Category Archives: Atheist

OPINION:

The U.S. Supreme Court is due to hear at the end of this month a widely reported case of a high school football coach who was forced from his job after he refused an administrative order to stop praying on the field at the end of games.

The crime of praying. In America? In a nation founded on a quest for religious freedom, forged on the principles of the Judeo-Christian belief system and both rooted in and raised to a state of exceptionalism on a concept of individual rights coming from God, not government is there really such a thing as a crime of praying?

This is how far America has strayed from its foundations.

This is how far the secularist, humanist, atheist loons of the left have managed to transform the society from rugged individualism, based on God-given liberties, into obedient collectivism, driven by government commands.

Joseph Kennedy began his coaching position in 2008 at Bremerton High School in Washington. He began offering prayers post-game for players and coaches alike at a midfield point where they would voluntarily gather, shake hands, and in a spirit of commonality, give thanks for the competition, for the safety of players, for sportsmanlike conduct and so forth.

Nobody minded.

Nobody complained.

Then school administrators caught wind of what he was doing and sent him a stern warning about policy that said staff couldnt encourage students to engage in religious activity that is to say, then pinheaded bureaucrats in the district ran like frightened sheep from the possibility that someone might sue, so they knee-jerked and intimidated the coach into stifling his prayers. Yes, knee-jerked. They couldve rallied behind the coach; they couldve stood tall on the principles of free speech, free assembly, freedom of worship, freedom in America or just common sense: The prayers, after all, were voluntary. Vol.Un.Tear.Ee.

But in bureauspeak the language, obviously, of these Washington school administrators the logic goes like this: Christians are so much easier to shut up than, say, an angry atheist who might come along and make a call to the, oh, say, Freedom From Religion Foundation or to the, hmm, perhaps, American Civil Liberties Union, and then join forces and launch a lawsuit that will entangle the school in legal battles, in costly legal battles, in expensive, ugly, well-publicized legal battles for months and even years to come. School administrators hate that. School administrators will do whatever it takes to avoid these scenarios.

So they go the path of perceived least resistance.

They expect that Christians wont fight. They expect that Christians will go quietly into that good night. They expect that Christians will do the Christian thing and bow quietly to the authorities in the government the authorities, after all, that the Bible teaches were put in place by God. What Would Jesus Do, and all that good stuff.

Christians dont fight.

Atheists, on the other hand, do.

That logic? Thats been pretty much the battlefield in America for years now.

And heres the thing: Thats why Americas been facing so much peril from the left in recent years. That logic has worked in bureaucrats favor. Bureaucrats have expected Christians, by and large, to stifle and stay quiet and go away because Christians, by and large, with few exceptions, have done just that.

America has come to the point where the path of least resistance has become the one that gives atheists more power and authority than Christians, than Bible believers, than those of faith.

In a country built on God-given, that wont do.

This Supreme Court case is the eye of Americas storm. If justices rule one way, its the underscore and recognition of all thats great about America of all that America is of all that keeps this country rooted in freedom. If justices rule another way, its the end of all that America is of all that makes America, America. Think about it.

But think about this, also. Either way, the fact that this case is at the highest court in the land is a clanging bell for believers.

If freedom to worship is a human right, if freedom of religious worship is a constitutional right, if America is a country where rights come from God the right of a coach to pray on public school grounds does not even belong in the hands of the court, of any court, to debate. The government should not even have a say.

Once upon a time, we all agreed. Now we dont. And that is making all the difference.

Cheryl Chumley can be reached atcchumley@washingtontimes.comor on Twitter, @ckchumley. Listen to her podcast Bold and Blunt byclicking HERE. And never miss her column; subscribe to her newsletter byclicking HERE. Her latest book, Socialists Dont Sleep: Christians Must Rise Or America Will Fall, is available byclickingHERE.

Excerpt from:

America must fight for the right to pray, no matter what the Supreme Court says - Washington Times

As a Bay Area teen, I am lucky enough to live in a community that contains bountiful diversity in all forms, but particularly religious diversity within the Jewish community.

As a longtime attendee of Camp Tawonga, a camp that encourages campers to find their own spiritual paths however they affiliate with Judaism, I have grown familiar with the beauty and complexities that come with modern interpretations of inclusive religious practice.

At camp, I have befriended everyone from Modern Orthodox Jews to Jewish atheists to people who dont identify as Jewish in any regard, but still find meaning in the rituals and community that they have found.

It was, in part, this acceptance that inspired me to pursue my own understanding of how Judaism fits into my life and identity; the knowledge that I could question and grapple with my faith and still be embraced unconditionally in my Jewish community.

Not unrelated to my questions surrounding modern Jewish identity has been my journey into social justice work.

In mid-2020, at peak pandemic boredom, I applied to be a fellow with the Kol Koleinu Teen Feminist Fellowship, now called the Meyer-Gottesman Kol Koleinu Teen Feminist Fellowship (and run by the Jewish nonprofit Moving Traditions). Through this fellowship, I have learned what it means to be a feminist, an activist, and a Jew, all with the same aforementioned acceptance that makes this growth possible.

Integral to the Kol Koleinu Fellowship is the yearlong social-change project, in which an individual or small group is paired with a mentor to create something to better our world.

I have been fascinated by ideas of intergenerational traumas, conflicts and legacies, so I decided to begin a project focused on legacies within the Jewish community. My project became a reimagined Passover haggadah focused on legacy and inheritance from a deeply intersectional viewpoint.

For this haggadah, called Yerushah (inheritance), I collected interviews, writings and art pieces dealing with inheritance to connect Passover, a holiday that is intrinsically history-oriented, with a legacy and continuation of the Judaism that plays out around me today.

I am deeply proud of this haggadah. Perhaps my favorite piece is the one that I created for maror, the part in the seder in which we eat bitter foods to remind us of the suffering of our ancestors.

I felt called to think of bitterness in a new way; that is, bitterness that one may feel toward religion, or religious practices in general. In addition to interviewing my atheist Jewish twin brother and a Presbyterian pastor who is the father of a close friend, and researching residual religious perspectives of Holocaust survivors, I spoke with my unofficial step-grandfather, John.

Despite having no connection to me by blood or marriage, John has always been a close grandfather figure, and I wanted to speak with him due to his late introduction to Judaism.

Religion has never been a part of my focus, he told me. In fact, I have a very bitter approach to most formal organized religions that seem to wind up killing lots of people because they dont wear the right-shaped hats.

The section on maror continues thus: In addition to bitterness towards the oft-misused power and legacy of the religious structure, the loss of faith that may come after witnessing intense tragedy can evoke intensely bitter resentment towards the divine being that was supposed to protect its followers from harm I have come across a phrase over the course of my research that was anonymously carved into one of the cell walls at the Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria: Wenn es einen Gott gibt mu er mich um Verzeihung bitten, which translates as If there is a God, he must ask my forgiveness. Grappling with bitterness gives us an environment in which to question, disagree, or even resent faith, but it does not necessarily preclude faith itself, in environments where questioning is permitted. There is hope and dialogue in the grappling, whereas bitterness itself is a brick wall.

By bringing new voices to the seder table to grapple together with these intense questions, I hope the haggadah I have written makes the seder more accessible and approachable to those who may have felt left out or disconnected from traditional Jewish practice.

Go here to read the rest:

For questions about identity, I've written my own haggadah J. - The Jewish News of Northern California

There is perhaps no better day to respond to what columnist Harold Acemah wrote in this newspaper last Sunday than today, which is Easter Sunday.Religion remains an integral part of peoples lives, but if we continue to fail to question what it says, especially if what it says is demonstrably and patently false; if we continue to prioritise religion over logic, reason and science, we may remain a poor and underdeveloped country and, by extension, continent for decades to come.We need to learn to teach our children, the future leaders of our country/continent, to think critically and to believe that everything must be open to question even if it is regarded by millions of people as the gospel truth. That is one of the ways our formal education will set us apart from people who did not go to school. Mr Acemah claimed that the article I wrote on March 6 entitled Wars illustrate how God is irrelevant in human affairs annoyed, offended and outraged many Christians.I stated clearly that the views I was expressing were not meant to offend anyone. I wanted readers to reflect deeply and soberly on what they believe and, crucially, what they teach our children to believe.I will cite several verses from the Bible, including the oft-used verse that Mr Acemah quoted to bolster his argument, to show problems with what we believe and why we are wrong.Fools say to themselves, there is no God. They are all corrupt and they have done terrible things; there is no one who does what is right. Psalm 14:1 (GNB).Is it true that people who do not believe in God are fools? Are they corrupt? Have they done terrible things? Let us look at facts closely. Here are the countries with the highest possible ranges of atheists: Sweden (4685 percent), Vietnam (81 percent), Denmark (4380 percent), Norway (3172 percent) and Japan (6465 percent).If Psalm 14:1 is true and is the word of God, why is it that Denmark, Norway and Sweden have almost zero corruption, according to Transparency International, yet Uganda, South Sudan and Somalia (all highly religious) are mired in corruption?Which terrible things have the Danes, Japanese, Norwegians and Swedes done? Denmark and Norway run two relief organisations the Danish Refugee Council and the Norwegian Refugee Council respectively that look after millions of people displaced by conflict started by countries where the leaders and the led are religious.From 2010 to 2013, Uruguay was led by an atheist president named Jos Mujica. If what Psalm 14:1 says is true, Mr Mujica would have been one of the worlds worst leaders. Yet, as president, Mr Mujica lived exceedingly frugally, driving a 1987 Volkswagen Beetle in a world where non-atheist presidents and prime ministers have miles-long convoys of swanky cars. He rejected a luxury home provided by the state and opted for a farmhouse. There are more demonstrably false verses in the Bible. Matthew 7:7, Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14, Matthew 18:19 and James 5:15-16 clearly tell believers that they can get anything if they pray. Mark 11:24 says: Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.Is this true? If prayer does work, as these verses say, can we pray and get rid of Ugandas rotten leadership, which we have failed to remove through elections? And can we succeed when we have Romans 13:1?We should not use religion to kill logic. Happy Easter!Mr Namiti is a journalist and former Al Jazeera digital editor in charge of the Africa desk[emailprotected] @kazbuk

View post:

The honest conversation we should have this Easter - Monitor

KGF: Chapter 2 Movie Review Rating:

Star Cast: Yash, Srinidhi Shetty, Sanjay Dutt, Raveena Tandon, Prakash Raj

Director: Prashanth Neel

Whats Good: Yash. Yashs style. Yashs action. And the thread that joins them all!

Whats Bad: Makers dont narrate the (half-baked) story, they howl in your eardrums!

Loo Break: The tracking rate of decibel/scene is so high that youll be forced to take one

Watch or Not?: Did you watch Chapter 1 and loved it? Give this a try as well, you may not love it as much but youll live through it

Available On: Theatrical Release

Runtime: 168 Minutes

User Rating:

Author Anand Vasirajus son Vijayendra (Prakash Raj) continues to tell the infamous Rockys (Yash) tale to a news-channel editor starting from where it all ended in the first chapter. In his story, we see how Rocky, from bhai, has now transitioned into bhagwan for people around him. Now that he has killed Garuda, its Adheera (Sanjay Dutt) and his army who returns to find and kill Rocky.

Adheera isnt the only obstacle for Rocky to cross but he now is on the radar of Indias Prime Minister Ramika Sen (Raveena Tandon). While Rocky somehow dodges Adheera, its the Government that comes in his way of becoming the CEO of India (in his own words). In this triple threat match, will there be just one winner? Well, put some cotton in your ears and sit back to know!

Prashanth Neels ambition overrides his story-telling and thats the biggest issue of his script. Everything looks extremely cool visually, but the whole argument behind making things cool is weak. It comes with some similar issues as chapter 1 like why is everyone talking so loud with everyone? I wanted to keep a track of how long any scene could be silent but it was so loud, I couldnt concentrate.

Just to clarify, I dont mind loudness in films, Ive loved movies like Master, Rowdy Rathore, Dabangg and likes. But, this one doesnt just leave your mind numb, but it does the same thing with your ears as well.

Side Bar: A scene censors the word democracy changing it to demography, and I couldnt help but wonder about the irony of what a democratic society were living in.

Bhuvan Gowdas camerawork elevates the already monumentally mounted action sequences, to a level thats almost unseen in the Indian film industry. Yashs car chase sequence with play & pause transitions remains the best highlight of the film owing to its breathtaking cinematography and well-synchronised background score by Ravi Basrur.

But the same Class-A cinematography goes against the feel of the film when it rushes from one place to another in Yash & Sanjays combat scenes because as the films story, nothing is clear enough to understand anything.

Chapter 1 was enough to register why there could be no one else apart from Yash to get the machismo of Rocky with such accuracy & swag. Chapter 2 just strengthens the similar thought further by transitioning him from bhai to bhagwan. Makers make sure to keep Rocky bhai on the pedestal boasting his high-octane presence in every alternate scene. The way he delivers his self-written dialogues, one cant help but listen to him (even if that doesnt interest you).

Srinidhi Shetty gets too little to contribute to the narrative, plus she gets a song (Mehbooba) that clutters the second half without any solid explanation. Sanjay Dutt was expected to repeat Kancha Cheena from Agneepath but due to the storys myopic treatment, he doesnt get a single chance (apart from his introduction sequence) to register any intrigue.

Raveena Tandons PM remains one-dimensional throughout the film without creating any major impact. Prakash Raj is reduced down to be a mere narrator, adding nothing apart from his voice.

Prashanth Neel, like every other director working with worshipped by fans star, gives in to the fan service losing his focus from what shouldve been a raw & earthy treatment of the story. The film celebrates Yash not once or twice but in every scene, he is in, its just Prashanth fails to find equally interesting reasons to do so for most of such instances.

Ravi Basrurs background score serves in a huge spectrum from too loud to too trippy. Just like every other thing, even the BGM of this film is on steroids complimenting a few sequences, burdening others. Not a single song is going to remain in my playlist after the film, but the problem is they arent even situational.

All said and done, this jumps from larger than life to larger than god treatment, and gives Yash fans another reason to celebrate his heroism. But beneath all the screams and boisterous BGM, one important thing gets suppressed and rarely gets a chance to flourish intriguing storytelling.

Two and a half stars!

Are you a Vijay fan? Read our Beast movie review to know whether thats worth a watch!

KGF: Chapter 2 releases on April 14, 2022.

Share with us your experience of watching KGF: Chapter 2.

Must Read: Beast Movie Review: Vijay Fails To Master This One, But Its Still A Celebration For Thalapathy Fans!

Follow Us: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Youtube

See the article here:

KGF: Chapter 2 Movie Review: Yashs Rocky Transitions From Bhai To Bhagwan, But The Atheist In Me Is Also A Critic! - Koimoi

Kazuhiro Sasahara met the priest suggested by his Catholic wife, a member of Kitami Church on Japan's island of Hokkaido

Kazuhiro Sasaharawas born into a family of the Buddhist Jodo Shinshu sect but considered himself an atheist. Because his wife, whom he met as a student, was baptized as an infant, their wedding was held in a Catholic church and their three children were baptized as infants.

I went to church once a year at Christmas and I didn't say anything about the faith of my wife or children, leaving that to my wife. Besides going to church on Sundays, my wife doesn't say much about her faith. However, compared to the beginning of our marriage, statues of Mary and crosses have multiplied all over the house," said the 63-year-old Japanese man.

After his retirement from years as a principal of elementary and junior high schools, Sasahara engaged in after-school children's classroom activities with the board of education until April of last year.

At that time, I thought it might be better to have the same faith as my wife. He did not believe in God's existence, but as his remaining years "shortened" he wanted to go into the future "with the same attitude as my wife with whom Ive shared life for so many years."

His wife, a member ofKitami Church on Japans northern island of Hokkaido, suggested that he meet the parish priest, FatherMasahiro Uesugi of Sapporo Diocese. Since July of last year, they have met once a month.

"At the time, I didn't have any strong desire for baptism or to attend any study sessions, said Sasahara. I just wanted to talk with the priest. I talked about books I had read, movies I had seen, TV dramas, and the state of the world today, and the priest talked about his interests."

Based on the Bible, they also discussed whether or not God exists. At one point, Sasahara introduced a book that explained the low probability of life on the many planets in space.

He said that, according to the book, the odds are similar to throwing the parts of a watch into a 25-meter pool, stirring the water and drawing out the original watch."

Sasahara continued: As we talked about the miracle of life, I came to think that the miracles of Christ in the Bible could be real.

When Sasahara first heard about the Holy Spirit, he thought there was no such thing. But he realized that there are times when he desires the good and other times when he goes in the wrong direction.

Thinking about the desire to go for the good began to convince me of the existence of the Holy Spirit who leads the heart to the good, and that I could believe, he said.

Describing his desire to be baptized, Sasahara said: "I heard that even FatherUesugis faith can be shaken, but above all I think it's a big thing that I was able to talk with him one on one about issues that I wouldn't normally talk about with anyone else."

According to Sasahara, we "live behind a faade with others." However, when he shared his heart with FatherUesugi, "I didn't have to try to protect myself, I was able to look into my heart as I was."

Sasahara said that when he decided to receive baptism, I asked FatherUesugi, If I start a new life with baptism, how about doing it on my birthday?"

"It so happens that my birthday is April 16, this years Easter Vigil," he added.

From his involvement with children and families with various problems during his years as an educator, Sasahara feels that "the Church can be a place to welcome those who are troubled and seeking peace of mind. As a member of the Church, I want to be a person who can listen to them."

Kazuhiro Sasahara will be baptized atKitami Church during the Easter Vigil on April 16.

.As we enter the first months of 2022, we are asking readers like you to help us keep UCA News free.

For the last 40 years, UCA News has remained the most trusted and independent Catholic newsand information service from Asia. Every week, we publish nearly 100 news reports, featurestories, commentaries, podcasts and video broadcasts that are exclusive and in-depth, anddeveloped from a view of the world and the Church through informed Catholic eyes.

Our journalistic standards are as high as any in the quality press; our focus isparticularly on a fast-growing part of the world - Asia - where, in some countries theChurch is growing faster than pastoral resources can respond to South Korea, Vietnam andIndia to name just three.

And UCA News has the advantage of having in its ranks local reporters who cover 23 countriesin south, southeast, and east Asia. We report the stories of local people and theirexperiences in a way that Western news outlets simply dont have the resources to reach. Andwe report on the emerging life of new Churches in old lands where being a Catholic can attimes be very dangerous.

With dwindling support from funding partners in Europe and the USA, we need to call on thesupport of those who benefit from our work.

Read the original post:

One-on-one with priest leads Japanese atheist to baptism - UCA News

It is widely thought that there are roughly 10,000 religions in the world, today. Most of us are familiar with the big ones Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and so on but hundreds of millions believe in folk, traditional, or tribal faiths, too.

Theologians, anthropologists, and sociologists are very good at classifying religions. People devote their entire lives to delineating between the tiniest, most esoteric of differences. Iconography, creed, ritual, worship, prayer, and community serve to draw the borders between these faiths.

But this misses something. Outside of the churches, mosques, temples, and pagodas is a shifting, enigmatic, indefinable mass: the group of people who belong to some type of atheism. It is no small fringe, either. Over a billion people do not follow a religion. They make up roughly a quarter of the U.S. population, making it the second largest belief. Roughly 60% of the UK never go to church, and there are now more atheists than believers in Norway.

Notably, not all atheism is the same. The various types of atheism deserve greater examination.

The problem is that these statistics do not tell a full story. The term non-religious is so broad as to be almost meaningless. The words secular, agnostic, atheistic, humanistic, irreligious, or non-religious are not synonyms. This is not some nit-picky pedantry. For the billion plus people in the world who are one particular type of atheist, the difference matters.

It is no easy task to delineate these belief systems, not least because a vast number of them balk at being defined as believers at all. Some suggest it is better to describe non-religion as a scale (such as the 1-7 likelihood of God scale Richard Dawkins suggests in The God Delusion). But this, too, puts the cart before the horse. Not all religion is about probability, certainty, or assent to various truth claims.

Broadly speaking, atheists can come in three varieties: the nonreligious, the nonbelievers, and the agnostic. This list is not intended to be exhaustive, and the types of atheism often overlap.

The first type of atheism means not subscribing to one of the big, traditional religions.

Consider China. It is a country, on first glance, that is hugely irreligious: 91% of Chinese adults can be called atheist. But so much of this data, as in most demographic surveys, hinges on self-identification by respondents. The issue is that most people in the world today will understand religion in a particular way. They see it as being the formal creeds or practices of the established, organized religions. It means going to church, praying five times a day, or believing the Four Noble Truths. But religion is much broader than that.

In the case of China, while 91% claim to be atheist, 70 percent of the adult population practices ancestor worship. Twelve percent self-identify with some folk belief, and the vast majority practice the pseudoscientific, quasi-religious traditional medicine.

For a lot of people, atheism means not believing in this or that formal religion. For others, the word might bear closer resemblance to its etymology, in which a-theism means anti-theistic belief (allowing Buddhism, for instance). Many in this category we might describe as mystics that is, they do not think any image or idea of God(s) is right, but they feel that there is some kind of spiritual reality.

It is a curiosity seen all over the world. An atheist might also believe in angels, fairies, karma, a divine plan, a soul, ghosts, spirits, or Ouija boards. None of these, alone, make up an organized belief, but they are beliefs of a sort.

The second type of atheism is one which argues against or rejects certain belief statements.

These atheists will define religion (rightly or wrongly) as being a set of creeds, beliefs, and quasi-factual statements that they call false. It is the type of atheism that most are familiar with, and it is often the type which most often pops up on internet message boards.

These atheists will say Jesus rose from the dead, Yogic flying is possible, or, The Angel Jibril spoke to Muhammed are all statements that can be disproven or should be disbelieved. They are facts to corroborate or dismiss. Modern atheists like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, and older ones like David Hume or John Stuart Mill, belong to this kind. They point out what they perceive to be the inaccuracies, contradictions, or absurdities of what religion teaches.

The nonbeliever type of atheism will often attack the values of a religion or even the religious themselves. They claim that religion is what leads to intolerance, prejudice, racism, misogyny, genocide, violence, cruelty, superstition, ignorance, and so on, so it must be rejected out of hand.

The third type of atheism is non-committal. Its called agnosticism.

If we define atheism as a belief statement namely, I am 100% sure God(s) do(es) not exist then there are very few atheists. A lot of the nonbeliever types concern themselves with probabilities and verifying belief-claims. But, with many of religions claims being supernatural, it is impossible to rule them out entirely.

Humans are physical beings, with fallible senses and variable intelligence. As such, very few people will claim certainty about the metaphysical and infinite. A lot of those who call themselves atheist are actually agnostic. They might be those who think religion is very, very unlikely to be right (as Dawkins does) or who accept that there is some varying degree of possibility. Others might suspend judgment there is no (accessible) data either way, so why commit?

As William James argues in his essay The Will to Believe, agnosticism of this kind (or skepticism as he prefers) is tantamount to atheism. If we go about our days without consideration of religion, without living the life of the believer, then it is as if we positively chose to disbelieve. The difference between agnostics and atheists is simply an epistemological one. For both, religion simply is not important.

Talking about belief (or the lack thereof) is something we could all be better at. Half of U.S. adults seldom or never talk about religion with people outside their family. In the UK, former spin doctor for Tony Blair, Alastair Campbell, once said, we dont do God. His point was that religion is a personal (and often unpalatable and awkward) conversation topic for most British people.

Yet, so much is lost in the process. Our beliefs, religious or otherwise, are the most important things about who we are. Sharing and discussing them with others not only helps us understand ourselves more but brings us all closer together. Conflict is often born of misunderstanding and ignorance, and a lot of discord could be avoided by dialogue that seeks to elucidate peoples beliefs.

Examining the types of atheism also reveals another exciting topic: disbelief. All of us have beliefs, but we also all have disbeliefs. Even theists reject the existence of some gods.

Jonny Thomson teaches philosophy in Oxford. He runs a popular Instagram account called Mini Philosophy (@philosophyminis). His first book isMini Philosophy: A Small Book of Big Ideas.

See more here:

What are the different types of atheism? - Big Think

Short Prayers? By Faith, not Sight.

My atheist social media partners snarl and demand of believers: prove that God exists! But, what I find more important than proving that some sort of deity exists is this question: what kind of God do we have? I only want a gracious God. and, I believe that is the kind of God we have.

Blessed are those who have not seenand yet have come to believe. (John 20:29b)

Elizabeth was four years old. Each day I had to pick her up at the Bancroft Nursery School and drive her home. This particular day she looked pensive.

Daddy, she said, I cant see God.

What? I asked. Oh, I had heard the question all right. I was asking her to repeat it just so I could buy some time to think up a response.

I cant see God, she went on with increased frustration. I look everywhere. I look at home. I look at church. I look at the nursery school. But nowhere do I see God. How come?

On the one hand, the question worried me because I thought Elizabeth might be exhibiting the tendency of the modern post-Enlightenment mind to rely solely upon empirical knowledge, thereby leading to premature atheism because spiritual realities cannot be empirically verified. On the other hand, I felt confident because I, a fully trained systematic theologian with a doctorate in the field, should be well prepared to take on just such a query. So I launched into what I thought was a rather astute response.

Well, Elizabeth, remember that God is omnipresent, ubiquitous. This means God is everywhere. Now if God is everywherestrewn throughout the length and breadth of this gigantic universethen there is nowhere where God is not present. Now to perceive anything we have to be able to distinguish what it is from what it is not. We need to see it in relief. But there is nowhere we can go to see where God is absent. We cannot physically contrast God with what is not God. We can contrast God only according to qualities such as righteousness versus unrighteousness, love versus non-love..

Elizabeth was growing perceptibly impatient with my dissertation, despite my erudition. So, she interrupted. Daddy, does God love little children?

Yes, of course.

Good, she said with a smile returning to her face, and the conversation came to an end.

In the centuries of long battle between faith and reason, faith had a little victory that day. Elizabeth believes in what she cannot see, because what she cannot see is the source of divine love.

Unsearchable, invisible, God only wise, give us the faith of your children. Amen.

Ted Peters is a Lutheran pastor and emeritus seminary professor. He is author of Short Prayers and The Cosmic Self. His one volume systematic theology is now in its 3rd edition, GodThe Worlds Future (Fortress 2015). He has undertaken a thorough examination of the sin-and-grace dialectic in two works, Sin: Radical Evil in Soul and Society (Eerdmans 1994) and Sin Boldly! (Fortress 2015). Watch for his forthcoming, The Voice of Public Christian Theology (ATF 2022). See his website: TedsTimelyTake.com.

Excerpt from:

Short Prayers 13: Faith | Faith and Reason - Patheos

In 1859, a British man, Charles Darwin published a book called On the Origin of Species. This book was based on his study of creatures he had encountered during his travels to many overseas locations, including the Galapagos Islands. He put forward the theory that all living creatures that exist today, including human beings, have evolved for perhaps millions of years, from more primitive life forms to how they are today by a process of natural selection. Another name for this random development of species is blind evolution.

Darwin was a natural science graduate of Cambridge University and a geologist. He was also a Christian. Darwin did not intend to challenge religious beliefs with his book but many religious believers responded to it with fury, because his theory of evolution by natural selection was at odds with how religion explains the process of creation.

Darwins Theory of Evolution was published in 1859, which later became known to the world at large. Few theories have impacted the human mind as much as did Darwins theory. It had created a class of his disciples, the most prominent of which was Richard Dawkins.

Born in 1941, Richard Dawkins is a British evolutionary biologist and author. The Selfish Gene, published by him in 1976, established Professor Richard Dawkins as a leading figure in evolutionary theory and popularized the idea that replicating genes are the central force behind evolution, not individual organisms or species. His other landmark books include The God Delusion, The Greatest Show on Earth, and The Blind Watchmaker in which he repeated the same theorem.

Dawkins was criticised as too strong in his criticism of religion, and thus rightly dubbed as fundamental atheist.

The common criticism was that Dawkins was too strong in his criticism of religion, and was thus rightly dubbed as fundamental atheist.

For anyone who would spend some time on this topic, two questions have always seemed quite a puzzle. Whence he came from at the time of his birth, and where he will go after his death. Every community and class of people have different views. When a community or creed takes a combined view, they form into one religious group. Their religious bonds keep them united in most of the activities. They believe that their births and deaths are ordained by God, who is the creator of this universe, and in this belief, they have firm faith.

Some critics hold that Richard Dawkins has educated and inspired many millions of people around the world, spanning generations, cultures, languages, and beliefs. His lifes work has been to open our minds to the beauty of science and to cast a fresh look on our closely held beliefs. He has been instrumental in demolishing the taboo around atheism, helping to bring non-believers into the mainstream of public discourse.

In the research done on this theory of evolution so far, three limitations of Darwins theory embrace the idea that all forms of life, great and small, were derived from a common primordial cell or organism which requires a scientific basis. The various religions, current and extinct, typically elevate humans above other forms of life.

The three limitations of Darwins theory concern the origin of DNA, the irreducible complexity of the cell, and the paucity of transitional species. Because of these limitations, the author predicts a paradigm shift away from evolution to an alternative explanation.

The objections to Darwinism are as follows:

(1) Darwin could not explain the origin and cause of variations that are generated during evolution.

(2) He emphasized the importance of the fittest organisms. Later, it has been suggested fit and fitter forms can also co-exist.

(3) The principle of inheritance was not present during Darwin.

By and large, there is no fundamental change in Darwins Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. Nor can this Theory be termed as a threat to our traditional religions, despite the fact that the theory was propounded in 1859 i.e about 163 years earlier. It has however won many supporters and now stands at a much sounder footing than before. The people are complacent because there is no immediate danger from the impact of this Theory, and the organic change due to natural selection is taking place so slowly. Even after millions and billions of years, it would not cause a physical shock to humanity, although with time, it may mould their minds to move away from conventional religions. Over time, things will seem to be normal.

Paradoxically even the intelligentsia, the well-to-do, the common citizens, and the poor all have simply overlooked its inherent impact, as it is not going to affect their beliefs or ideas in any forcible future, nor is going to benefit any particular religion over the other. Everyone, except a few people, who have been aware of its implications for far too long.

The writer is a former member of the Provincial Civil Service, and an author of Moments in Silence.

Original post:

Richard Dawkins and Evolution - Daily Times

A baby was born on Feb. 2 because, when a scared late teenager walked in for an appointment at an abortion clinic months earlier, someone explained to her what would happen during the abortion process. A doctor would stop the babys heart from beating. Im sure the person doing the explaining didnt use the word baby, but once you know it has a heart, its hard to pretend it isnt a human.

Abortion thrives in the darkness of euphemisms and lies.

This particular mother was still early on in her pregnancy, and yet doctors would have to stop her unborn childs heart from beating. The young mother wanted nothing of that reality. She left without getting the abortion. When the truth is told, women are set free.

And yet the New York Times recently ran an article with the headline Abortion Opponents Hear a Heartbeat. Most Experts Hear Something Else.

The Times wants you to believe that because the heart of a 6-week-old fetus isnt fully developed, its beat doesnt count. Its only a primitive tube of cardiac cells that emit electric pulses and pump blood.

The piece contends: The consensus among most medical experts is that the electrical activity picked up on an ultrasound at six weeks is not the sound of a heart The sound expectant mothers hear during a scan is created by the machine itself, which translates the waves of electrical activity into something audible.

You dont have to be a doctor to find this absurd.

Fresh off giving birth, former atheist blogger-turned Catholic Leah Libresco Sargeant responded to the Times article on Twitter: This objection is quite odd. By the same logic, an ultrasound picture isnt real because it translates sound waves into a visual representation.

Instead of admitting there is a heartbeat early on, the abortion industry wants you to believe that heartbeat bills are merely pro-life propaganda.

But if you go to Planned Parenthoods own website, the abortion giants answer to what is happening with a fetus during weeks five and six of pregnancy is: A very basic beating heart and circulatory system develop.And my colleague Ramesh Ponnuru pointed out that even the paper of record has acknowledged that heartbeats are detectable at six weeks in a pregnancy, on more than one occasion. They were simply stating fact at the time, but to state fact now is impermissible, because it means that unborn, developing babies will be seen as just what they are. And our culture of convenience and death doesnt want that.

Experts are quoted, as is convenient for the Times. The medical realities cannot be spoken now because most Americans arent hardened ideologues when it comes to abortion. Stopping a beating heart sounds quite barbaric. I talked with a woman who was 12 weeks pregnant recently, who was in the process of a two-day abortion. On the first day, doctors insert a device to widen the cervix. She was desperate and resigned. She told me she was dizzy. She looked like she was about to throw up.

This is the reality of abortion in America. Anyone who has a heart would be honest about it and work together whatever our political and moral views are to make sure women know what they are getting into and have an actual choice, at the very least. Acknowledging that women deserve better should be the goal.

(Kathryn Jean Lopez is senior fellow at the National Review Institute, editor-at-large of National Review magazine and author of the new book A Year With the Mystics: Visionary Wisdom for Daily Living. She is also chair of Cardinal Dolans pro-life commission in New York. She can be contacted at klopez@nationalreview.com.)

Read the original post:

The realities of life and the lies of abortion - Lake County Record-Bee

(J. The Jewish News of Northern CaliforniaviaJTA) Since becoming University of San Franciscos rabbi-in-residence in 2019, Rabbi Camille Angel has been busy, whether shes creating inclusive on-campus spaces, teaching classes, officiating Jewish lifecycle events or leading Passover seders.

All in a days work for a campus rabbi, perhaps, but her impact is being felt well beyond the universitys Jewish community.

When Angels hiring was announced, it madeheadlines. A Jesuit Catholic university appointing a rabbi-in-residence was unprecedented, especially when that rabbi is a lesbian andlongtimeLGBTQ activist.

I was trained and Im a rabbi to serve Jews, and I do I led a shiva two nights ago, so Im definitely still serving Jews, Angel told J. But theres something remarkable for me and totally unexpected about my rabbinate being primarily among non-Jews at this point and that my teaching is primarily with non-Jews.

According to Angel, there is only one Jewish student in her Queering Religion class of 40. The other students represent a mix of religious affiliations, but they gravitate to Angels classes and programs because of the inclusive queer community she has cultivated on campus.

I actually didnt know much about Judaism and what a rabbi was or what they did, said Jade Peafort, a senior sociology major from Redwood City. But honestly, I love it. Ive learned from her that in Judaism, some of the core values are just working with other people and for other people and as a community. Its not just about yourself.

Angel said its important for her to be a visibly Jewish and queer presence on campus both in and out of the classroom. She regularly wears an embroidered kippah and keeps a rainbow pride flag displayed in her office window. She emphasizes how much real representation and inclusion matter, especially when many students have never interacted with Judaism or Jewish thought or even met a rabbi.

Students will often ask me, What should I call you? Professor? Doctor? Rabbi? Angel said. I tell them to call me rabbi, because everyone needs a rabbi, and if you didnt have one before, now you do.

Before joining the seven-person University Ministry staff as the on-campus rabbi, Angel had been lecturing at USF for several years as part of the Swig Program in Jewish Studies and Social Justice, which she largelycredits for her presence on campus.

Ordained rabbi at the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Angelplaces a lot of emphasis on being a positive, identity-affirming spiritual adviser regardless of students backgrounds or belief systems. Angel finds that many of her students relationships with religion often are complicated by negative experiences due to their sexual orientations or gender identities. But they are also curious and seeking for themselves to figure out whether they want to explore spirituality.

When I was teaching my first [theology] class, I encountered so many people whod been really damaged and hurt by religion, or who had chosen not to be associated with religion, because they could see that it hurt people they loved, said Angel. According to USF, a majority of undergraduate students are unaffiliated with a religion, while others identify as Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, atheist or Protestant. Fewer than half are Catholic.

According to a 2020 study bythe Trevor Project, LGBTQ young adults whose parents held negative religious beliefs about homosexuality were at twice the risk of attempting suicide.

In her Queering Religion class, Angel teaches from a Jewish perspective how to navigate religious contexts, especially those religions that have often attempted to negate queer people. Many students credit Angel and this class with helping them re-evaluate and reconnect with their respective spiritual traditions.

This was the case for Luis Anaya, a senior sociology major, for whom growing up Mexican American and Catholic went hand in hand, but being queer and Catholic, not so much.

I had a lot of reservations around religion because growing up and being queer, I innately had a different experience and different perspective on Catholic teachings, said Anaya, who was born in Mexico City but grew up in Stockton.

When he took Angels class, he said, he also was taking strides in exploring and navigating his queer identity, so the intersection of queer narratives and spirituality was particularly meaningful for him. He also said exposure to Jewish thought helped to repair his strained relationship with Catholicism.

Rabbi Angel talks a lot about pluralism, how different identities can coexist at the same time, and the idea of not reading the text literally, but rather interpreting it to get a better perspective of what these people were trying to write about and the messages that they were trying to convey, Anaya said. To question things and almost approach them with a grain of salt.

Peafort had a similar experience. Raised Catholic, she stopped going to church in her teens. She says she struggled with Catholicism for several reasons, but especially when her older sister came out as queer. She says the tools she learned in Angels class helped her figure out how to deal with her conflicting beliefs around religion. Peafort says Angels class also helped her feel comfortable exploring her own sexuality and identity as a Fillipina woman and sister.

Even though I felt like I didnt fit into Catholicism and their values, I was still able to take little pieces and apply it to myself or just reframe it in a way that applies to me and my life and my identity, said Peafort.

With Angel as a facilitator, Anaya and several other students started a peer-led LGBTQ group on campus called Qmmunity, which Anaya describes as a sort of extension of Angels class and the Jewish values she teaches. On Thursdays, the group hosts a lunch program called Breaking Bread and the Binary, in which students come together to share a meal, their thoughts and reflections on current events.

The first session this semester was held Jan. 27 on Holocaust Remembrance Day and shortly after the Jan. 15 Colleyville, Texas hostage crisis. Angel expressed how significant the gathering felt and how it reminded her of the importance of creating inclusive spaces not just for Jewish students but for all marginalized people.

Being in this group out and proud, here and queer, on the lawn in front of the church, its the biggest satisfaction that Hitler and the Nazis and fascism and fundamentalism dont rule our lives, Angel said the next day, reflecting on the session. Were here, together, and we wont be frightened back into our respective closets.

Next month, Angel will host the inaugural Alvin H. Baum Jr. Memorial Lecture, in honor of the San Francisco philanthropist known as a community pillar in the Jewish, civil rights and gay communities who died last year. In April, shes leading a social justice-centered interfaith Passover seder focused on themes of climate justice, interfaith solidarity, peace, health and freedom. She also has plans to expand community outreach to address the issue of food insecurity among college students, something that affects LGBTQ people at twice the rate of others, according to theU.S. Census Bureau.

All throughout, her core focus is on the intersection of religion and queerness.

I think its so refreshing to hear a different perspective, Peafort said, and even if its based on a religious point of view, it doesnt necessarily feel like it is. It just feels like shes a very wise woman, and a mentor and a friend.

This article was originally published inJ. The Jewish News of Northern California, and is reprinted with permission.

Continue reading here:

Meet the rabbi queering religion at the Jesuit Catholic University of San Francisco - JTA News - Jewish Telegraphic Agency