness, indoctrination, self importance and bad education on your own side. I’m sure you think the same of us.

            It’s because of this all we can really discuss is the socio political aspects and all we could possibly reach is compromise, you have two options with atheists.
            Atheists who act like Christians or atheists who don’t.

            Tell me it is not a flaw that a Christian would refuse peace on earth because the peaceful are not faithful.

        • jeremy Morfey

          You have a point there. We have to take people as they come, and if they cannot believe, then there’s little point starting from a presumption of faith.

          If the whole premise of atheism is that it is rational, then we should start there from a presumption of rationality and work from there. The first point is that rationality is itself an act of faith. We only have our own senses to suggest when something is rational and when something is not, and they cannot always be relied on, especially if we are angry or disturbed.

          We have this interesting dialogue between Buddhists and Christians over the function of desire. How do you see it?

    • Woman In White

      oh !! — was doing some of my checking to see if you weren’t one of the habitual trolls, and came across your comment : “Man was a gender neutral term, meaning person previously prefixed with ‘were’ and ‘wyf’ to denote gender.

      Excellent — I’ve sometimes had to make the very same point myself.

      I disagree with you entirely nonetheless on the question in here, but do please forgive any previous rudeness towards you personally, it’s simply that the skulls of most online atheists in here seem to be in urgent need of a new spark plug.

      • Sanctimony

        Oooh !!…. get you…. Is your inferiority and persecution complex getting the better of you ?

        So you are now 1 in a 100, are you….. talk about monomania….

        So, you check up on everyone who contributes, do you ?

        • Woman In White

          idiot

          • jeremy Morfey

            Now, now, children!

      • Cyril Sneer

        It’s always a troll when it’s someone you don’t agree with. It’s like ‘how dare they voice a different opinion than I’.

    • jeremy Morfey

      God is no more dead than you or I are.

      As for magic, if 50 years ago, you said I could type a thought on something the size of a telephone directory (or even the size of a pack of cards) and it could be read after a second or two anywhere in the world, and that I could keep an entire life’s collection of music on something the size of my fingernail, I’d have called that magic.

      We can move on from the mythologies, which do provide comfort and illustrate hard-to-grasp philosophical concepts, and if in so doing we can find a way around intractable humanitarian conflicts, then yes I might call that magic too.

      • John Partridge

        I just meant dead as an idea people believe in, compared to the rest of the Christian Pagan traditions we do uphold.

        I put stock in western liberal democracy to stop conflict, I put stock in the teachings of the bible for the same aim, I would put it in an almighty judge if people still believed they would judged for their actions after their death. But they don’t any more, the best we have is that an ideology that shares a lot with bible, is worth believing in and defending.

      • Cyril Sneer

        “I’d have called that magic.”

        You see this where you and I differ, I’d have called it progress.

  • GoJebus

    “The Hitch had very little to say against Allah because he knew the
    latter’s followers did not take kindly to cheap remarks against him”

    I’ll take issue with that, and won’t bore anyone with a million links that prove otherwise, and also the rest of your article, which is the usual hot wind expelled from the pious. Bring me the evidence of God. Bring any of us the evidence for your God (or Zeus, or Ahura Mazda, or Apollo, or Thor, or Allah or [insert a thousand other Gods long vanished from the Earth]). Brainwashed you are. Intelligent you are not. The sooner you stop with the make-believe, the better it will be for all of us.

    And before you and the defenders of the indefensible start whining about militant atheists, please remember that most atheists are also secularists and will defend to the death your right to practise your religion (where it does not interfere with the running of the state, which it does at the moment in this comedic country), while in Bangladesh and elsewhere (listen and research this bit carefully) atheists are being hacked to death (with knives Taki) by the devout for practising no religion and having the temerity to query the status quo. The religious houses there and in this cowardly little country have a million miles still to travel on the various rights of men and women.

    P.S. Hope you can take being offended, without resorting to the AK47 or the panga/machete.
    P.P.S. I am also partial to a little Christmas cake.

    • Woman In White

      What a confused and incoherent opinion, but then one can expect little else from the militant atheist crowd.

      • GoJebus

        Wow, you’ve spent some serious time here defending the indefensible. I can help with your Joan of Arc complex. Please read the following:

        1. http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/055277331X
        2. http://www.amazon.co.uk/God-Not-Great-Religion-Everything/dp/1843545748/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1450039202&sr=8-1&keywords=God+is+not+great

        Take one chapter per day until finished.

        • Damon

          Wasn’t your enlightened mate “the Hitch” an apologist for Stalinism? His close friend Martin Amis (who presumably knew him better than you do) certainly thought so. See, for example, the Introduction to Amis’s “Koba the Dread”.

          • GoJebus

            It is instructive how the pious like to cling onto the ‘Stalin was an atheist story’, like a 50 stone heffalump holding onto a straw to prevent itself from drowning in the sea. It is such a miserable defence of religion, and has been refuted so many times, that I will just ask you to read the relevant chapter of ‘The God Delusion’, in the hope that it might lead you to read the rest of the book and you might escape from HMS Bollox via the gaping holes it will blow in her sides.

          • Damon

            “It is instructive how the pious like to cling onto the ‘Stalin was an atheist story’,”

            It’s instructive how atheists like to cling onto the ‘Hitler was a Catholic’ story. It’s such a miserable defence of atheism, and has been refuted so many times. As for Stalin, well, I’m merely a History graduate (BA, MA, PhD) so you probably know a lot more about it than I do. Re your Dawkins recommendation, fair enough – I appreciate you pointing me towards an objective, impartial text.

          • GoJebus

            Sorry, just having a bite of my sandwich before tending to the rod. It is almost too good to be true that you have now introduced Hitler into the conversation: the second of the two main heffalump straws. Next you’ll be telling me the human eye cannot possibly have evolved and I’ll have the full set. Thanks also for including your CV in your last post, but please be advised I will not be hiring you for research work until you’ve found your way out of the hull of the doomed warship mentioned in my previous post.

          • Cyril Sneer

            Good stuff. 😀

      • Cyril Sneer

        Every Atheist is a militant Atheist to you and that’s a problem with you, not them.

  • Marcus

    It appears that people view asking for “proof” and for “evidence” as the same thing; but they are not (as any scientific research will tell you). The idea of stonewall proof defeats the entire purpose of faith, which, along with love, is the basis of Christianity. However, there is much “evidence” out there for those who are sufficiently interested, and prepared to budge even slightly to find and comprehend it.

    • Cyril Sneer

      “However, there is much “evidence” out there for those who are
      sufficiently interested, and prepared to budge even slightly to find and
      comprehend it.”

      Where? Any particular holy book? Perhaps it’s the one you don’t follow, the one that you weren’t born into… no no of course it wouldn’t be.

  • Simon Wagstaff

    The title is wrong, it should read “the world needs Atheism in this age of religious bigotry, warmongering, and general all-round madness and stupidity”.

    • Woman In White

      And what about all that atheist bigotry, warmongering, and general all-round madness and stupidity ?

      Or what, do you *really* imagine that no atheist could possibly be bigoted, violent, mad, or stupid ?

      • Simon Wagstaff

        In the name of Atheism? Please give me an example.

        • Woman In White
          • Simon Wagstaff

            Wasn’t that in the name of Communism?

          • Woman In White

            … sigh …

            Soviet policy, based on the ideology of Marxism–Leninism, made atheism the official doctrine of the Soviet Union

            The state was committed to the destruction of religion

            ” … generally promoted atheism as the truth that society should accept

            The Soviet regime had an ostensible commitment to the complete annihilation of religious institutions and ideas. Militant atheism was central to the ideology of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and a high priority of all Soviet leaders.

            The state established atheism as the only scientific truth. Soviet authorities forbade the criticism of atheism or of the state’s anti-religious policies; such criticism could lead to forced retirement, arrest and/or imprisonment.

            Some actions against Orthodox priests and believers along with execution included torture, being sent to prison camps, labour camps or mental hospitals. Many Orthodox (along with peoples of other faiths) were also subjected to psychological punishment or torture and mind control experimentation in order to force them give up their religious convictions.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            So in the name of Communism then…

          • Woman In White

            You ask for an example ; I provide an example ; then you refuse to accept it because your atheist ideology leads you to refuse actual hard evidence.

            Newsflash — Communism is atheist.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            But you gave such an erroneous example (Communism) that goes in no way towards explaining or excusing atrocities carried out in the name of relgion, which are numerous and not confined to any one type of religiosity.

          • Woman In White

            ???????!!!!???!!??

            that goes in no way towards explaining or excusing atrocities carried out in the name of relgion

            Excuse me ??

            Is your head **really** so stuck up your own ideology that you think I was attempting to “explain” or “excuse” atrocities ?

            such an erroneous example (Communism)

            No true scotsman …

            If I were to claim that the ISIS barbarians weren’t religiously motivated on the basis that their islamism is really a proper religion, would you be convinced, and would you accept the exact same sort of blatant intellectual dishonesty that you’re trying to hide behind yourself ?

          • Simon Wagstaff

            If we stretch the truth and our imaginations and pretend you are right, are you saying that because Lenin/Stalin/Marx doctrines led to the Communist state policy of Atheism and subsequent atrocities, it must therefore be OK to do the same in the name of religion? A perverted “eye for an eye” type of argument?

          • Woman In White

            it must therefore be OK to do the same in the name of religion?

            Obviously not, and that just smacks of some more hand-waving to try and salvage the preposterous suggestion that atheism might not be capable of “bigotry, warmongering, and general all-round madness and stupidity”.

            Even so, nothing that any religiously motivated barbarians has done is even vaguely comparable to the genocidal industrialised killings that 20th century atheist totalitarianism achieved …

          • Simon Wagstaff

            See now you’re just taking liberties. The acts you describe were carried out in the name of Communism. Period. Stalin was an Atheist but he didn’t carry out atrocities in the name of Atheism. The state doctrine was perverted by a phsycopathic, schizophrenic, paranoid, delusional madman and religious nuts like you collectively formed and jumped on a bandwagon in order to have a counter argument to the plain, simple, and irrefutable fact that more atrocities have been carried out in the name of gods than in every other name combined.

          • Woman In White

            No true scotsman …

            Sorry matey, but your intellectual dishonesty is utterly appalling.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            Ummm…Atheism isn’t an ideology…and by all means do go ahead and provide the numbers…

          • Woman In White

            The French Revolution + the Napoleonic Wars + WW1 + WW2 (including N*zi Atrocities) + Stalinist Atrocities + the Maoist revolution all add up to far FAR more misery and death and warmongering than anyything that any religions have ever come up with, and it’s quite possible that the addition of all that non-religious horror and warmongery constitutes the majority of atrocities committed in the entire history of the human race.

            You would be completely incapable of coming up with anything demonstrating the contrary.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            On the contrary, I believe I could. But, as usual, these arguments are always open to interpretation and bias, and are a waste of time. Let’s agree to differ – you keep talking to your invisible friends and I’ll keep talking to my real ones.

          • Except that Jesus actually existed and has had more of an impact on the world than you or Hitchens or any other atheist who will be swept away with time.

            Cheers.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            Sadly the impact is mostly negative

          • Oh, you mean like the centuries of art, literature, music, philosophy, law, architecture…

            The list goes on.

            Feel free to live elsewhere.

            Try North Korea.

          • hobspawn

             “On the contrary, I believe I could. But, as usual, these arguments are always open to interpretation and bias, and are a waste of time. Let’s agree to differ – you keep talking to your invisible friends and I’ll keep talking to my real ones.”

            Good effort! WiW lists all of the major atrocities in history, and you come up with… “I could, but bias, waste of time, I have friends”. Come on man, at least mention the 3000 people executed by the Spanish Inquisition.

            Your argument is a total failure. Ask yourself why.

          • Cyril Sneer

            “WiW lists all of the major atrocities in history”

            And she somehow mistakenly links it to Atheism. When you’re confronted with such a wild crazy allegation then there seems little point continuing the debate as you’re all batsh t crazy, no you really are all batsh t crazy.

          • hobspawn

            It’s simple: atheist socialism can list in its achievements the appalling horrors of Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, the Khmer Rouge and so on, a politics which killed hundreds of millions of people in the 20th Century alone. There is no religion which has achieved that level of destruction and oppression. Now islam has taken up the challenge, but the important thing is to blame it all on the pacifist Christians, whose murderousness in no way approaches that of socialists or muslims. The scripture is there for all to read. The numbers of fatalities are there for all to see. But noticing them gets you called “batsh t crazy”. This is the standard cultural Marxist method – send the honest off for ‘re-education’.

          • Sanctimony

            I remember you…. someone accused you of being a reincarnation of one of the creatures sitting at the foot of the guillotine with their knitting as Robespierre & Co tried to cull the French royalty and aristocracy…..

          • Simon, you’ve put your foot in it.

            At this point, walk away from the argument. The only thing propping up your argument is your pride.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            The only thing propping up yours is your imagination

          • Come on, Simon. You’re all about proof. Start doing some heavy-duty proving.

            But this is not about proof or faith but your need to feel like a smug, arrogant @$$hole.

            Pat yourself on the back. You’ve accomplished that much.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            I wondered when you’d get to personal insults, thanks for not disappointing me. That’s what usually happens when there is no cogent argument from one who has nothing but faith/imagination. As for me, I’m just having a bit of fun…its so easy…

          • Aw, you mad, bro?

            Aren’t you the one who called Christ “imaginary” even though there is so much proof to the opposite and then tried denying the obvious fact that communism and the atheism it embraced was ruinous to Western civilsation? Do you remember that?

            Who has a vivid imagination now?

            Now, run along. The grown-ups are trying to have a serious conversation.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            You’re funny!

          • Yeah, I know.

            You’re unintentionally funny, though.

            They’re not laughing with you, Simon.

          • Simon Wagstaff

            I do it on purpose and you can’t help it!

          • Cyril Sneer

            You seem to be rather offended by people who do not believe in your sky fairy bullsh t?

            Imagine what it’s like for us Atheists living in a world that is still riven by religious conflict.

          • Aw, somebody’s angry and needs a hug.

          • Damon

            “… are you saying that because Lenin/Stalin/Marx doctrines led to the Communist state policy of Atheism and subsequent atrocities, it must therefore be OK to do the same in the name of religion? A perverted ‘eye for an eye’ type of argument?”
            It would indeed be a perverted argument, if she had ever made it. But since she didn’t (and indeed, did not say anything remotely of the kind) your point is a bit redundant. Nice attempt at straw-mannery, though.

          • Damon

            Perfectly true, Woman in White – but arguing with bigots is a thankless task. He is, I think, the same kind of prawn who routinely comes up with guff like “Hitler was a Catholic”.

          • Marvin

            Where was your god then? If it existed, it would have done something about it don’t you think?

          • Cyril Sneer

            Why did god ignore their plight?

        • Carlos Hernandez

          What about the Cristeros War? A war that was started by the atheist president of Mexico, Plutarco Elías Calles, and who’s sole purpose for starting this war was to destroy the Catholic Church in Mexico and done in the name of atheism.

          • Simon Wagstaff
          • Damon
          • Marvin

            What about the slaughter of the Incas and the Mayas by the Spanish Conquistadors then?

          • Carlos Hernandez

            What does that have to do with religion? The destruction of the Aztec empire was caused by Hernan Cortez, who was given orders by the king of Spain to explore new lands and find out if there are more advanced civilization. He then ignored those orders and wanted to take over Mexico and steal all the gold from the indigenous people. The king of Spain even sent soldiers to apprehend Cortez and he beat them and forced them to join him. He was able to take over Mexico in two years, mostly due to smallpox which the Aztecs weren’t immune to. So again, what does that have to do with religion?

          • Marvin

            AND the Inquisitions? Was that done in the name of your god?

        • Damon

          The persecution of religious believers in Soviet Russia, republican Spain, revolutionary France, early twentieth-century Mexico, communist China, Cuba, etc, etc. More examples?

      • jeremy Morfey

        It is the nature of humanity to be bigoted, warmongering, mad and stupid. It comes with the head, a heart, two arms and two legs.

        One of the joys of the Church you and I belong to is that we can endeavour to do something about it.

        • Dominic Stockford

          It is the nature of ‘sin’ to be thus. Christ can free us from the result of that sin (eternal destruction), but we shall always be sinners. And we cannot change who is saved, for, as Jesus said, “You did not choose me, but I chose you.”

          • Cyril Sneer

            For the most part where you’re born and the family you’re born into dictates which sky god you follow.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Which means you construct a little god based on your own image – and clearly, in your image, god is ineffective and lacking in power. Which says more about you than about Him.

          • red2black

            Most Theists and Atheists get along fine.

        • Brian Hinchcliffe

          What exactly do you intend to do?

          • Marvin

            Keep praying to a blank sky with a blank mind? All this in 2015, do people not evolve anymore? I suppose we need an defence against that other lot of mutants.

          • Cyril Sneer

            Pray I think…. so in other words… nothing.

        • Marvin

          Like the abuse of young boys by preachers of your god, or the Inquisitions? Bless you!

      • voidist

        stalin ..pol pot ..lenin ..mao and hitler to name a few….all athiests ,,all butchers

    • Damon

      Ah yes, if only I could have been born in one of those atheist paradises – Stalinist Russia, say, Maoist China, Khmer Rouge Cambodia or today’s North Korea. Good job those places knew nothing about warmongering or stupidity. It’s just us Christians that b_gger everything up.

      • Simon Wagstaff

        Religion in general to be more precise. All of your examples were or are communists first, thier regimes were appalling, and in many ways a backlash against religion having had its own way for hundreds of years. But you keep trotting out the same old rubbish because for the first time in history more and more people are seeing religion for what it really is.

        • hobspawn

          &nbsp“Religion in general to be more precise. All of your examples were or are communists first, thier regimes were appalling, and in many ways a backlash against religion having had its own way for hundreds of years. But you keep trotting out the same old rubbish because for the first time in history more and more people are seeing religion for what it really is.”

          Milgram’s experiment suggests that most people do what they are told by authority. Jesus said “thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself”. Imagine Europe’s alternative history if he had not. The miracle of Christendom is how little war and suffering there has been. Yet those amongst us who proclaim that religion causes all ills don’t seem to be emigrating to North Korea. “By their fruits shall ye know them”.

      • Marvin

        You seem to very conveniently leave out “The Inquisitions”, how long did that go on for and how many heinous deaths, not to mention the sexual abuse of young boys by the preachers of god.

  • Leah Sothman

    Thank you Taki. Excellent write up. As a child i remember feeling stupid for believing in God but my grandfather who was an Atheist himself said to me “There were no Atheists in the trenches”. As stupid as my imaginary friend sounds to others he’s always popped up and helped me through tough times and has given me heart to give to others when they least deserved it. The Christians i have known in my life have given everything they can to others, started charities, orphanages, women’s refuges… however stupid, mad and unintelligent that makes myself and others i know look, i’m forever grateful for it.

    • red2black

      ‘There were no Atheists in the trenches.’ That’s it! Let’s have another war along 1914-1918 lines, and everyone will believe in God again, just like they did on both sides back then.

      • LEWHAT

        You kind of missed the point, but that’s ok. I don’t really know what your problem is, why do you care if people believe in God or not? I’m sorry for whatever has caused your hang ups.

        • red2black

          No hang ups. Some people are religious and others aren’t. I’m sure there wasn’t much evidence of God either.

          • LEWHAT

            This is true some are, some aren’t and that’s ok. There is enough evidence for me and then it’s down to faith, that’s what drives all of us down a path to whatever our belief. Do scientists need the evidence before they discover something? or is it a faith/ deeper belief that there is something before they find the truth/evidence themselves? If you believe there is no truth except that that already exists and has been proven your view is about as shallow as a baby pee pool. So what your need to comment on everyones posts about their beliefs are making yours the more intellectual and more correct view is silly, intellectually wrong and snooty.

  • Jurgen Naseema Tess Tickles

    As long as therebe dunces there wilst be a need for Christianity so twille be arounde fore a long tyme yet.

  • jeremy Morfey

    I’ve come to this thread a day late, so it’s unlikely anyone will read it. So I can say what I like and like what I say and nobody will argue with me!

    I was baptised in middle age into the Roman Catholic Church in a country which 200 years ago was mortally hostile to this Church. I was brought up by 20th century Atheist parents, lapsed Anglicans. I like to think I am a radical, in that I have always looked from first principles and never conform to received wisdom, but feel comfortable about receiving in old truths if I can get them to make sense. This was the understanding by which I did my RCIA instruction in the Faith, and would not have been baptised or confirmed if I found anything there irreconcilable with my beliefs.

    My mother was brought up believing God was a genial white-robed bearded gentleman sitting on a cloud, and was rather disappointed when it proved to be nonsense. My definition of God is the sum total of everything that has ever existed, everything that ever will exist, and all the forces that bring it about and regulate its processes. I am therefore a pantheist, which may be heretical or not, but I don’t care – it’s what I am. Everything I do must therefore affect the order of things by a minute degree – like the butterfly landing on the sea sends ripples that go round the world and returns home, albeit in a highly modified and diluted form, but it could also be amplified by other forces – God knows. I also recognise my own divinity and that of all creation around me. Father Raphael, the old Benedictine monk who instructed me in the faith told me that every act of kindness and everything we find beautiful and uplifting is a manifestation of God; the Bible is a guidebook, and an important one at that, but we should not ignore the messages and lessons coming from all around us at all times.

    Christianity is just one way at looking at a much larger picture – something so immense, it is impossible for a single human brain to take it all in. Simplified in order to relate to one species and one subculture within this species, the message of Christ, Son of God, is that by taking on fraternity with Christ and with all Christ’s followers and with all people of good will, we recognise our common divinity. By carrying the cross, we recognise too that we will be ill-judged by others who are not on our wavelength and must endure injustice bravely and not allow ourselves to descend to a cycle of vengeance. This breaking of this cycle is Christ’s Salvation, since we can learn then to love one another, despite our shortcomings, rather than hate one another for them.

    My motive for becoming a Christian is simply to enhance my own capacity to love at a time when society’s capacity to love is being seriously curtailed, not least by these atheists so devoted to direct literal material rationality.

    • GoJebus
      • jeremy Morfey

        Done all the growing I can in one lifetime. Now I’m about to turn 60, a more accurate description of what I am capable of is shrivelling.

        Negativity is really rather irritating, especially when it does not offer any constructive alternative.

        Hitchens does not challenge the existence of God, only that this concept has been abused by practitioners, and on balance has done more harm than good. He’s probably right, but I’d like to find ways to extract some good out of it, rather than constantly dwelling on the bad.

        • GoJebus

          Christopher Hitchens said (among a great many other things on the same subject), “Thus, though I dislike to differ with such a great man, Voltaire was simply ludicrous when he said that if god did not exist it would be necessary to invent him. The human invention of god is the problem to begin with”

          Come on Jeremy, you can stop that bit of your mind lost to mysticism from shrivelling can’t you, even if you can’t stop other bits falling off as you get older.

          P.S. the alternative I offer is encompassed in that book link. I apologise for the blunt comment, which I have edited.

        • hobspawn

           “Hitchens does not challenge the existence of God, only that this concept has been abused by practitioners, and on balance has done more harm than good.”

          Hitchens himself did exhaustive and very careful scientific tests to show that the world would have been a better place without theism. In particular, the work he did on the archaeological record proves that battle-scarred bones only begin to occur around the same time as graven images of deities. He also proved beyond all doubt that the dinosaurs themselves had no teeth. People underestimate his contribution to the monumental edifice of vain lefty drivel.

          • jeremy Morfey

            Curiously enough, Hitchens finds common ground with, of all things, the Book of Genesis, which concurred that humanity’s problems began when it tasted of the Tree of Knowledge. We’ve been trying to get back our innocence ever since.

            Shakespeare once remarked in ‘The Tempest’ that Prospero’s greatest and most feared weapon was his books.

            Palaeontologists may consider that dinosaurs are most closely related to birds, but an emu can deliver a fairly mean peck with the beak.

          • hobspawn

             “Curiously enough, Hitchens finds common ground with, of all things, the Book of Genesis, which concurred…”

            Good for the book of Genesis. It must be an honour for it to be in such elevated company.

          • Fritz123

            The tree of knowledge, the Arabs did not like Aristotle. Albertus Magnus was more important for Europe than any enlightment.

          • Brian Hinchcliffe

            As a point of information: The Shakespeare you are apparently quoting from did not own a single book. He was the only member of his family who could read and write. Don’t believe everything you read.

          • jeremy Morfey

            It was actually Prospero who was the great book lover. I once played Gonzalo, and it was my character that smuggled his books into the island where Prospero was banished.

          • Fritz123

            And this was not an improvement? What would Europe be without its wars?

        • Marvin

          There is not one iota of bad in the disbelief of ignorance and dogma.

      • Marvin

        Possibly the best book I have read.

    • Dominic Stockford

      So in fact it’s all about you then. And there was me thinking it was all about God.

      • jeremy Morfey

        Meaow – scratch my eyes out!

        I nearly got thrown out of an astronomy lecture for suggesting that I was the centre of my observable universe, and so are you, and so is every other sentient being. It suggests too that my universe is slightly different to yours. It can all be explained mathematically when we find someone clever enough, but it must have something to do with how gravity affects space/time and the constant c. Quantum theory and relativity are in there too. It all comes down to the gravitational red shift not being linked to direction. If the centre of the observable universe was anywhere but with the observer, then we’d be able to discover which direction it lay.

        So you will forgive me if I look at God from my perspective, rather than claiming to speak for yours.

        • Marvin

          All that info and knowledge about Astronomy cancelled out by a blind ignorant belief in a three letter word that has never existed or seen by the eyes of man. Why is it that this thing never put human life in all the uninhabitable planets in the universe, and no sewage about there being life in outer space and more mumbo jumbo.

        • whorya

          If you had come up with this “statement” 500yrs ago. You would have been burnt at the stake, by the very same Religious leaders, that you take your directions from…..

          • jeremy Morfey

            Indeed I would, but it is quite possible I wouldn’t have been a committed Catholic then, only one forced into it.

            I see no conflict between religion and science. Rather, if God can create the universe, then God can create evolution, and it’s up to God what orbits round what, and up to us to discover it in our own time within the limitations of our current understanding and capacity for measurement and verification.

            Today’s popes are far more concerned with world peace, spiritual well-being and keeping the Earth habitable for a bit longer than with enforcing conventional orthodoxy.

          • whorya

            So you believe in God or not.?. You state, if God can create the universe, then God can create evolution, That to me means, the church now believes in evolution. And are re-branding, as they did with the holy trinity. As in when I was young it was called, God the father, Jesus, And the holy “ghost”, now referred to as, holy spirit. And also if god created evolution, why did he create Adam & eve.

          • jeremy Morfey

            Yes, I do believe the church now believes in evolution.

            I do not believe that humanity has any more than a tiny inkling of the greatness of the universe or God, or full comprehensive understanding of all its processes. However, we must start from somewhere, and Genesis expresses the essence of it most succinctly in a form readily understood by simple folk.

          • jeremy Morfey

            Yes, I do believe the church now believes in evolution.

            I do not believe that humanity has any more than a tiny inkling of the greatness of the universe or God, or full comprehensive understanding of all its processes. However, we must start from somewhere, and Genesis expresses the essence of it most succinctly in a form readily understood by simple folk.

            ‘Ghost’ is an archaic English word that actually meant the same in King James’ time as ‘Spirit’ does today. Meanings of words swill around even in my lifetime – take for example the word ‘gay’ which in my childhood meant light-hearted, carefree or colourful. Few would give it that meaning today. Both ‘holy ghost’ and ‘holy spirit’ refer to the intangible mystery of God that we cannot yet witness directly. My understanding of the Trinity is that ‘God the Father’ refers to that which created us, and ‘God the Son’ refers to God’s creation, of which we are part, and we gain access to this kingdom through his son Jesus Christ, whom I regard as a brother in spirit, as I do all Christians, and indeed the rest of creation that will not acknowledge it. We Christians are the Risen Christ, and it is a heavy cross to bear sometimes.

            [I tried to discuss your point about Adam and Eve, but whatever I wrote set off the autocensor, so I have had to give up. I will try to paraphrase it above]…

            What is most interesting is the concept of the spare rib that made woman. I was told once I take a Zoroastrian approach to this. I consider God to be masculine and the Universe and all of creation to be feminine. Jesus Christ, in his capacity as the Son of God, a spiritual creature, is masculine. Yet Jesus Christ, the Son of Mary, and our companion and saviour, is feminine, regardless whether sexually he is male. Even Jesus has an X chromosome, as indeed I do. Under Genesis’ spare rib, this implies that God made the Universe out of Himself, and the Universe then bore the rest of creation from Her body and nurtured it to maturity.

          • jeremy Morfey

            Adam and Eve to me represent the point that this ape-like creature became H*mo sapiens, with a human conscience. At this point, humanity gained the divine capacity to influence events through free will, which to all other creatures is arrived at through instinct. This is a conventional school biological defintion, which seems consistent with Christian understanding. God realised this when Adam and Eve became aware of their nakedness – something that does not trouble those ordered by instinct. Naturists yearn for the innocence of Eden, and Muslims think by ordering total submission to their interpretation of the Will of God, they can somehow revert to the innocence of Eden. Read into that what you will.

            P.S. Would you believe it? The auto censor passed the word ‘gay’ but would not allow me the Genus name for our own species!

          • whorya

            So do “you” believe the Earth, as other Christians do, was created 6000yrs ago ? Even though scientifically it is proven Billions of years older.

          • jeremy Morfey

            What sort of years?

            If you mean the Earth has circled round the Sun just 6000 times (and pre-Copernicus Christians didn’t believe the Earth did that, but astronomical mathematicians made this a racing certainty, explaining a lot of things), then no.

            Since the Earth ‘day’ was only invented on Day 4 of creation, then God can make a day or a year or any other unit of time as long or as short as He likes, for example billions of Earth years. The trouble with some literal and simple-minded Christians, notably those from America, is that they think that the words used and understood in the King James Bible, or even in the Greek and Hebrew originals, are the absolute truth for all eternity, when these languages themselves have not existed for very long.

            It’s like in science fiction that all intergalactic aliens speak perfect English. Not even cockroaches do that, and they are very much more like us than any Martian we may encounter. Not even chimpanzees have more than a few dozen words of English at best, and you’d be hard pressed to find any life form more humanoid than that anywhere on Earth that we couldn’t breed with. Talking of alien life, I once had a Hungarian human riding pillion on my motorcycle who spoke no better English than the chimps in London zoo, but we communicated because the words ‘igye’ and ‘nem’ seemed to mean something to him. What chance would even this Hungarian have in coming to grips with the King James Bible?

            In the beginning was the Word… (that’s how John’s Gospel starts), yet who spoke the Word’s language in the beginning? Did this being even have a tongue capable of uttering The Word? The Old Testament Jews however refused to give God a name, and they are perhaps closer to the truth.

          • whorya

            Don’t put your words in my mouth. I mean 6000yrs old according to man.! And science proves it wrong. Because your god left the evidence to prove it. you can not defend a faith, that burnt at the stake men “Scientists, astronomers, chemists, Doctors. ets “. And then claim, hundreds of years later, that god “created” the world. After executing the very people who proved it. Protesting against the Dogma of a business (religion) to impose, that learning and education is only for the church, and the ruling classes. By the way. There was never a Christ religion, that was invented. There was a Jesus religion, but “died” 300yrs after his death. Question, I would like to know, what position or you are,
            as in a religious capacity ?. .

          • jeremy Morfey

            Where in Genesis does it say 6000 years?

            As a scientist and mathematician, albeit a fairly elementary one, I have no issue with using parameters when discovering a phenomenon. Quite a few planets and other astronomical objects, as well as sub-atomic particles were discovered not by direct observation, but by their influence on other objects. One day, the origins of the Universe may be able to be explained through creative mathematical analysis of the constants g (gravity) and c (speed of light), using developments of quantum and relativity theories, but we are a long way off it yet despite Professor Hawking’s ongoing dialogue with his mechanical exoskeleton.

            I’ve never burnt anyone at the stake, nor known personally anyone who has, other than that effigy of that Catholic radical Guy Fawkes, whom we do once a year in November. Are you making that bit up? It’s a bit like saying that just because some criminal gangsters are taking selfies of themselves slicing the heads off aid workers in the Cradle of Civilisation, that all Muslims are at it, and have been for all of eternity.

            Nor do I have an issue with the current faith of the Christian Roman Catholic Church, which is constantly evolving. Many of the things I find beautiful about it date back to the Second Vatican Council, which dates back less than 60 years, and on quite a few Pagan traditions from my own national cultural heritage going back into the mists of time. Christ’s mythology I recognise as such, but a myth has no potency until you believe in it. I therefore separate science (which is measurable, repeatable and within known margins for error) from myth and mystery (which is not, but may well expose deeper truths about the nature of life and love essential to human well-being).

            Finally, may I suggest that these days, learning and education is within easy reach of anyone with access to the internet who can read, and no rulers or clerics can easily put that genie back in the bottle?

          • whorya

            Of cause a machine would do that, it is manipulated by man. As all men are..

    • Marvin

      Every human is entitled to their asinine beliefs due to spineless abilities to think for themselves and toss away the crutches of
      idiotic dogma.

    • Cyril Sneer

      Oh that’s it blame the Atheists, blame the non-believers… some things never change.

  • Dominic Stockford

    “My soul I sold to the devil long ago. No prayers will save that loser. ”

    Prayer doesn’t save – it is the death of Jesus Christ on the cross which was the saving act – ‘and that alone, lest we should boast’ – faith in Him will bring you to eternity. Don’t give up on yourself, for God does not desire the death of a sinner, but rather that every man should turn to Him and be saved.

    • Brian Hinchcliffe

      Eh? “The saving act” ? How does that work, then?

      • Dominic Stockford

        The Innocent one dies so that the guilty ones may have life. That’s you and me buddy.

        • Brian Hinchcliffe

          I still don’t get it. We all die. THAT is you and me, buddy.

          • Dominic Stockford

            I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, my faith, given to me by God, gives the me sure and certain hope of resurrection to eternal life WITH God. Without that faith there is no hope.

          • Well said.

          • Marvin

            Possibly the poor innocent guys who felt the knife of jihadi john prayed to be saved. But as usual, no one is ever there to help them.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Which is a reply that demonstrates why you will never understand faith – either in God, or in a false religion. It isn’t all about this world.

          • CockneyblokefromReading

            What’s a false religion?

          • Cyril Sneer

            A false religion is one that you’re not born into and brainwashed from birth, one that your society does not follow.

            You can get a muslim from Egypt to be just as sure about his faith as Dominic is sure about his own faith.

            Apparently they can’t both be right, but they can both be wrong.

          • Marvin

            They ALL are. Man made utter horse dung to suppress the ignorant and the weak.

          • Marvin

            Faith is just believing in what one wants to because they lack the intelligence to question what their minds have been filled with from infancy. So either their brains have not progressed since infancy, or they are stuck in the quicksand of ignorance and fear.

          • whorya

            Your “faith”… No Sir, it is “fear” that keeps you believing. You are taught at a young age, that God sees everything. So you become frightened to question anything, or research anything, that may be against the teaching of the Bible.

          • Dominic Stockford

            You are most presumptuous. You know neither me, nor do you understand the Christian faith. The second verse of Amazing Grace answers your ‘fear’ allegations very simply, beautifully, and Biblically.

            “‘Twas grace that taught my heart to fear
            And grace my fears relieved.
            How precious did that grace appear
            The hour I first believed.”

            It is unbelievers who should fear God, for all will stand before Him and be called to give an account of themselves – but you have no advocate or mediator who has already taken the penalty due to you on Himself. You will take the full judgement on yourself.

          • Cyril Sneer

            Lovely and if you had been born into another country dominated by another religion it’s highly doubtful you would be saying what you’re saying now.

    • whorya

      That’s doing a lot of good for the Syrian Christians…..

      • Dominic Stockford

        It is indeed. If you take the trouble to find out what they ask Christians here to pray for you will find that it is that their faith will remain strong. Death is certain for all of us, the method may not always be so pleasant – also certain is eternity and God’s judgement. Eternity with life with God, or eternity not with him, eternal destruction.
        They have, through faith, a sure and certain hope. Have you reliable hope for anything at all?

        • whorya

          So it is OK for God/Allah’s Muslim children to kill Gods/Allah’s Christian children, as they will all be residing with God/Allah eventually. Well that makes it OK then.

          • Dominic Stockford

            I didn’t say that. You present a straw man of your own making, in order to make yourself feel better about having no faith in Christ.

          • Cyril Sneer

            Do you think that if you had been born in a muslim country, in a muslim family you would now be a muslim?

            How do you explain the trend that where you’re born and which family you’re born into dictates your religious belief?

            It’s pretty obvious that the religion you follow is dictated by your country of birth and the family you’re born in to, your upbringing which is heavily influenced by the society around you.

          • Woman In White

            Were you recruited into atheism from having been born into an atheist or non-religious family ? Were you brainwashed into a belief in atheist doctrines throughout your childhood ?

            And whatever your personal circumstances, would it not be silly to deny the existence of such atheistic indoctrination of children throughout Western society ?

            But then, aren’t you just entirely denying the value of free will and individual conscience in these matters ?

  • Marvin

    Since Jesus died on the cross for our sins, the world has got worse everyday since then. Atheism is not the dangers for the dissolution of Christianity, science and fact is. But even those things are the least of your problems, there is a more definite and doom laden defeat and death to your dogma.

    • Brian Hinchcliffe

      Will somebody explain how Jesus died apparently nearly 2000 years ago for my sins that I would commit no more than 60 years ago? While you are about, it can somebody explain trans-substantiation and Papal infallibility? Also I am not clear about Limbo and where dead babies go. As God is the creator of our infinitely expanding universe, in place for trillions of years, what took so long?

      • Sue Smith

        These are all good questions, but that’s all they are.

        • red2black

          “We have ways of making you talk!” (tee hee)

        • Cyril Sneer

          Yeah it’s just a shame there are no good answers.

      • Marvin

        Brian, I am on your side, that was all tongue in cheek. In 2015 we still have people so, so definite of the man made dogma and tripe invented/created when their knowledge of reality was non existent.

  • Brian Hinchcliffe

    This is judgemental, tendentious twaddle with little knowledge of Christianity’s roots or its evolution into genocide, assasination, mass torture and internecine brutality, massive intolerance and oppression under the sign of the cross.
    Christianity and its spawnings have been the greatest source of human suffering ever. Stalin, Hitler, Hiro Hito, Ghengis Khan are mere schoolboys in comparison.

  • Fritz123

    I dont understand the French neutrality.

  • Fritz123

    There is the military order of Malta that could set up an ordinary army of proud cruzaders. We should save Assad and support Shia. We need a free Levante and diversity.

  • Fritz123

    But come on, Kamikaze is ok if you have something to fight for. Isnt this the famous ultimate sacrifice?

  • Fritz123

    God means everything and makes the world round for us that we dont know.

  • Oli Norwell

    The Spectator has provided some superb articles in 2015. This isn’t one of them.

    Complete and utter drivel – so the author felt better during the war when he was 5 because he believed in God? Fair enough, but now he’s 79 surely he can realise that that’s literally no different to feeling very good as a 5 year old child on the night before Christmas, because you believe Santa Claus will fly down your chimney and magically deliver you presents.

    Yes, if you believe in fairies, and magic, you feel safe, you feel good.

    But we’re grown-ups here and would prefer the truth, not a comforting lie.

    • Dominic Stockford

      The truth is that God exists, and that with faith in Jesus Christ you too can enjoy His presence for eternity.

      • Marvin

        Which god exactly, there are so many. I assume you mean “YOUR” god.

        • Dominic Stockford

          There is only one True God, Father, Son and Spirit. All others are false gods.

          • Brian Hinchcliffe

            Wrong, Dominic. God spoke to me today. he told me there are six deities, all real, all related. What you call “false gods” are God’s partners and his family. He told me this. Let Him speak to you

          • Dominic Stockford

            Mocking God? Repent before you can no longer do so.

          • Cyril Sneer

            When will that be?

          • Sue Smith

            Perhaps you’ve been listening too long to a talking Bush.

          • Cyril Sneer

            And yet they say what you believe in is false.

            You can’t be all right but you can be all wrong.

  • Dr. Heath

    Hitchens [PBUH] has said quite a lot about Islam. For one, he’s described the religion as being simultaneously both the most interesting and the least interesting of the world’s monotheist creeds and he’s backed this up with a chapter in his denunciation of religion. Because the Koran is little more than a not very ample stew of seventh-century Syriac and Aramaic Christian prayers and rants against polytheists badly translated into Arabic, this is bound to be the case. The events and personalities that have inspired Islamic holy writings provide us with a garbled history of a relatively small number of backward tribal people in a backward, violent part of the world during the Dark Ages. [I need to re-visit the chapter on Islam to figure out why CH thinks Islam could be deemed ‘interesting’.]

    YouTube [which is, in most other instances, a conduit for anti-intellectual swill and the peddling of crackpot cosmologies] offers web-surfers a large number of recordings of Hitchens’ appearances during which he talks about Islam.

    • Monkish

      Chistopher Hitchens [PBUH] – excellent! The Hitch would have bust a gut reading that! A fitting tribute to a great rebellious spirit.

    • Monkish

      Not sure if Hitch agreed with him but Rushdie has called Islam the most fascinating of the Abrahamic faiths as its narrative of origins is the least mythical/most historical. With Islam you know that the (non-supernatural) events described in the Sira and Hadith really did occur and the protagonists really lives and were pretty much as the sources describe them to be. Same reason why the eminent and savagely ant-Mormon critic Harold Bloom has described Mormonism as the only truly American great religion.

      • Dr. Heath

        Opinions vary as to the plausibility of the allegedly historical narrative surrounding Islam’s founders. I side with those who, like Tom Holland and Robert Spencer, find that the contradictions or lacunae in the history of the first two centuries after the demise of Islam’s prophet point to an entirely different explanation than that touted by believers [and, it’s shocking to say, the editors of sites like Wikipedia].

      • Dr. Heath

        Mormonism is surely the most entertainingly stupid religion of all time, its holy books and theology being the adolescent drivel of a recidivist crook who managed to get himself lynched by members of his own ‘church’.

  • A Theologian

    Let’s assume that the four badges of the natural man are earth mother worship, idolatry, polytheism and human sacrifice of the first born. Then Judaism is antithetical to all of these in ways I don’t need to spell out. BUT the Christian revelation brings them back in as what Hegel would term a double negation. Mariolatery, the human image of Jesus, the Trinity and the death of God. Is it no wonder that Islam revolted as Christianity itself revolted in the Reformation? So what’s next.

    • Dr. Heath

      Mariolatry.

  • Sanctimony

    Thomas Jefferson wrote that ‘all men are created equal’ and he called the proposition self-evident…

    Indeed he did… and the irony is that during his lifetime he probably owned more than 250 slaves … who were in no way his ‘equals’; in fact his whole existence and wealth depended upon their unpaid labour for him in his plantations and, supposedly, his bed.

    What a delicious irony that this polymath and sophisticate could include such a patently hypocritical statement in the Declaration of Independence….

    • Sue Smith

      The typical hypocrisy of the Left. I prefer to look at what they do, not what they say.

    • red2black

      Created equal. Doesn’t that equate to being born equal in our helplessness?

      • Sue Smith

        Casuistry. (Look it up.)

        • red2black

          Had to Google that. I really don’t see how that applies. After all, Christianity is heretical as far as Judaism is concerned.

          • Sue Smith

            I meant that esoteric arguments about Christianity and the existence of a god mostly involve casuistry – sophisticated and tricky tactics where people are effectively debating in space. It’s impossible to prove on way or another and simply becomes a semantic discussion.

          • red2black

            Of course, there are lots of things that aren’t dependent on scientific proof, but why should anyone object to scientific enquiry? In some cases (as with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah) what seems fantastical has been shown to be based on actual events. Allegory and metaphor are fine, as long as we’re able to understand them at some point, and when these appear in Scripture, they seem to indicate hidden meanings and an initiation process, or they may be encryptions of important information in order for it to be protected and preserved, such as the measurements essential for temple-building, for example.

          • Sue Smith

            I’d agree with this, but that’s what my ‘article of faith’ comment was about. I remember that series by Barbara Thiering (I think her name was) where some of these ‘events’ in the old testament were put under the microscope. I found myself strangely bored, not really caring whether it was true or not.

            And any English teacher worth his/her salt will tell you that a narrative can change very quickly when in the hands of more than the original teller – even then problematic.

          • red2black

            Well, I read her books, which I found very interesting. It seems reasonable to suggest that there may be real events at the core of things. It’s recently been demonstrated that the voyage of the Argonauts was possible in ancient times, and that the Golden Fleece may be based on the use of sheepskins to filter particles of gold from silt – something that’s still done today in the area of Afghanistan that the Argonauts reached in the story.

          • LEWHAT
          • red2black

            Use smaller ones.

          • Sanctimony

            And Judaism probably killed Jesus Christ….

          • red2black

            A job for UCOS.

        • Sanctimony

          Or Jesuitry, for that mattter… which inflicted a great deal of physical and mental anguish upon me…

          • Sue Smith

            That’s dreadful, if you experienced abuse!! The horror is that you didn’t have to go to a Catholic school to experience this – it is universal and widespread, apparently.

            The question has to be asked: ‘what’s wrong with men’?

      • Sanctimony

        It’s certainly a valid interpretation in the sense that most one-day-old babies are pretty defenceless, but, of course , the circumstances of one’s birth can differ vastly and project you toward very different ends.

        That said, I have heard of royalty who have been infected with syphilis by their wet nurses.

        • red2black

          I daren’t ask ‘who?’

          • Sanctimony

            It was a common phenomenon in France in the late 1700s and treatment was mostly centred around the Vaugirard Hospital in Paris… that said, the wet nurses were as much at risk from the congenitally syphilitic infants … so it was two-way traffic…

            Any wonder why the French Revolution was such a purging agent for all the debauchery that preceded it….

          • red2black

            I always remember a few lines about ‘The Terror’ that claimed its excesses had already surpassed anything the Marquis de Sade wrote about.

  • Grant Melville

    I’m glad that Taki prays. I do wonder, though, if he actually believes that his prayers are heard. If he did, and he prayed, he would know that his soul isn’t beyond redemption. He would know the God he has to do with, that He is able and willing to save.

    That’s what’s left out of the churches these days, and the good works, and the cynical attitude of unbelievers to the whole thing. The reality that, when the believer prays, they speak to a Person they know. When I pray, I know that I’m speaking to God. Sometimes I get an answer there and then, sometimes I don’t, but I know I’m speaking to Someone regardless. Christianity is real and substantial. Communion isn’t a ritual administered by a clergyman in an ornate building. It’s an active, living relationship with God. People say that God isn’t real. I find that utterly ridiculous, because I know God. One might as well say that my parents aren’t real, or my colleagues at work. Part of the issue is that people look for reality in what’s essentially not real, the fluff and theology and ritual which surrounds religious life – of course they get cynical. That isn’t Christianity. Christian life begins with a personal touch from God, and it’s maintained as a personal link with God is maintained. So, to everyone who laughs at the idea of God and mocks the religious world of the day, I’d simply say this: seek Him while He is to be found, call on Him while He is near. Do it for yourself.

    • Dominic Stockford

      “Seek the Lord while he may be found;
      call upon him while he is near;
      let the wicked forsake his way,
      and the unrighteous man his thoughts;
      let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him,
      and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
      For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
      neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.
      For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
      so are my ways higher than your ways
      and my thoughts than your thoughts.”
      Isaiah 55

      • davidofkent

        6th Century BC. Which Lord did he mean?

    • Cyril Sneer

      ” People say that God isn’t real. I find that utterly ridiculous, because I know God. One might as well say that my parents aren’t real, or my colleagues at work.”

      It’s easy to prove the existence of your parents or co-workers, they exist.

  • Fritz123

    God has no content and that is his secret.

  • blods

    wow You rant like a spoilt little child having a hissy fit. Hopefully you’re not getting paid for articles which simply list famous atheists, and then concludes that they’re all ugly – or implies such nonsense as Christopher Hitchens was scared of muslims or that priests can repel bullets. If you’re going to use the phrases “loss of faith” and “inability to confront islam” in the same sentence it is only right for someone to point out to you that as islam is a faith, then it sounds to me as though the only issue is that while people like dawkins/hitch have helped knock Christianity back into the dark ages where it belongs, that islam needs some more work.

  • Bonkim

    Yes God died in the post-WW2 era of technological advances and growing affluence. Followers of Islam still have their dark ages belief in Allah and backward culture for support – no reason Christianity particularly the dark ages varieties should be resurrected as a counter to resurgent Islam. Ignore Islam and it will go away – don’t give it the oxygen of publicity. Christianity in the dark and Middle Ages was no different from the head-chopping ISIS today.

  • green hackle

    No we dont need More child abusers or stinking perverts, Christianity is full of these filth, How Do i Know?, The Pope said so..All religions have there own con men and perverts and should be Banned from Schools, If you want Your children to Believe this Nonsense Do it a Home..

    • Sue Smith

      Does this include the new ‘religion’ of climate change?

      • Owi Wowi

        Sue, you could spend 30 minutes on the Internet and discover all that has been scientifically proven about climate change and after that it is not too hard to differentiate the worthy from the fantastical nonsense. It isn’t a religion it is just hijacked by communists, but so was ‘the public good’ but we didn’t abandon that.

        • Sue Smith

          Reminds me of the film “Inherit the Wind” where Spencer Tracy’s character says of the bible and Darwin, “we must abandon the pleasant poetry of Genesis; Darwin took us forward to a hilltop”.

          The fact that communists/the left has control of the climate change religion is a major deterrent to a great number of people – especially conservatives. There are no mediating voices and obviously activists don’t have the intelligence to realize this. The left is using it as an excuse to change the world. Why else would somebody exclaim after Paris that “soon we’ll have no cars”?!! This turns off the average person.

          Yesterday in Sydney we had a Tornado. This is almost unheard of. Winds reached 218kph. One news report suggested that ‘it was believed’ that winds of approximately that speed occurred in 1991 in a Queensland tornado. It’s all over the shop.

          And I would very strongly disagree with you that “the public good” had not been abandoned to a greater or lesser degree. But that’s for another day. It’s 5.49am here in Sydney and all is well.

  • sidor

    Both the Atheists and the Christians should enjoy the traditional pagan Latin celebration of the birth of sun-god Mitra in the longest night: it has nothing to do with the Christian faith.

    • davidofkent

      Well it didn’t, but it is supposed to now!

      • sidor

        Many Atheists believe in Santa. Do you?

        • red2black

          Everyone does. We wouldn’t get any presents otherwise.

  • George

    ‘The Hitch had very little to say against Allah because he knew the latter’s followers did not take kindly to cheap remarks against him.’

    Both disingenuous and incorrect. Christopher Hitchens was an ardent supporter
    of apostates Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali whilst he was alive; further, he
    gave multiple critiques of Islam, all of which are readily available on YouTube.

  • davidofkent

    It is customary for people to become more religious as they reach venerable old age. It is the fear of the unknown. It’s as good a reason as any for believing in God, if you must. As Voltaire said on his deathbed, in answer to a priest’s call for him to renounce the devil, “This is no time to be making new enemies!”

  • cromwell

    We need less religious superstition not more but I suppose a case could be made for a radical Christianity to oppose the Islamist invasion with a crusade or two. Best do it now while we have superior weapons. While they fight it out us atheists can get on with enjoying life.

    • Woman In White

      The religious superstition of the radical evangelical atheists is indeed something we could all desire less of.

  • Torybushhug

    The original word of God was contained in a document full of violence, intolerance and pious inadequacy.
    One can believe in a higher order without any need for Man made religious templates and yarns. The God of the Bible is so damned pedestrian, who the heck could be interested in anything it had to say?
    Any worthy God like presence would be immensely more impressive.

    • samton909

      It is refreshing to hear from someone who has been the basis for the most advanced cultures on earth, unlike Mere Christianity, which has been the religion of all the failed societies.

  • Sanctimony

    What’s happened to all the previous comments ?

    • Woman In White

      Good riddance to bad rubbish.

      • Sanctimony

        Happy Christmas you fatuous old ratbag… and to all the other religious fruitcakes who plague these sites !

        • Woman In White

          You seem to think ’tis the season to be trolling …

          • Sanctimony

            The nearest I could get to trolling is Troilism …. a desire to indulge in threesomes… or an affinity to Troilus, son of Priam, who is believed to have enjoyed watching his wife perform with one of his son’s friends…. interesting company that you keep….

          • Woman In White

            good GRIEF Moany, I’m hardly responsible for these sordid s€x fantasies of yours, and that you so enjoy to put on ghastly public display.

          • Sanctimony

            Reading my posts is probably as close as you have ever come to enjoying s€x… I can see you sitting on the serried balcony of your Fréjus high-rise condo… frotting and foaming with lust at all the tanned and muscled Lotharios parading beneath you and gasping for a bit of saucisson noir as you divert your corporal seethings into some sort of eclamptic and paroxysmic release of all your frustrations…..

          • Woman In White

            cripes, you’re a git Moany

          • Sanctimony

            And you are gagging for a bite of amour propre in the argot of my coarser friends in the lowlife hangouts which I haunt, when not stretching myself mentally against far more accomplished intellects than your own hackneyed and trite ranting and posturing declamation…..

            I can return to the mountains tomorrow and face far bigger challenges than nitpicking with intellectual midgets like your good self…..

          • Woman In White

            your continual self-aggrandisement is as pitiful as it is erroneous, Moany

          • Sanctimony

            And here’s your Christmas card:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVBIeEglehw

            I imagine you could play all three roles……

            Joyeux Noel….

          • Woman In White

            You’re likely too stupid to have understood that referring to “your continual self-aggrandisement” amounts to calling you a w*nk*r.

          • Sanctimony

            Perhaps in the intellectual or spiritual sense your description of me as a branleur might be appropriate… but it is many years since I needed to indulge in spanking the monkey… whereas I imagine that your hunger for romantic fulfillment or physical gratification might require the finest products of the Anne Summers emporiums to gratify your manifest frustrations….

      • Sanctimony

        Most of them were yours…..

  • jmjm208

    Taki: You say that you sold your soul to the devil – you can still be saved from your sins if you truly repent and ask Jesus to be your personal Saviour. He died for your sins so that you can be forgiven by God, and rose again to be your Saviour.

    • Cobbett

      Of course he did.

  • Cobbett

    Christianity is a religion for wimps…why bother with it?

    • Woman In White

      Atheism is the religion of self-important bores.

      Why bother with it ?

      • Cobbett

        Is that so? I’m a Pagan myself.

        • samton909

          Oh, well then.

          Enjoy the blood eagle.

      • Dutch_Boy

        You confuse atheism with the books of two or three famous activists. And you fail to point out that atheism comes in two quite different forms: 1) belief that there is/are no god(s); 2) lack of belief in (a) god(s). My favourite flavour is apatheism: a lack of interest in the question whether or not there is/are (a) god(s).
        What we need in our societies is not some public form of atheism but an effort to protect secularism. A theist may of course very well be a secularist.

        • Woman In White

          You confuse atheism with the books of two or three famous activists

          I have no idea why you cling to the irrational belief that I might only ever have encountered atheism inside books.

          You also appear to confuse atheism and agnosticism.

    • samton909

      Yes.

      Enjoy Islam, Britons.

      • Cobbett

        A religion for nutters…no thanks.

        • Germainecousin

          But it is clearly the one you are going to end up with. The statistics point to only one conclusion, unless there is a miracle.

  • Rabbit of Caerbannog

    It’s not so much having a religious backbone, but having a conservative one to fight off PC culture and the regressive Left.

  • Woman In White

    The evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is an atheist hard to dislike. He’s charming, learned and intelligent, and never a bully.

    Oh yeah ?

    https://spectator.com.au/2014/08/the-bizarre-and-costly-cult-of-richard-dawkins/

    http://pragmaticcompendium.com/2015/04/16/richard-dawkins-on-christians-mock-them-ridicule-them-in-public-with-contempt/

  • Anti_Theist

    “The Hitch had very little to say against Allah..” Really? He seems to know a lot about the late great Christopher Hitchens and at the same time knowing very little.

  • GreyRover

    If Taki thinks Hitch had little to say about Islam he hasn’t been paying attention. Try reading God is not Great or look for him on YouTube.

  • Fantastic article. Thank you Mr Taki.

    • Germainecousin

      Absolutely, just what I was looking for. God Bless you and yours Mr Taki, and you as well Julian-Says

  • Terence Hale

    Hi,
    „We need Christianity more than ever in this Age of Atheists”. Christianity as a world religion has a face in the name of Jesus the son of God. In the Islam it is a crime to give it a face and its being is from a prophet, the common denominator is God. God is at the back of most people’s minds typifying a delinierisation between good and evil and its symbiotic existence. Without the devil God cannot exist and a celebration without God remains just a party.

  • Sanctimony

    Hey, folks, The Woman in White has admitted to having an IQ of only 120…. that’s like admitting that you are an effing idiot…. here it is in her own words….

    ????!!!!!?????!!!??!?!?!???!!!???

    No, I’m saying that IQ tests and IQ itself have certain intrinsic structural flaws.

    That doesn’t mean IQ is not useful, and BTW my own IQ is hovering somewhere in a region towards 120, although it’s never been formally established (which I’d have to prepare for anyway, so my estimate from personal ad hoc experiment is unreliable), but it **does** privilege the testing of certain rational abilities or skills to the detriment of others, that it implicitly considers as being non-valuable to its own criteria.

    The simple fact that a training regimen can influence the results of an IQ test is sufficient to demonstrate its unreliability for the establishment of a criterion of native intelligence.

    Ipsa res loquitur……………..

    • Terence Hale

      „No, I’m saying that IQ tests and IQ itself have certain intrinsic structural flaws”, It is indeed,
      if for example you make an IQ test in Holland and then in Britain, and mark the difference. The Dutch themselves having the highest IQ, but we must remember this is the summation of all of them added together.

  • Why not Islam because Muslims are less inclined towards Atheism and Islam is already growing fastest and evidences show that in fact Vatican & Atheists are allies! http://historicityofreligioustexts.blogspot.ca/p/extreemist-christians-atheist-united-in.html

    • whorya

      So god fearing R, Catholics, Are connected to non god believers, where did you get that from..

  • EUSSR-Dissident

    Islam is a moon worshipping cult, Christianity overlaid existing sun worship cults in Europe – the winter solstice at christmas when the sun is reborn, the spring equinox when nature, and then Jesus comes back to life around Easter. Europe desires religion more then ever, but it has to be rational and serve the people. I don’t think the liberalised, globalised CofE does any longer.

    • whorya

      I read this when you posted it, but I was skimming the posts. But I agree completely. Still don’t understand about, Islam is a metaphorised moon worshipping cult. enlighten me. As I see Islam, they pray to the East. No matter where in the world they are. If they are visiting Mecca. And if they are to the East of Mecca, but their feet are touching the walls of their holy shrine, do they still pray to the East or turn around and face the shrine, i.e. West ?. For me if they still face East they are like all religions, Sun Worshippers.

  • Sophie Curtis-Hardy

    This is disgusting. Why do people insist on belittling others to get their point across ? There is nothing wrong with Islam as a religion, there is nothing wrong with Christianity as a religion and there’s nothing wrong with being an atheist either. There is however something wrong with extremists and bad people and you will find these people in every religion and in atheism so there is no point only pointing out Islamic extremists when Christianity is an important factor when it comes to the KKK and The Christian Identity Movement.

Close