Share
A- A A+
Free Email News
15 Questions for Evolutionists (tract)


US $0.20
View Item
Letter from a Christian Citizen
by Douglas Wilson

US $7.00
View Item
The God Reality
by Rob Slane

US $8.00
View Item
Evolution and the Holocaust DVD
by Dr Jonathan Sarfati

US $13.00
View Item

Feedback archiveFeedback 2012

Don’t bother me with your religion!

Published: 5 August 2012 (GMT+10)

P.H., from Ireland, commented on CMI’s Question Evolution campaign and Dr Don Batten responds.

Hello, I am a little sceptical that you will print this, but we shall see.
I wonder when you go out with your 15 questions, will you stop once you have met anyone who can give you a reasonable answer? Obviously not everyone is going to have the knowledge to answer the specifics, but if you meet a Biologist for instance who can clearly explain the current state of scientific knowledge will you stop? If you don’t stop will you at least inform the next person without knowledge of the evidence you have been presented with?
Personally as an Atheist I would rather you did not go around bothering me on the street or in my home, (I am only here because of a link in a debate about removing Religious indoctrination from schools) I think it would be far better if you realised that your thoughts are private ones and should not be forced on others. You believe in god, I don’t believe in your god or anyone else’s and I have no interest in “learning” about them beyond an interest in cultural variety.
You may quite rightly wonder why I am taking time to post this, It is simply that at the moment we are embroiled in a debate on removing the prayer indoctrination from our child’s school, if just a few of you could recognise the rights of others to a reasonable secular environment, we could all move on and end these sometimes bitter quarrels. You have your views, apply them to your own work and lives and leave others alone.
Thank you
P.S. I would rather not have my name published as it is very rare in my country and I don’t want any more Christians at my door!

Part of the price of living in a free society is that you can be bothered by other people sharing their views, just as atheists and others can ‘bother’ me with their views (which they do).

CMI’s Dr Don Batten responds:

Dear P.,

Thanks for commenting.

A couple of comments in response:

We have already published the best answers so far provided to the 15 questions. See

Part of the price of living in a free society is that you can be bothered by other people sharing their views, just as atheists and others can ‘bother’ me with their views (which they do). I don’t mind, as that is a wonderful thing to live in such a free society where that is possible; something I celebrate. Perhaps you would rather live in a country where the state mandates atheism (such states killed 150 million people last century).

With kind regards,

Don Batten

P. replied:

Just to say that of course I would not want to live in a society that mandates any form of belief or none and I am sure I am not alone amongst people here to have a family tree dotted with those who sacrificed everything to allow us that freedom. My feeling would be that people should be allowed to list their homes in the same way they list their phone numbers to stop cold calling, once on that list Religious organisations would be obliged to leave you alone, I have nothing against people standing on the street advertising their wares, as long as they follow local bylaws and are not obstructive or bothersome. Once we have removed religion from our schools and public institutions then its advocates are free to practice as they like within the constraint of leaving alone those who wish to be left alone.
I am not interested in converting anyone to my thoughts on this, I just don’t want them using the education service to poison my child’s intellectual development and I don’t want statues and crucifixes in my hospital, people can adorn their own hospital bed as they like.
Finally, Atheism is not responsible for those deaths, fundamentalism is, we can argue about the private beliefs of dictators but it is the drive of fundamentalism that causes people to do evil deeds. Being an Atheist is simply having an absence of belief in any deity; it does not cause good people to behave wickedly. True believers of course give up their natural human understanding of common good and empathy and do whatever their God or political master tells them. You would have to be a true believer to fly a plane of terrified humans into a Tower full of other humans as much as you would need to be one to plant a bomb under someone’s car simply for not sharing your faith. Lots of people good bad and indifferent are atheists, it makes no difference to their ability to perform evil, However religion has made many otherwise good people behave appallingly as have twisted ideologies in the hands of people like Hitler and Stalin.

Dear P.,

I’m glad you appreciate your freedom and those who bought it for you. So do I; that we can agree on!

However, it seems that some high profile atheists (the ‘new atheists’) don’t seem to appreciate that one cost of living in a free society is that people have to be free to believe things that they don’t like. Richard Dawkins, for example, has labelled Christians teaching their children about God ‘child abuse’ (see review of God Delusion). Of course child abuse is something that governments should proscribe, isn’t it? That sounds like a form of ‘fundamentalism’ to me; atheistic fundamentalism. Indeed the recent actions of the British Humanist Association (atheists’ club) to get the UK government to proscribe the teaching of any view other than doctrinaire Darwinism (even scientific criticisms of Darwinism) in schools, even faith schools, smacks of the totalitarianism of the USSR, Nazi Germany, Mao’s China or Kim Il Sung’s North Korea.

Even your own words indicate that you are afflicted with some of that same intolerant, totalitarian thinking; you don’t want Christians in the “education service to poison my child’s intellectual development”. But I guess it is OK for atheists to use the education service to influence the intellectual development of the children of Christians away from the faith of their parents? That is what the teaching of Darwinism does, for example. Having just read Origin of the Species, in 1860, one of Darwin’s mentors at Cambridge wrote,

“I have read Darwin’s book. It is clever, and calmly written; and therefore, the more mischievous, if its principles be false; and I believe them utterly false … From first to last it is a dish of rank materialism cleverly cooked and served up … And why is this done? For no other reason, I am sure, except to make us independent of a Creator … ”

—Rev. Adam Sedgwick, letter to Miss Gerard dated January 2, 1860.

I could quote a number of atheists today who admit the same. Dawkins admitted that Darwin enables him to be “an intellectually fulfilled atheist”. Your own defence of Darwinism belies the same point; that Darwinism is part of the atheists’ ‘faith’ (it was actually written into the Humanist Manifesto I).

There is no neutral position in all this. You only think that secularism is the neutral because you are a secularist and it is to your liking.

I find it quite strange that you think that Stalin’s atheism had nothing to do with his murderous actions. He apparently had people murdered without a second thought. No Bible-believing Christian could do that because the Bible says that humans are made in the image of God, making human life sacred (special) and so not to be wantonly taken. Only a materialist (atheist) such as Stalin could do this. See: Evolution and social evil. A Christian murdering someone is acting contrary to his principles, whereas an atheist murdering someone is acting contrary to what? There is no absolute moral principle, only the whim of government decree (or if you are the government?).

A.C. Grayling, prominent British atheist, admitted: “You can see we no longer really believe in God, because of all the CCTV cameras keeping watch on us.” (in an interview with The Guardian’s Decca Aitkenhead, 3 April 2011; www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/apr/03/grayling-good-book-atheism-philosophy).

We can see the results of secularism with such things as the London riots and the breakdown of family life in once-Christian countries. In my country, in the 1950s when the vast majority of the population believed there was a Creator-God to whom they were accountable (I am not saying they were all genuine Christians, but almost all shared a Christian worldview), the property crime rate was 1 reported per 1,000 people per year. This was the rate from the 1920s to the 1950s, including during the Great Depression (according to our secular ‘all-knowing’ sociologists, poverty is the cause of crime, isn’t it?). Then the rate began to rise in the 1960s, when the secularization of education began in earnest. It rose to around 20 per thousand in the late 90s (a 20-fold increase!), in spite of a much-increased police force, security systems, CCTVs, etc. (and such crime is under-reported today because we know that the police are not going to be able to do anything about a theft unless it is really serious). I remember when I was a child that we did not have locks for our family home (no keys) and cars had no keys, and, with those that did the owners left them in the ignition switch; the idea of something being stolen was not on the thought radar. Similar trends can be seen with other measures of social decay, such as male youth suicide, divorce, drug abuse, etc.

It is also of note that Darwinism also gave justification to the murderous dictators of the 20th century: Darwin’s impact the bloodstained legacy of evolution. Indeed Stalin’s atheism came about from reading Darwin.

Atheism provides no basis for a free, just and prosperous society.

The famous British poet, T.S. Eliot wrote: “If Christianity goes, the whole of our culture goes. Then you must start painfully again, and you cannot put on a new culture ready made … You must pass through many centuries of barbarism.” (T.S. Eliot, Notes Towards the Definition of Culture, Faber and Faber, 1948, p. 122.)

Even an atheist recently wrote about Africa needing Christianity for social and economic progress. See Atheists credit the Gospel.

No, atheism provides no basis for a free, just and prosperous society.

But more than that, atheism is a recipe for your own demise. Whether you like it or not, you will one day be before your Creator to answer for your life. “I did not believe in you” won’t cut it. As the Bible says, there is ample evidence that God exists (Romans 1:18ff). But you need not fear hell; not because it does not exist, but because God himself has provided for a way of escape. Jesus said, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come so that they may have life, and may have it abundantly. I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.” (John 10:10–11).

I tell you this out of concern for you; I don’t want to see anyone suffer God’s judgment. If you don’t want to receive what I have to say, then so be it. I am not offended; that is your right. There is no coercion where societies are based on biblical principles.

With kind regards,

Don Batten

Related Articles

Further Reading


Julie I. wrote: “Thank you so much for this site! I am very blessed already. I appreciate you sharing all these helps and resources. Especially the free ones. We are grateful!” Keep the free stuff coming. Support this site

Comments closed
Article closed for commenting.
Only available for 14 days from appearance on front page.
Readers’ comments
John B., Australia, 5 August 2012

The Lord's view on atheism:

"Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good."

Macquarie Dictionary:

fool // (say foohl)

noun 1. someone who lacks sense; a silly or stupid person.

2. a professional jester, formerly kept by a person of rank for amusement.

3. a weak-minded or idiotic person...

etc

Don Batten responds

"There, but for the grace of God, go I."

Chandrasekaran M., Australia, 5 August 2012

You won’t get such a robust and gentle reply from people who believe that almost nothing (the singularity) created them!

Atheists, agnostics and Darwinists are sick and tired of what their won worldview offers - totalitarian systems like Stalin. But they long for what the Christian worldview offers - values and morals. These values and morals do not exist without a firm foundation which is the Lord Jesus Christ who is the creator of cosmos and everything in it and the savior who gives equal opportunity for every single soul regardless of intellectual ability for salvation in Him.

Matthew P., Australia, 5 August 2012

Your letter to P., was so very good, I enjoyed reading it, please print more for our instruction and edification.

I wish him well and fair weather going forward. It sounds as if he has set his course and plans to sail it. The problem being the charts he has are not for the seas he is on. Atheism has no charts for the sailors it sends out. I trust this person reconsiders their course or goes to the great chart maker and bows their knee to be given the correct maps to live by and for.

Sir, I only hope you can be used more of the Holy Spirit to inform wayward sea-farer's.

Graham D., Australia, 5 August 2012

Don.

It is interesting that when one claims to subscribe to a particular set of beliefs they manifest delusions of moral superiority over those who don't believe in such things..

Don, lets be honest. People do evil things because they are evil. Not because they are atheist, or Christian etc.

I think it is funny how responded to P's email all preachy-like, reassuring him/her that they will one day face your particular imaginary friend. I can reassure you however, that this will not happen. And on your death bed, you will probably still be preaching that Jesus is returning, and your children, and your children's children will be unfortunate heirs to the meme of blind faith...

Regards

Don Batten responds

This comment manifests delusions of moral and intellectual superiority and sounds very preachy!

"Evil people"? Just what is evil if there is no God (i.e., atheism is true)? If we are just a cosmic accident, a bag of chemicals, what does it mean to say someone or something is evil?

And by what source of omniscience do say that God does not exist or that Jesus is not returning?

"Blind faith"? Then you are not referring to Christian faith, which is based on solid evidence (see Who created God? and check out articles on the Resurrection of Jesus, an historical fact that authenticated Jesus' claims.

A. A., Canada, 5 August 2012

AA from Abbotsford, BC:

My son and daughter have been brainwashed with evolution through the school system's regular flouting of secular faith. My son has retained some Christian values while my daughter has turned from Wiccan to atheism. She was also raped by her friends at 13 as they felt she should be exposed to lesbianism, another byproduct of the school system. We have suffered a whole lot of "poison" at the hands of teachers who malign the Christian faith. If you want prayer out of the school because it is faith based, then get rid of evolution, Harry Potter, and anything else that is offensive to Christians. Let's have a level playing field.

Swej H., United States, 5 August 2012

I do not normally look to a "Ministry" for my science education. On this note, I have 2 comments:

1. The key misunderstanding here seems to be that Creation Ministries does not accept the FACT that evolution occurs. Sorry, but it is NOT fundamentalist to say this is not open to debate - it has been demonstrated over and over again by qualified professionals. I'm sorry this fact does not fit your preferred view about the diversity of life on earth, but facts don't always align to our personal preferences. That's life.

2. Your 15 questions are based primarily on a logical fallacy called "argument from ignorance" meaning that just because you don't understand how something happened, it does not give you the power to invent an explanation. There are some authentic questions among the 15 that scientists are truly interested in solving, and there are other questions that have already been solved to the satisfaction of the scientific community. This means that repeated, independent, peer-reviewed studies have come to similar conclusions. If your organization would like its scientific claims to be taken seriously, please conduct some studies of appropriate scientific rigor that demonstrate the reasoning for your claim, and submit them for review among the scientific professionals. If your theory actually has muster, then you should be able to do this. The fact that we have not seen this happening indicates that you have no solid evidence for your claims.

Don Batten responds

You can't escape religion/philosophy when it comes to science education; it's just a matter of which religion/philosophy you prefer. See Leading anti-creationist philosopher admits that evolution is a religion.

1. Your assertions (ipse dixit?) don't make evolution a fact. Reminds me of the joke about the preacher who wrote in the margin of his sermon notes, "Argument weak here; shout louder."

2. The 15 Questions for Evolutionists are not arguments from ignorance. For example, it is because we do understand the nature of the genetic code and how proteins are made that we know that these are huge problems for evolution. The more we know, the more problematical evolution becomes, not less. These questions are based on existing knowledge; they don't require new research to establish their basis as they are already based on solid evidence. Furthermore, we welcome new knowledge, which only reinforces how bankrupt evolution is and how it actually harms science. You have again made only evidence-free assertions.

As for peer review, this is often nothing but a ruse for those who refuse to engage the arguments. It is effectively an argument from consensus, which is no reliable way to arrive at the truth of a matter. See Michael Crichton on consensus.

Les G., South Africa, 5 August 2012

Cogently, boldly, truthfully and most graciously dealt with. May God bless your ministry.

John M., Canada, 5 August 2012

I would suggest that Mr. P's intention of passing a law to prevent people from calling on houses in the same way phone call solicitations are restricted is an act of totalitarianism versus freedom. He would impose his views making them binding thru law on others.

If he doesn't want to be approached, he need only put a small sign on his door like the one I noticed a few weeks ago on a homeowners door. "No soliciting, religious or otherwise".

I rarely get solicitors at my door, and when I do, I welcome them. If I don't want someone at my door I will determine that for myself. I don't want him or any other totalitarian telling someone they may not come to my door. This is my decision and mine alone.

NB. To all you totalitarians....mind your own business and stop forcing your values on everyone else!

Matthew L., United States, 5 August 2012

The irony in P.'s message was very noticeable. The most I could see was "Let's remove everything about God in school, but we will keep evolution. Sounds fair, right?"

It is that kind of mindset makes me take atheists less seriously.

Colin L., Australia, 5 August 2012

Hi Don,

Regarding Mr PH and his not wanting Christians to bother him. HHHmmm Looking at the very construction of the letter me thinks it is so well constructed and so subtly worded it may not be written by by a victim of Christian's at all but by the Christian Bashing Bug. Besides I have not met any Creation believers who go door knocking to bother anyone at all. The only Creationists I see are those who share their knowledge by inviting those who are interested to COME to meetings of THEIR OWN FREE WILL. It also seems Mr P H does not think we got this land we call OZ by Christian means...which we clearly did as is clear from our Constitution. Maybe Mr P H would, as you hinted, like to live in a land where there is no acceptance of The Bible's Creator God. If that is what suits him let him try China or Russia even better Iran, Syria, or any other Muslim land. Or does Mr P H think he can find some magic land where there is NO intermingling of thinking? Me thinks there is no such place on this earth where there is no intermingling. So Mr P H wants to live somewhere that does not exist on this earth. God Bless you Don Col from Lismore NSW...

Daniel R., Canada, 5 August 2012

Sorry P. but in the hierarchy of things you have been overridden. Jesus Said go ye into all the world & preach the Gospel to every creature. You say don’t! Who are you to supersede God? Your not free, where the Spirit of God Is, there is Liberty but outside that, no. You can remove religion but how are you going to remove Christ? There is no neutral ground, either you are for or against. Sitting on the fence is against, luke warm is worse than cold, I’m gladder your cold. You make no bones that you are against. Where are you going to run from God, where are you going to hide? We won’t leave you alone, never!! You're to valuable! You don’t understand how much we care about you, that we are compelled by Love. God forbid, but should you perish, you will find yourself in quite a different society, in the endless throws of eternal damnation & all you will think is why did they leave me alone for they Knew and I didn’t! Ask God if He is real, seek Him, you will find, that’s His Promise.

Cameron M., Australia, 6 August 2012

Recently on social media I had commented about my Faith and the importance of Biblical Authority. I was then heckled by a (presumed) troll about having Christianity 'shoved down my throat' or 'brainwashed by my parents' as a child. When I responded that I came to Faith as an adult the poster quickly removed their posts. Funny how when evidence contrary to their opinion and they pull out of the argument. Great responses Don!

Jack C., Australia, 6 August 2012

How dishonest by any atheist to claim Christian teaching should be curtailed if not banned from schools. So, who gave them the right to say only atheistic material must be taught at schools? Given they don’t believe in a God there can be no absolutes. Hence, any form of teaching should be allowed at schools, including Christianity as well as atheism, since there can never be a right and a wrong way. Everything becomes a matter of opinion, and even atheists have to agree everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Otherwise, atheists become our gods and hence they themselves have to stop teaching their own religion to schools by their own ruling.

Al M., United States, 6 August 2012

The link between atheism, evolution, the big bang and immorality seems rather clear to me.

1) Everything came about by nothing, for no reason, with no purpose, through unknowable means.

2) Again, for no reason, defying every condemning and impossible chance and outcome, life comes about and (more or less miraculously) somehow manages to reproduce, survive, and form every life form there ever was.

3) Because the universe and life was formed for no reason, with no purpose, and by chance alone, you are entitled to do whatever you want. Because, when you die, it's like nothing ever happened anyways. Rape, steal, murder (dare I say, mass murder) are all neutral actions in a purposeless world.

The logic seems simple enough, but then again, atheism isn't a very logical philosophy. I hope our friend P sees the utter hopelessness of athiesm and finds God's message.

Kathy W., Australia, 6 August 2012

Atheists bite the hand that feeds them. Freedom to choose is due to Christianity and no "..ism" can claim responsibilty. Thanks, Don, for a sensitive yet firm and balanced response. It was sheer poetry. I also feel that keeping knowledge of God away from children, on purpose, is child abuse.

Kevin L., Canada, 6 August 2012

Even as a Christian and Creationist,{6 days,thousands not billions}I was surprised that Mr. Don Batten took this approach in his responce. To go so negative {bringing up Hitler and Stalin and the killing of 150 million people last century}. This is just going to start a fight. So can respond by telling you why I have to share the Good News and God's creation? It's about Jesus Christ and his love for the lost. To quote Penn Jillett {an atheist} from Penn and Teller.I paraphrase, "How much would you have to hate someone not to tell them about this heaven and this hell? If you truly belived in hell and what it holds for the unbeliever. How much would you have to hate someone to 'not' tell them about it?" I think it is always good to go positive then negative.Have a blessed day.

Don Batten responds

I appreciate your concern for preaching the gospel. However, it is necessary for a sinner to know that he has a problem before he can appreciate his need for forgiveness and how this is possible (which I presented in the last part of my response).

I agree with what you paraphrase from Penn and Teller; I have made that point myself in other responses.

David S., United States, 8 August 2012

As a former atheist, I would suggest that Mr. P. consider his beliefs and be open to discuss them. We all want to be in what is true and Christianity gives the best answers for the truths around us. Atheism does not answer any of the critical questions with any consistency. I don't have enough faith to be an atheist! I can't believe that nothing exploded into something. I can't believe that life started form non-life (Pasteur also proved this). I can't believe that the complex information in our DNA occurred by chance. I can't believe that this earth was placed in this exact spot by chance. I can't believe that the moral fabric of humanity just happened. Mr. P, please think about what your religion is really saying (Atheism is a religion too).

Wayne M., United States, 9 August 2012

In a book called, Death By Government, Don Rummel attributes over 200 million deaths to atheistic, totalitarian governments killing their own citizens...in the 20th century alone. Not fundamentalists, atheists!

Dave P., Australia, 10 August 2012

You present a good argument and with grace.

We certainly do live in a "my rights" age.

You said at the end of your argument "If you don’t want to receive what I have to say, then so be it. I am not offended; that is your right". Who gave him that right to reject truth? Presumably God?

I have wondered about this matter of attributing a "right" to rejecting (or accepting for that matter) God, His truth etc.

It appears to me that a "right" is not the same as a "will". It would , I think, carry more weight of responsibility if we say it is your will that you reject God.

We do not have a right to reject God any more than Adam had a right to disobey God in the garden.

I wonder if we are not giving ground for people to hide on when we give the idea that they have a right to reject God.

On what grounds would God punish me if I was only enacting my "God given right" to reject Him?

Lucas P., Canada, 10 August 2012

Hi Don,

I quite enjoyed your article, but I am just wondering if you had any references or studies I could look at about the crime rates being much lower from the 20s to 50s and during the Great Depression. If you have any you could point me to that would be great!

Lucas

Don Batten responds

Glad you appreciated it. The stats I quoted came from "State of the Nation: a century of change", The Centre for Independent Studies, St Leonards, NSW (2001) (www.cis.org.au), but the raw figures would have come from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (www.abs.gov.au). Other countries would have similar government instrumentalities from which such figures should be available.

Gail G., South Africa, 10 August 2012

As Previously stated in the responses to Don's Letter - it was sheer poetry to read! Loved reading all the comments mostly by obviously intelligent, moral people. What a difference to the Political News Media comments.

Narindra R., Madagascar, 10 August 2012

Atheism is a luxury. One can afford it only if he's rich enough. That's why atheists are so few in Africa. I dare Mr P to live the way we live in Africa, with scarcely enough food and water, struggling for a decent life, not knowing what tomorrow will be made of, and still believing that atheism is the best choice.

Leon G., New Zealand, 10 August 2012

A fine discourse, however I must point out that one can be an aetheist and be spiritually fulfilled with their pantheon of luminaries.

Chaos is their deity

Darwin their patriarchal prophet

'On the Origin of Species' their sacred text

Global warming their Armageddon

SETI their hope of redemption

Hawking their ethereal oracle

Dawkins their hardline fundamentalist

Hitler, Stalin et al their zealots

C. Hitchens their televangelist

DNA their undoing

Flew their defecting Judas

Actually, I'm wrong; aetheism is unfulfilling after all.

Billy B., South Africa, 10 August 2012

He mentioned he has children, who should be given the chance to be saved from death (Christianity) as there may be some chance it is the only way, if he loves his children and there may be a slight chance his atheist view is not the answer he should give them their chance to at least be able to make their choice when able to (when they are ready to) so the children should at least see both sides as the DAD may have got lost at this time. Children need creation, man thinks he is cool with evolution, how silly!

Hans G., Australia, 12 August 2012

Atheists are right...there is no God...not for them.

I wonder if this P.H., typical for trouble seekers to operate from the unknown, ever called out, caused by excitement: "OH MY GOD"?

Hans G., Australia, 12 August 2012

Don't bother our kids with your atheism.

Geoff W., Australia, 12 August 2012

Dear P,

There's so much that could be added to the above, but let me comment on this statement of yours:

"I just don’t want them using the education service to poison my child’s intellectual development".

You imply that religious education (telling children that there is a God who loves them - at least in Christian religious education)is detrimental to your child's intellectual development. Of course you have evidence to support the idea that believing in a deity, or even hearing that there is one, is detrimental to intellectual development. It would surprise me (and I'm sure, those who run this site) to learn that this was so. Look around this site and you will see that many of the greatest minds (or intellects) in fact believe (or believed, in the case of the deceased - they now know) in the God of the Christians, and that much of the intellectual development we enjoy today has come about through such minds. It hardly seems that their minds have been poisoned.

Further, I can tell you that in my primary school days (in the 1950's), my classes comprised around 50 students - quiet, well-behaved, and attentive. We learned well. Today's classes of around 20 students are often noisy, rebellious and out of control, and teachers frequently go off on stress leave because of their class-control problems.

Which do you think is the better learning environment? And doesn't better learning lead to a better ability to discern what is true and what is false?

Isn't ignorance one of the biggest enemies of liberty?

And why do you think classes are so difficult to control these days? There are clues provided in others comments above. Basically, our society decided in the 60's to throw away the rule book, along with belief in God, teaching on responsible living, and many other things. Sunday school attendances began to drop off dramatically and crime increased proportionally. We are now reaping the 'benefits' of our enlightened ("If it feels good, do it") way of life.

So no, our children are not being poisoned or intellectually disadvantaged at all by hearing that there is a deity who created them, who loves them, and who wants nothing but the best for them. Hearing that (at least where the Christian God is concerned, and where the teachings of the Bible are faithfully conveyed) has, as far as I am aware, always led to significant and welcome improvements in societies which adopted those teachings.

Do not fear the teaching of the Bible about a God Who created us and Who loves us; fear instead those who seek to deny such teaching, as it is they who threaten the destruction of our society and of all we believe to be good and true.

George T., Australia, 12 August 2012

I read an issue of Newscientist a couple of months ago regarding religion and while I only scanned the issue I came away with one important point.

All children who believe in the tooth fairy, Santa Clause and the Easter bunny will abandon those beliefs when they reach adulthood.

All children who disbelieve in those entities as children will maintain that disbelief once in adulthood.

Most children who are brought up to believe in God will continue to do so once having reached adulthood. Some will reject such a belief

There are also a good number of disbelieving children that having reached adulthood will turn around and believe in God. There is no other "fantasy" entity which a grown adult, having been brought up to disbelieve, will turn around and believe in.

S. V., New Zealand, 17 August 2012

It is interesting to note that in revelation it mentions that the people had the mark of the beast on their foreheads and on their hands this means that their will (this is a metaphor we see here) is in the beast. The forehead represents the will of a person and their power, represented by the hand, was in the beast. This is directly referring to people that have a will for anything of the devil (they are anti god and their power is in the devil (so they have none xD) therefore P.H. Has his will in the devil. Here is what will happen to P.H. A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: "If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on their forehead or on their hand, they, too, will drink the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. There will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name." (Revelation 14:9-11 NIV)

Keith S., Australia, 21 August 2012

Wonderful answers Don!

We are allowing our language to be taken over by militant minorities. The word "fundamentalist" is one of those words that has been demonised to mean something implied. Like the words "positive" and "negative", rarely is it meaningfully defined.

Instead of allowing its application with a broad-brush, we should pin-down the misuser to explain exactly what "fundamentalism" he is talking about, and what it is that make it "fundamental".

As a Bible-believing Christian, I am happy to wear the title "fundamentalist Christian" because I adhere to the fundamentals of the Christian faith: substitutionary atonement, repentance and salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.

That puts me in a very different camp to a fundamentalist muslim, or a fundamentalist evolutionist!

Comments closed
Article closed for commenting.
Only available for 14 days from appearance on front page.
Copied to clipboard
8662
Product added to cart.
Click store to checkout.
In your shopping cart

Remove All Products in Cart
Go to store and Checkout
Go to store
Total price does not include shipping costs. Prices subject to change in accordance with your country’s store.