Category Archives: Atheism

Jack is a happy and energetic young boy who spends his days playing outside with his brother, Warnie, and his nights sleeping peacefully inside his parents' spacious home in Belfast, Ireland.

Life it seems couldn't be better.

But then his mother dies of cancer. And then his father a stern man grows despondent, walking drearily through each day as if life itself is not worth living.

Jack, too, becomes cynical about life. He even swears off all religion, believing the world and the universe together are a "rather regrettable institution."

At 14, he turns his back on Christianity.

In high school and college, he embraces atheism.

He is as he later says as "non-moral as a human creature could be."

God, though, has other plans for Jack.

Jack better known as C.S. Lewis is the subject of the new film The Most Reluctant Convert, which follows Lewis from his childhood, to his teenage years, to his time at Oxford as a young adult, when he converts to Christianity and becomes a world-famous apologist. (The film's subtitle is "The Untold Story of C.S. Lewis.)

Here are three things you should know about the film:

The movie is based on an award-winning stage play starring Max McLean, who as in the film plays a middle-aged Lewis who is looking back on his childhood and conversion. But while the stage play stars McLean in a solo role, the film features him alongside numerous actors in what is a combination of narration and drama.

Like Ebenezer Scrooge traveling back in time to see his early life, the middle-aged Lewis (played by McLean) travels back in time to his childhood, teen and young adult years, where he walks the same streets and visits the same houses and classrooms of his younger self oftentimes mere feet away from the younger Lewis.

It's a brilliant method of filmmaking that is as entertaining as it is educational and inspiring. The movie was directed by Norman Stone, who also helmed The Narnia Code (2009) and C.S. Lewis: Beyond Narnia (2005). Stone won an International Emmy and a BAFTA Award for Shadowlands, the 1986 film about Lewis' relationship with his wife, Joy Davidman.

It was filmed in 18 locations in and around Oxford, England, where Lewis attended and later taught. The fragrance of history nearly teems from the screen.

McLean carries much of the film's weight, but he's not the only impressive actor. Nicholas Ralph (All Creatures Great and Small), who plays Lewis as a young adult, and Tom Glenister (Vera, Doc Martin), who plays J.R.R. Tolkien, also stand out. Eddie Ray Martin, a young actor who plays Lewis as a child in his debut theatrical role, is solid, too.

McLean is a well-known actor who is known as much for his rich, baritone voice as his face. He narrated The Listener's Bible an audio version of Scripture that is widely available on the Internet. (It's so relaxing that I often use it to help my children unwind at night.) He is the founder and artistic director of the Fellowship for Performing Arts, a New York-based company that produces film and theatre from a Christian worldview. He also adapted for the stage The Screwtape Letters, The Great Divorce, Genesis and Mark's Gospel.

It has been said that the 18th-century preacher George Whitefield had such a captivating voice that he could pronounce one word "Mesopotamia" and make people weep. Perhaps McLean's voice is the 21st-century version of that.

"This story has a remarkable ability to engage audiences regardless of their religious belief," McLean said. "Lewis applied his formidable and self-deprecating wit to engage audiences about his own trying and painful experiences."

The Most Reluctant Convert is an inspiring tale about an atheist who was consumed by intellect he believed Christianity was one "mythology among many" became the greatest defender of the faith of the 21st century.

Lewis was drawn by the Holy Spirit, yes, but God used friends and intellectual giants alike to persuade him with Lewis kicking and screaming each step of the way.

Doubts about his atheism were sparked when a college friend, Owen Barfield, switched from materialism to theism. Lewis tried talking "sense" into his friend, but to no avail. Lewis was further impacted by such Christian authors as George MacDonald and G. K. Chesterton men who wrote honestly about the "roughness and density of life" that, Lewis said, secular-minded authors lacked.

Two Christian intellects, J.R.R. Tolkien and Hugo Dyson, helped Lewis clear the final hurdles. At the time, Lewis said he believed in a supernatural being but not the personal God of Christianity. Jesus was a good moral teacher, Lewis argued, yet not the Savior of the world.

Tolkien was having none of it.

"Either this man was and is the Son of God, or else he is a liar, a lunatic or a fraud," Tolkien told Lewis. "But all this patronizing nonsense about him being some great moral teacher, it's not an option to us, nor was it intended to be."

The Most Reluctant Convertis part-biopic, part-apologetics crash course, and part-evangelistic tool. It's the story of how a God-hater was transformed into a God-worshipper. Yes, you may already know much of Lewis' story, but you haven't seen it told like this. The Most Reluctant Convertis one of the best films of the year.

Learn more atCSLewisMovie.com

The Most Reluctant Convert is unrated but should be treated as a PG film. Content warnings: We see Lewis drink in a pub and smoke a pipe. We hear two coarse words (both d--nit). We hear Lewis discuss "sexual temptation" and "lust," although the film contains no sexuality. Lewis also discusses how his hospital roommate had a "furious affair" with the nurse. We hear them laugh but see nothing.

Entertainment rating: 5 out of 5 stars

Family-friendly rating: 4 out of 5 stars.

Photo courtesy: A1 Productions

Michael Foust has covered the intersection of faith and news for 20 years. His stories have appeared in Baptist Press,Christianity Today, The Christian Post, theLeaf-Chronicle,the Toronto Star andthe Knoxville News-Sentinel.

Read more:
3 Things to Know about The Most Reluctant Convert: The Untold Story of CS Lewis - Crosswalk.com

Atheists living in 13 countries risk being condemned to death, just for their beliefs (or non-belief) according to a new, comprehensive report from theInternational Humanist and Ethical Unionout on Tuesday.All 13 countries identified by the study are Muslim majority.

The countries that impose these penalties are Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.With the exception of Pakistan, those countries all allow for capital punishment againstapostasy, i.e., the renunciation of a particular religion. Pakistan, meanwhile, imposes the death penalty for blasphemy, which can obviously include disbelief in God.

The study's interactive map gives a good, broad, overview of which countries punish apostasy and blasphemy by death (black), with prison time (red), or place legal restrictions on (non-)religious speech and thought (yellow):

The report is a more comprehensive version of a similar study released last year that identified just seven countries where atheists faced capital punishment, only half of this year's total. It alsofound much more widespread discrimination against atheists around the world. "Our results show that the overwhelming majority of countries fail to respect the rights of atheistsand freethinkers," the study explains, noting that laws in some countries prevent atheists from marrying, attending public school, participating as a citizen, holding public office, or just existing at all. The authors, citing a Gallup study, estimate that about 13 percent of the world's population is atheist, while 23 percent identify as simply "not religious."

Although not on the list of 13, Bangladesh receives some special attention in the report as a particular low-light. Several non-religious and atheist bloggers and journalists in the country have faced death threats and harassment this yearin the wake of a series of government prosecutions for blasphemy. One blogger, Ahmed Rajib Haider,was murdered with a machete outside of his home. The report also incorporates assessment of general free speech protections in each country. Russia earned significant criticism in part because of its anti-LGBT "propaganda" laws. And North Korea, an aggressively secular state, received the report's lowest rating of "Grave Violations."

Because of the U.S.'s strong constitutional free speech protections and lack of an official state religion, the country fared moderately well in the report, earning a "mostly satisfactory" rating. But the IHEU had some cautionary notes on how atheists are actually treated in the U.S., criticizing "a range of laws that limit therole of atheists in regards to public duties, or else entangle the government with religion to thedegree that being religious is equated with being an American, and vice versa." Those laws include constitutional provisions still on the books in seven states (Arkansas,Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas) barring atheists from holding public office. The authors add:

While there is some legalremedy for clear religious discrimination by the government, it can often go unchallenged insituations where it is difficult, or personally disadvantageous or hazardous, to take a stand againstauthority, for example in prisons, the military, and even some administrative contexts.

So, which countries earned a somewhat elusive "free and equal" rating from the IHEU? The best-ranked countries included Jamaica, Uruguay, Japan, Taiwan, and Belgium.

This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.

Go here to see the original:
There Are 13 Countries Where Atheism Is Punishable by ...

Studies have found that both atheists and agnostics are surprisingly knowledgable about a variety of religions. Which begs the commonly asked question: what is the difference between someone who defines themselves as atheist and a professedagnostic?

There is a key distinction. An atheist doesnt believe in a god or divinebeing. The word originates with the Greek atheos, which is built from the roots a-(without) andtheos(a god). Atheism is the doctrine or belief that there is no god.

However, an agnostic neither believes nor disbelieves in a god or religious doctrine. Agnostics assert that its impossible for human beings to know anything about how the universe was created and whether or not divine beings exist.

Agnosticism was coined by biologist T.H. Huxley and comes from the Greek gnstos, which means unknown or unknowable.

For example:

To complicate matters, atheists and agnostics are often confused with theists and deists.A theist is the opposite of an atheist. Theists believe in the existence of a god or gods.

Like a theist, a deist believes in God. But a deist believes that while God created the universe, natural laws determine how the universe plays out.

Deists are often connected to Isaac Newtons clockwork universe theory, which compares the universe to a clock that has been wound up and set in motion by God but is governed by the laws of science.

For example:

Religious or not, you likely say goodbye on a daily basis. But were you aware of the words holy history?

See the rest here:
Atheism vs Agnosticism: What's the Difference ...

The idea of American exceptionalism has become so dubious that much of its modern usage is merely sarcastic. But when it comes to religion, Americans really are exceptional. No rich country prays nearly as much as the U.S, and no country that prays as much as the U.S. is nearly as rich.

Americas unique synthesis of wealth and worship has puzzled international observers and foiled their grandest theories of a global secular takeover. In the late 19th century, an array of celebrity philosophersthe likes of Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freudproclaimed the death of God, and predicted that atheism would follow scientific discovery and modernity in the West, sure as smoke follows fire.

Stubbornly pious Americans threw a wrench in the secularization thesis. Deep into the 20th century, more than nine in 10 Americans said they believed in God and belonged to an organized religion, with the great majority of them calling themselves Christian. That number held steadythrough the sexual-revolution 60s, through the rootless and anxious 70s, and through the greed is good 80s.

Read: Elite failure has brought Americans to the edge of an existential crisis

But in the early 1990s, the historical tether between American identity and faith snapped. Religious non-affiliation in the U.S. started to riseand rise, and rise. By the early 2000s, the share of Americans who said they didnt associate with any established religion (also known as nones) had doubled. By the 2010s, this grab bag of atheists, agnostics, and spiritual dabblers had tripled in size.

History does not often give the satisfaction of a sudden and lasting turning point. History tends to unfold in messy cyclesactions and reactions, revolutions and counterrevolutionsand even semipermanent changes are subtle and glacial. But the rise of religious non-affiliation in America looks like one of those rare historical moments that is neither slow, nor subtle, nor cyclical. You might call it exceptional.

The obvious question for anybody who spends at least two seconds looking at the graph above is: What the hell happened around 1990?

According to Christian Smith, a sociology and religion professor at the University of Notre Dame, Americas nonreligious lurch has mostly been the result of three historical events: the association of the Republican Party with the Christian right, the end of the Cold War, and 9/11.

This story begins with the rise of the religious right in the 1970s. Alarmed by the spread of secular cultureincluding but not limited to the sexual revolution, the Roe v. Wade decision, the nationalization of no-fault divorce laws, and Bob Jones University losing its tax-exempt status over its ban on interracial datingChristians became more politically active. The GOP welcomed them with open arms. The party, which was becoming more dependent on its exurban-white base, needed a grassroots strategy and a policy platform. Within the next decade, the religious rightincluding Ralph Reeds Christian Coalition, James Dobsons Focus on the Family, and Jerry Falwells Moral Majorityhad become fundraising and organizing juggernauts for the Republican Party. In 1980, the GOP social platform was a facsimile of conservative Christian views on sexuality, abortion, and school prayer.

Read: Evangelical fear elected Trump

The marriage between the religious and political right delivered Reagan, Bush, and countless state and local victories. But it disgusted liberal Democrats, especially those with weak connections to the Church. It also shocked the conscience of moderates, who preferred a wide berth between their faith and their politics. Smith said its possible that young liberals and loosely affiliated Christians first registered their aversion to the Christian right in the early 1990s, after a decade of observing its powerful role in conservative politics.

Second, it may have felt unpatriotic to confess ones ambivalence toward God while the U.S. was locked in a geopolitical showdown with a godless Evil Empire. In 1991, however, the Cold War ended. As the U.S.S.R. dissolved, so did atheisms association with Americas nemesis. After that, nones could be forthright about their religious indifference, without worrying that it made them sound like Soviet apologists.

Third, Americas next geopolitical foe wasnt a godless state. It was a God-fearing, stateless movement: radical Islamic terrorism. A series of bombings and attempted bombings in the 1990s by fundamentalist organizations such as al-Qaeda culminated in the 9/11 attacks. It would be a terrible oversimplification to suggest that the fall of the Twin Towers encouraged millions to leave their church, Smith said. But over time, al-Qaeda became a useful referent for atheists who wanted to argue that all religions were inherently destructive.

Meanwhile, during George W. Bushs presidency, Christianitys association with unpopular Republican policies drove more young liberals and moderates away from both the party and the Church. New Atheists, such as Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris, became intellectual celebrities; the 2006 best seller American Theocracy argued that evangelicals in the Republican coalition were staging a quiet coup that would plunge the country into disarray and financial ruin. Throughout the Bush presidency, liberal votersespecially white liberal voters detached from organized religion in ever-higher numbers.

Religion has lost its halo effect in the past three decades, not because science drove God from the public square, but rather because politics did. In the 21st century, not religious has become a specific American identityone that distinguishes secular, liberal whites from the conservative, evangelical right.

Other social forces, which have little to do with geopolitics or partisanship, have played a key role in the rise of the nones.

The Church is just one of many social institutionsincluding banks, Congress, and the policethat have lost public trust in an age of elite failure. But scandals in the Catholic Church have accelerated its particularly rapid loss of moral stature. According to Pew research, 13 percent of Americans today self-identify as former Catholics, and many of them leave organized religion altogether. And as the ranks of the nones have swelled, its become more socially acceptable for casual or rare churchgoers to tell pollsters that they dont particularly identify with any faith. Its also become easier for nones to meet, marry, and raise children who grow up without any real religious attachment.

Nor does Smith rule out the familiar antagonists of capitalism and the internet in explaining the popularity of non-affiliation. The former has made life more precarious, and the latter has made it easier for anxious individuals to build their own spiritualities from ideas and practices they find online, he said, such as Buddhist meditation guides and atheist Reddit boards.

Most important has been the dramatic changes in the American family. The past half century has dealt a series of body blows to American marriage. Divorce rates spiked in the 70s through the 90s, following the state-by-state spread of no-fault divorce laws. Just as divorce rates stabilized, the marriage rate started to plummet in the 80s, due to both the decline of marriage within the working class and delayed marriage among college-educated couples.

Read: The not-so-great reason divorce rates are declining

Theres historically been this package: Get married, go to church or temple, have kids, send them to Sunday school, Smith said. But just as stable families make stable congregations, family instability can destabilize the Church. Divorced individuals, single parents, and children of divorce or single-parent households are all more likely to detach over time from their congregations.

Finally, the phenomenon of delayed adulthood might be another subtle contributor. More Americans, especially college graduates in big metro areas, are putting off marriage and childbearing until their 30s, and are using their 20s to establish a career, date around, and enjoy being young and single in a city. By the time they settle down, they have established a routinework, brunch, gym, date, drink, footballthat leaves little room for weekly Mass. They know who they are by 30, and they dont feel like they need a church to tell them, Smith said.

The rise of the nones shows no signs of slowing down. In fact, the religious identity that seems to be doing the best job at both retaining old members and attracting new ones is the newfangled American religion of Nothing Much at All.

Does the rise of the nones matter?

Lets first consider the possibility that it doesnt. As Americas youth have slipped away from organized religion, they havent quite fallen into wickedness. If anything, todays young people are uniquely conscientiousless likely to fight, drink, use hard drugs, or have premarital sex than previous generations. They might not be able to quote from the Book of Matthew, but their economic and social politicswhich insist on protections for the politically meek and the historically persecutedarent so far from a certain reading of the beatitudes.

But the liberal politics of young people brings us to the first big reason to care about rising non-affiliation. A gap has opened up between Americas two political parties. In a twist of fate, the Christian right entered politics to save religion, only to make the Christian-Republican nexus unacceptable to millions of young peoplethus accelerating the countrys turn against religion.

Although it would be wrong to call Democrats a secular party (older black voters are highly religious and dependably vote Democratic), the left today has a higher share of religiously unaffiliated voters than anytime in modern history. At the same time, the average religiosity of white Christian Republicans has gone up, according to Robert P. Jones, the CEO of the polling firm PRRI and the author of The End of White Christian America. Evangelicals feel so embattled that theyve turned to a deeply immoral and authoritarian champion to protect themeven if it means rendering unto an American Caesar whatever the hell he wants. American politics is at risk of becoming a war of religiosity versus secularism by proxy, where both sides see the other as a catastrophic political force that must be destroyed at all costs.

The deeper question is whether the sudden loss of religion has social consequences for Americans who opt out. Secular Americans, who are familiar with the ways that traditional faiths have betrayed modern liberalism, may not have examined how organized religion has historically offered solutions to their modern existential anxieties.

Making friends as an adult without a weekly congregation is hard. Establishing a weekend routine to soothe Sunday-afternoon nerves is hard. Reconciling the overwhelming sense of lifes importance with the universes ostensible indifference to human suffering is hard.

Although belief in God is no panacea for these problems, religion is more than a theism. It is a bundle: a theory of the world, a community, a social identity, a means of finding peace and purpose, and a weekly routine. Those, like me, who have largely rejected this package deal, often find themselves shopping la carte for meaning, community, and routine to fill a faith-shaped void. Their politics is a religion. Their work is a religion. Their spin class is a church. And not looking at their phone for several consecutive hours is a Sabbath.

American nones may well build successful secular systems of belief, purpose, and community. But imagine what a devout believer might think: Millions of Americans have abandoned religion, only to re-create it everywhere they look.

Read more from the original source:
How America Lost Its Religion - The Atlantic

By Leah MarieAnn Klett, Christian Post Editor | Wednesday, October 27, 2021Eric Metaxas | The Christian Post/Sonny Hong

Eric Metaxas believes that culture is at a paradigm-shifting moment, with science and archeology increasingly pointing to the existence of God and those opposed to Christianity arent going to like it."

We've all lived at a time when not only is the trend that science is pointing us away from God, but we've been living for over 100 years with the narrative that says, science is fundamentally at odds with faith, that reason is at odds with religion, the Christian author, speaker and conservative radio host told The Christian Post.

The one thing everybody kept saying science is leading us away from religion. Ironically, in the last 50 years, precisely the opposite has happened. Science is leading us to God. It's big news."

In his latest book, Is Atheism Dead? Metaxas uncovers new evidence and arguments against the idea of a Creatorless universe. He draws on the insights of top scientists and five scientific discoveries to prove that atheism is untenable.

I am genuinely more excited about this book and about getting the information in this book out to people than I have ever been about any book I have written, the New York native told CP.

One archeological discovery Metaxas said particularly intrigued him was the reported discovery of the biblical Sodom. Some scientists have speculated that a city known as Tall El-Hammam was destroyed by a meteor and could actually be the site of Sodom, the ancient biblical city destroyed for its wickedness.

Most believers, and definitely most non-believers, don't know this information, and it's because we live in a media echo chamber that tends to filter out this kind of information. By the grace of God, I've been able to stumble on this stuff," he said.

Metaxas explained that the title of his latest book is based on the 1966 Time magazine article that provocatively asked Is God Dead?

Maybe the logical question in 1966 was, Is God dead? But the logical question, now that science itself is pointing to the existence of God, which sounds crazy but it's true, and nobody knows it maybe now's the time to write a book with the title, Is Atheism Dead?

Based on his research, Metaxas stressed that science, archaeology, and history dont just support Christianity they also undermine atheism.

This idea that data and science are at odds the biggest news is that not only is that not true, there are two things that follow, Metaxas explained. The second is, according to John Lennox ... it is actually atheism that is incompatible with science, which is a dramatic statement. The third thing, which nobody seems to know, but it's true, is that Christian faith led to modern science this is a historical fact; this is not some Christian gloss on history.

Science lately ... is discovering things about our universe, about the Earth, about human life, about cellular life that looks so fine-tuned, so perfectly calibrated that even atheists are being shaken. That's the one thing that they don't know quite how to handle it, he added.

The more advanced science gets, the more it points to the idea that there had to be a Creator who created the universe, Metaxas said, citing, for example, the complexity of water and plate tectonics.

Every believer needs to understand how freakish it is. I mean, for you to study science, the more you look, the more you just think, I almost can't bear this. The evidence of God is just everywhere I look, including things like water and erosion, he said. It makes you realize God is even more amazing than any of us could ever dream.

Metaxas expressed concern that some Christians today buy into a secular narrative that says its possible to believe in Jesus and the Bible until Scripture seems to contradict science.

That's not the kind of belief God is interested in, he stressed. He doesn't tell you to believe in something that is not true to the bottom. He is truth either Jesus rose from the dead bodily or He didn't. Either what the Bible says is true or it isn't. Either the Lord created the universe and every detail in it or [He] didn't. "

He added: "This idea that we would sort of put ... our faith as Christians kind of in a corner, we're participating in the marginalization of our faith. Our faith is supposed to touch everything: science, math, history. We need to be much bolder in saying, If this is true, it is true everywhere.

The Bonhoeffer,Amazing Graceand Martin Lutherauthor acknowledged that though science and archeology increasingly prove the existence of God, there will always be naysayers who refuse to acknowledge such truth.

I think in these last days, as things unravel around the world, God is shining His light brighter and brighter; He's allowing us to discover things via science and via archaeology it simply gets harder and harder to deny Him, Metaxas said. God will just keep pushing out this evidence .. but at the end of the day, it's got to be the Holy Spirit.

Though Is Atheism Dead was written for anyone eager to learn "with an open mind," it was primarily written for the Church, Metaxas said a Church he believes desperately needs to wake up.

In my Bonhoeffer book I deal with this the Church was slow to wake up, he contended. And that is a model of what not to do. If we do not wake up and fight and a lot of Christians have bad theology that says, Oh, I don't think I'm supposed to fight' not only is that not biblical, that's demonic. God pulled us to fight evil. He calls us to fight on our knees in prayer, but He also calls us to fight in all kinds of other ways.

Part of the reason I wrote this book also is to say to people, Hey, this is not a philosophy. Our faith is not a truth this is truth. And God is giving this to us so that we can be emboldened.'"

Metaxas said he believes God is going to turn things around but His Church has to fight and be armed with information.

On the science thing ... I'm thinking, tell me where I'm missing something here? I know I'm not, because I got all this information from scientists. So people are gaslighting us, that Christians have their weird views. It is nonsense. We have to be bold, we have to know what we believe, and we have to act. And, if you don't do it for yourself, do it for your kids and your grandkids.

More here:
Eric Metaxas on why atheism is 'incompatible' with science, why the Church must 'wake up' and 'fight' - The Christian Post

"Is Jesus Lord or is Caesar king?," Delano Squires asked Thursday on "Tucker Carlson Tonight," cutting to the heart of the parents vs. government debate that has set off a political firestorm at school board meetings nationwide.

"The question is, Is Jesus Lord or is Caesar king?," the "Fearless" contributor wondered. "And really, what we're seeing play out isthat tension between two competing authorities. [W]hat you see in Virginia, in New York City, in the upper northwest is school systems asserting authority that they do not rightfully have. Our children are not theirs."

ERIC METAXAS: IS ATHEISM THE ENEMY OF FREEDOM? HERE'S HOW RETREATING FROM FAITH MAKES US LESS FREE

Squires' pithy summary of the crux of the matter comes amid recent Fox News polling showing that Republican Virginia gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin leads Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe 53% to 45%. Only a few weeks ago, the numbers were almost opposite with McAuliffe in the lead. Youngkin's surge follows McAuliffe's admission in a Sept. 28 debate, "I dont think parents should be telling schools what they should teach."

Squires said he thinks that "most regular parents" realize the government "does not own their children." Instead, he said there is a "narcissistic classroom cosplay that involves two groups in the elite, privileged class: White liberals seeking absolution for sins that they didn't commit; and Black liberals seeking empathy for injustices that they didn't endure."

Squires framed teachers calling themselves "liberators and de-colonizers" as an act of narcissism.

The "bigger issue," he said, is the "struggle between our rights as individuals and the government's rightful authority." That boils down to a religious struggle, "particularly for Christian parents" like himself who have taken their children out of public schools to homeschool them.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Squires stood for parents' rights and mothers he dubbed "mama bears" resisting "race essentialism" and "radical gender theory." He also admonished fathers to do the same, "because for too long, fathers have taken a backseat when it comes to the education of their children."

Visit link:
Delano Squires hammers McAuliffe on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight': 'Schools asserting authority they do not have' - Fox News

Literally Ilm-ul-Kalam means the science of debate. The foremost aim of introducing this knowledge was the defense of religious doctrines by means of logic and rational arguments. Those who engaged in this discussion were referred to as Mutakallimun(those who practice knowledge of Kalam). The older history of Ilm-ul-Kalam is associated with the rationalist group Mutazilites that emerged at the beginning of second century. Later on two other school of thoughts established such as Maturidites and Asharites who represented the mainstream Sunni theology and viewed Mutazilites approach contrary to Islamic tradition and holy scriptures which brought many conflicts among themselves. I do not intend to indulge in this long historical discussion.

We know that Atheism has almost defeated all the religions except Islam because many intellectuals, even though non-Muslims they are, have admitted the rationality of Islam, the only religion goes hand in hand with science and also confronting contemporary models and alternatives. The weapon atheists use for demolishing religion is sciencenot science actually.but scientism, the attitude of extending scientific laws and consequences to ethical, social, philosophical and religious values. Scientism has to do nothing with science. It is the misuse of science for achieving personal desires. It can be classified as a religion like Darwinism, Naturalism, Socialism and Marxism etc. Even in America people celebrate Darwin's day. Is Darwin a single genius lived on the planet? There are certainly many more but why did not they get as much protocol? The reason is obvious. Atheists view Darwin their pseudo-prophet who proposed an alternative theory of creation which is the building block of atheism. The most important things of our life such as God, ethics and meaning etc, do not exist physically. Now what scientismists do, they reject all these metaphysical entities solely on the basis of science. They argue that these things cannot be verified by science and what cannot be verified by science do not exist. It is an explicit fallacy to study metaphysics using scientific spectacles. The very definition of inductive logic on which science is based, suggests that there is no certainty in the realm of science. The relation between premises and consequences is that of probability. The scientific method is limited to observation and experimentation. What lies beyond sensory perception science has no right to deny its existence. If it did so, it would be the violation of its basic definition. With the praiseworthy, attractive and astonishing achievements of science people started applying scientific method to categories that were before thought to be domains of philosophy and religion. Unfortunately, it has also brutally disrupted philosophy which resulted in movements such as logical positivism limiting the broader view and scope of philosophy to materialistic approach to make it parallel and compatible with current dominant methodology and worldview. They usually neglect the probability of variation in scientific assertions, even though it has been experienced many times in the history of science. Science may be a knowledge but not all knowledge is science. Scientists do an observation at different places and times and then broadens it universally, but if someone came up with a contradictory observation at any other place or time the previous one would be discredited because scientific claims are always exposed to falsely . A theory is said to be scientific if it is empirically falsifiable.We have to make religious community aware of the misuse of science. Scientism has made our youth agnostic and skeptic regarding their ethical, moral and religious values. To increase the rational potential of people to steadfast on their faith, the comeback of Ilm-Ul-Kalam is inevitable. If we did not take a positive step for its comeback and reformation, the young generation will fall in the quagmire of confusion and tension forever.

Writer is a student of Science, Philosophy and Theology

Email:------arafatfani439@gmail.com

Read the original here:
Why is the comeback of Ilm-ul-Kalam necessary ? - Brighter Kashmir

C.S. Lewis (Max McLean) reflects on his spiritual journey in "The Most Reluctant Convert: The Untold Story of C.S. Lewis." Courtesy CSLewisMovie.com

The Most Reluctant Convert: The Untold Story of C. S. Lewis debuts in theaters on November 3 and brings the viewer into C. S. Lewis shoes, from his childhood to when his life begins anew as a full-fledged follower of Jesus.

The short movie is based on the successful stage production by the same name, which heavily draws from C. S. Lewis own account in his book Surprised by Joy, sometimes using direct quotes.

The biopic account is narrated by an older Jack Lewis who journeys with you, the viewer, through his life. Jack is played by acclaimed narrator and stage performer Max McLean, known for his solo stage shows based on Lewis books The Screwtape Letters and The Great Divorce.

The film also stars Nicholas Ralph as the younger Lewis and Eddie Ray Martin as Lewis as a child. The Most Reluctant Convert is directed by Norman Stone, who may be best known as the director of another film about C. S. Lewis, Shadowlands.

Ive personally had the pleasure of going to Oxford and Cambridge, Lewis grave, the Kilns (his home later in his life), the Eagle and Child (a pub frequented by Lewis and Tolkien), and studying the legendary man. The movie uses all of these real-world sites as sets, bringing a unique realism to the story.

Though the storytelling certainly delivers, the constant narration gives the impression of a documentary, and one should set their expectations appropriately. The film uses simplistic and beautiful cinematography as the camera follows the older Lewis through the critical events of his life.

From bookish boy to young professor, Lewis spiritual journey moves from indifferent child to rationalistic teen and atheist, to a dabbler in the occult, to a weakened atheist, to a believer in the transcendent, to aloof theist, and, finally, to reluctant Christian. In each step in the process toward Christ, Lewis dragged his feet, putting up his best fight against Gods draw on his life.

At the beginning, we hear a tirade from the old Lewis explaining what he would have said if youd asked him why he was an atheist all those years ago. His beginning monologue tears down Christianity, posing the problem of evil with rational and rhetorical force. From the beginning, the viewer knows it would take God himself to move a man like this away from his atheism, and that is precisely what happened.

Avid Lewis fans will enjoy how the movie fills between the lines of Surprised by Joy. People who have only heard of the Chronicles of Narnia will get an introduction to one of the most brilliant minds and greatest communicators of the twentieth century and his reluctant conversion to Christianity.

The movie debuts on November 3 and has a short run through November 7. To see if the film is playing at a theater near you, visit CSLewisMovie.com.

The filmmakers commitment to showing Lewis Christian story is apparent in their website, which includes a workbook that your small group or family can use to discuss the biblical truths in his story.

Here is the original post:
New CS Lewis film The Most Reluctant Convert is an inspiring account of a legendary story - Denison Forum

Phil Wood| Special to The News

"Believing is Seeing" is the title of a new book by Michael Guillen, Ph.D. On the front cover, "A Physicist Explains How Science Shattered His Atheism and Revealed the Necessity of Faith." This subject has been of great interest to me since discovering this quote from the Baha'i writings.

The fourth teaching of Bah'u'llh is the agreement of religion and science. God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions.

If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question isfound contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation. (Baha'i World Faith, p. 240)

Guillen begins this book with the story of how he became a scientist. He became interested in science when he was in the second grade. He went on to get a BS in physics and mathematics from UCLA and a Ph.D. in physics, mathematics, and astronomy. After graduating he went to Cambridge, Massachusetts, to teach at Harvard. After several years he left Harvard to work in broadcasting. His last job was as News Science editor at ABC news. He gives a fascinating account of his travels and adventures as a science newscaster and commentator.

The most interesting aspect of his story is his encounter with religion. He came to the conclusion that science did not answer all his questions and began to study religion. He studies the major religions of the world and ended up with a year-long study of the Christian Bible. He found many teachings in the Bible which were completely compatible with his understanding of science. After intensive study, he became a Christian.

The last section of the book is "Your Destiny." He begins with some comments made by college students who are attending a prestigious college in the eastern United States. They are being interviewed and presented with some strange comments about people and their beliefs.

The students accept these strange comments without comment indicating that whatever you believe is OK, without any consideration for facts or truth. He continues to consider the importance of these beliefs in relation to your worldview and how this can influence your actions. This emphasizes the importance of worldview in relation to conditions in the world.

I was not surprised by the results of Guillen's search and his decision to become a Christian and his comments on the importance of religion. The importance of religion is one of the basic Baha'I teachings.

"Religion is, verily, the chief instrument for the establishment of order in the world, and of tranquillity amongst its peoples. The weakening of the pillars of religion hath strengthened the foolish, and emboldened them, and made them more arrogant. Verily I say: The greater the decline of religion, the more grievous the waywardness of the ungodly. This cannot but lead in the end to chaos and confusion. Hear Me, O men of insight, and be warned, ye who are endued with discernment!" (Baha'u'llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 27)

Phil Wood, a Baha'i, from New England, resided 12 years in Barbados, 4 years in China, 35 years in Hutchinson. pwood1937@gmail.com, Phone: 620-314-8571

More:
Wood: The importance of faith - The Hutchinson News

Should religion go extinct? Should we accelerate evolution by killing off religion? Just as the Chicxulub asteroid 65 million years ago killed off 75% of life on Earth, including all non-avion dinosaurs, should we today take control of our evolutionary future by deselecting religion?

Religion should be selected out of the evolutionary process because it has outlived its adaptive usefulness. Oh yes, our ancestors needed religion at one time to establish altruistic communities that would care for selected populations. But the very tribal in-group loyalty that was once adaptive is now preventing the advance of rationality, restricting growth in scientific knowledge, and even preventing world peace. If we could replace religion with science, reason would then govern a single global society without conflict. Really? No, not really. So, just what is going on here?

Some anti-godders along with some theologians turn the analytical lenses of evolutionary theory toward the history of religion. What might this teach us? It appears that in the history of Homo sapiensthat religion united communities in reciprocal altruism. Caring for one another contributed to the health of individuals who grew to reproductive age, or even longer. This insured that the genes of these communities would survive into future generations. Religious communities survived because they were fit.

What does an evolutionary interpterion of religion teach us about God? Nothing. Yet, we cannot sidestep this most important of questions. Is there a divine reality? Is this divine reality gracious or not? Do we need religion in order to enjoy life in relationship with God? Could God get along without human religion?

The anti-godders in our society claim that science is on their side. Truth, justice, and peace are on their side. Is there any evidence to support this? Perhaps, yes.

During the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, what has made the news are religious yahoos who oppose vaccinations. The blood of Jesus is my vaccine, reads a protestors poster in a Sydney rally. Rev. Jackson Lahmayer of Sheridan Church in Tulsa will send you a religious exemption from Covid 19 vaccination or mask-wearing for only a $25 donation to his church. Yes, such examples suggest that religion is irrational and anti-science.

When political leaders insist that government mandated vaccines and masks follow the science, it is frustrating that such a dangerous anti-vax and anti-science force is at work in society. Does this in itself warrant the enforced extinction of religion?

Dangerous. Thats the way religion appears when looking at a very small screen. When we turn to a much larger screen, one that surveys the globe, we see that no major group opposes vaccinations, mask-wearying or public safety. The U.S. Conference of Roman Catholic Bishops along with the Vatican itself insist that receiving the Covid-19 vaccine is morally acceptable and responsible. On September 16, 2021, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America said that even if some individual persons might have good reasons for not receiving the vaccine, there is no exemption in the Orthodox Church for her faithful from any vaccination for religious reasons. Spokespersons for the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, along with pastors of Southern Baptist megachurches all agree: Get vaccinated! Wear masks! (Smith September 17, 2021).

In her attempt to survey the Orthodox Christian world, Scripps neuroscientist Hermina Nedelescu found that virtually all church leaders are strongly committed to following the science. The problem in an age of fake news and conspiracy theories is discerning just what is the most reliable science. In sum, todays religious tribes are overwhelmingly reliant on science at its best.

If youre anti-religious and pro-science, you may wish to switch categories so that religion becomes subsumed under science. One way is to give an evolutionary account of religion. Then, declare that this evolutionary account is superior to any account a theologian might give. This is the strategy pursued by anti-religious forces who wish to turn evolutionary science into the hegemonic worldview.

There are some things we can say about the history of religion that become illuminated from the light of evolutionary theory. Religious phenomena are adaptations, not just useless byproducts, claims evolutionary theorist Terrence Deacon(Deacon 2012, 492). Religion, according to anthropologist Solomon Katz, is a catalyst to promote cooperation and facilitate the emergence of the new moral leadership in scientific, technological, and political spheres(Katz 24:2 1999, 238).

A bit more completely, evolution researcher Augustin Fuentes tells us this: The human niche, our way of making it in the world, consists of extreme cooperation in complex social relationships, in childrearing, in foraging, in information sharing, and in the development of a symbolic, extended, and shared memory, wherein people, places, items, and relationships become imbued with meaning beyond their immediate sensory and temporal contexts(Fuentes 72:2 2015, 177).

Evolutionary insights illuminate todays religious adherents. What goes unnoticed, is that religious adherents are just as interested in the evolutionary interpretation as the anti-religious are. Theologians of the theistic evolution school, for example, like to hear from evolutionary theorists about the emergence of religion in our past. Such science gets incorporated into the theologians comprehensive grasp of Gods work within the creation. Theologians, for the most part, do not perceive a conflict with such science.

There are anti-religious belligerents, in contrast, who want to reduce everything spiritual to biology. This turns religion into a biological epiphenomenon. And a dispensable epiphenomenon at that.

Clearly, religion is man-made, according to the famed Franz De Wall, so the question is what good does it do for us(DeWaal 2013, 94-95). Religion does no good today. Is it time to rid us of religion?

Prominent among the anti-religious forces are those who believe atheism or agnosticism should patent scientific knowledge and prevent others from borrowing scientific authority. Like two species contending for the same evolutionary niche, science should adapt while religion go extinct.

Harvard entomologist and sociobiologist E.O. Wilson champions an Armageddon-like battle in which the scientific children of light will win a total victory over religious darkness. Scienceis the wellspring of all the knowledge we have of the real world that can be tested and fitted to preexisting knowledge.It is not just another way of knowing as often claimed, making it coequal with religious faith. The conflict between scientific knowledge and the teachings of organized religions is irreconcilable (Wilson 2012, 295). Religion should go extinct. Science should survive. Science alone should rule culture.

Should religion go extinct like the dinosaurs? No.

It might be more accurate to say Christianity is not under attack, it is under review, avers Patheos columnist Karl Forehand. Christianity along with the other prominent religions of the world should be subjected to review. Peaceful human flourishing requires every dimension of culture, including both science and religion.

In this review, lets get clear on a few items. First, religion and science are not like two species competing for the same cultural niche. Our global society needs both.

Second, neither science nor reason is the exclusive patent of atheism and agnosticism. Science and reason are the shared resource of Jews, Christians, Muslim, Buddhists, Hindus, along with the spiritual but not religious. To the religious mind, science exposits the book of nature just as scripture exposits special revelation. The most common attitude towards science in the Islamic world is to see it as an objective study of the world of nature, namely as a way of deciphering the signs of God in the cosmic book of the universe. Natural sciences discover the Divine codes built into the cosmos by its Creator, and in doing so, help the believer marvel at the wonders of Gods creation (Kalin 2002, 48).

In brief, knowledge of God comes from two books. The book of nature is interpreted by scientists. The book of special revelation is interpreted by the faithful. We need both to grasp the wondrous works of God in our world.

Third, despite the so-called tribalism of previous centuries that characterized religious rivalry, todays Parliament of the Worlds Religions rallies a concerted effort to bring to our planet peace, justice, and compassion. In addition to combating the virus we know as Covid 19, we must also fight moral viruses such as racism and sexism,. This according to Stephen Avino when opening the 2021 Parlaiment. (1893 Parliament in Chicago)

Fourth, measuring religion according to criteria drawn from social contribution or natural selection misses the most important point. The decisive point is God. The question of whether the world would be better off without religion has no logical bearing on the ontological question of Gods existence.the question of Gods existence is logically and factually independent of the question of whether belief in Gods existence is beneficial for the human species(Lilienfeld 38:4 2014). In order to raise and appraise the question of God, we need theologians. Not scientists, let alone anti-religious malcontents.

On the one hand, the public theologian engages in discourse clarification so that we all can assess the claim to cultural hegemony by the anti-godders among us. Further, the public theologian engages in worldview construction, which incorporates scientific knowledge into a theology of nature.

On the other hand, religion is under review. Within this review, the theologian needs to examine self-critically religions foundations. This includes raising the questions of God. Two such questions. First, does God exist? Second, if God exists, is God gracious?

Answering these questions prepares us much more adequately than evolutionary theory to ask the question: should religion go extinct?

Ted Peters is a pastor, professor, and author of both fiction and nonfiction. Visit: TedsTimelyTake.com.

Ted is emeritus professor of systematic theology and ethics at Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary and the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California. He co-edits the journal, Theology and Science at the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences. His fictional thrillers feature an inner-city pastor, Leona Foxx, who courageously challenges the structures of political domination buttressed by the latest in science and technology.

Deacon, Terrence. 2012. Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged from Nature. New York: W W Norton.

DeWaal, Franz. 2013. The Bonobo and the Atheist. New York: W W Norton.

Fuentes, Augustin. 72:2 2015. What evolution, the human niche, and imagination can tell us about the emergence of religion. Theology Today 170-181.

Kalin, Ibrahim. 2002. Three Views of Science in the Islamic World. In God, Life, and the Cosmos: Christian and Islamic Perspectives, by Muzaffar Iqbal, Syed Nomanul Haq, editors Ted Peters, 43-76. Aldershot UK: Ashgate.

Katz, Solomon. 24:2 1999. Toward a New Concept of Global Morality. Zygon 237-254.

Lilienfeld, Scott and RAchel Ammirati. 38:4 2014. Would the World be Better Off Without Religion? The Skeptical Inquirer 31.

Peters, Ted and Martinez Hewlett. 2005. Evolution from Creation to New Creation. Nashville TN: Abingdon.

Peters, Ted. 2018. Public Theology: Its Pastoral, Apologetic, Scientific, Political, and Prophetic Tasks. International Journal of Public Theology 12:2 153-177; https://brill.com/abstract/journals/ijpt/12/1/ijpt.12.issue-1.xml.

Peters, Ted, and Martinez Hewlett. 2009. Can You Believe in God and Evolution? Nashville TN: Abingdon.

Smith, Peter. September 17, 2021. Many faith leaders say no to endorsing vaccine exemptions. AP News https://apnews.com/article/health-religion-united-states-coronavirus-pandemic-coronavirus-vaccine-9c947acecd6ba26b4c78827b7b87c185.

Wilson, E O. 2012. The Social Conquest of Earth. New York: W W Norton.

Read the original post:
Should Religion Go Extinct with the Dinosaurs? | the future of religion - Patheos