In the beginning there was no Word, and besides that, there was no God for the Word to be with.
Nothing was made through the Word that was not, and everything was made without him.
Life was not in him, but from mistaken belief in him emerged the Delusion.
The Delusion shines with the dullness of darkness and as yet the light has not overcome it.
There was a man sent from some compelling force in the universe whose name was Charles. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness to the light.
The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world and the world was made in a way discovered by Charles and perfected by him, yet not everyone in the world was convinced of this.
He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his message, he gave the right to become children of the Enlightenment, who were born not of baptism, nor of tradition, and certainly not of the Bible, but of primal natural forces pulsating through their parents.
And the true word, the light seeking to overcome the Delusion became a traveller, and descended Down Under. And we in Christchurch will see his luminescence and hear his wisdom on March 11th.
By coincidence the Archbishop of York is in NZ about the same time (and in Christchurch 12th - 14th March). I do not suppose they will share a platform together, but surely it is possible to get them on the same TV or radio show?
Tomorrow I plan to post some thoughts on Dawkins, atheism, and belief in God today.
5 comments:
LOL! Good one Peter
'Cranmer' has a great post on Dawkins that generated a lot of comment.
John Richardson is great on taking Dawkins on his absurd terms.
Terry Eagelton takes him to thje cleaners.
There's plenty of stuff on William Lane Craig's blog on the necessity of a transcendental basis for morality, without wich Dawkins' moral outrage is simply groundless.
On the web as well you can find a debate in Alabama between Dawkins and an Oxford mathematician John (can't remember surname).
If I fibnd it I'll post details.
But we also need to pray for the man. He's a lost soul facing a Christless eternity unless he responds to the Lord's call.
http://www.fixed-point.org/index.php/video/35-full-length/164-the-dawkins-lennox-debate
It was John Lennox - I hope the above link works.
Hmm. For a moment I thought you were talking about Charles Darwin! Dawkins, IMO, is a crude fundamentalist. Most of my atheist and non-religious friends are not half as snotty as Dawkins. I’d like to see a progressive theologian wipe the floor with him.
Kurt Hill
In snowy Brooklyn
(Founded in 1637 by Willem Adrianse Bennett as Bruikleen, [the “Brook Lane.”])
"I’d like to see a progressive theologian wipe the floor with him."
Yeah - like, um, Richard Holloway? The Spong?
Post a Comment