There is a website called the Brights where atheists can gather and feel at home in the Koinonia of unbelief. According to the site:
- A bright is a person who has a naturalistic worldview
- A bright’s worldview is free of supernatural and mystical elements
- The ethics and actions of a bright are based on a naturalistic worldview
Unfortunately, every encounter I’ve had with an atheist belies the rather arrogant epithet they have appropriated for themselves. Most atheists are more interested in the mindless, formulaic repetition of the creeds of contemporary atheism than in carefully scrutinising the consequences of their philosophical position: they really are not very bright.
This, in a way, is good news for Christians since it provides both the motive to explore the reasons why Christianity holds together as an explanation for the meaning of human life, and countless opportunities to give atheists a satisfying poke in the eye with the rationality of which they believe themselves to be the sole custodians.
Regrettably, the intellect of most atheists is insufficiently adroit to alert them to the fact that they have been thoroughly routed; this only lessens the euphoria very slightly.
Good comments!!!!
Today’s Sunday. In the church at the bottom of my street, believers are going through the
as they do across the world, in different churches, mosques and temples. I doubt more than a few percentage have ever ever read their holy book from cover to cover.
Perhaps they are
On they other hand, they may just be repeating mindlessly what their parents believed in, and their parents before them, leading any fairminded observer to conclude
And the day Christianity has a “Brights” denomination I might be saying something similar. As it is, the pretention has been claimed for exclusive use by atheism – ironically, the only belief system grounded on a self-defeating axiom:
The material universe is all there is, so it follows:
The human mind is part of the material universe;
No event has the intrinsic property of being more true than any other event;
The human mind draws conclusions based on its observation of events in the universe;
Since there is nothing outside the material universe, the conclusions drawn by the human mind are also events in the universe.
If the material universe is all there is, a human mind that concludes that the material universe is not all there is, is another event in the universe.
Therefore, if the material universe is all there is, it is impossible to tell which of the following statements is true:
The material universe is all there is.
The material universe is not all there is.
Conclusion: naturalistic materialism is self-defeating.
I think you are building atheism into an ideology, which it is not.
It is simply: a-theism, or not-theism (meaning, not-god).
I don’t like the idea that I will die any more than you but the difference is, I’m not trying to pretend there’s any life afterwards.
“…I’m not trying to pretend there’s any life afterwards.”
Which brings to mind the expression, “whistling past the graveyard.”
Rebranding a group, eh?
Reminds me of the “re-branding” of homosexuals to “gay”.
“Gay” used to mean “cheerful, happy-go-lucky, merry”.
Hence the attempt at renaming themselves to create a more positive image.
Didn’t work, though, did it?
Maybe the word “bright” will morph into meaning cheerless, pessimistic, or whatever your view is.
Despite the arguments (I found this thematic rather interesting) I just want to say “thank you” to David for the amazing title of this article.
The Dulls
Awesome. I love it. Great enough for a post-punk band name. Great enough for me too. I’m an atheist and I believe in something. In me and in everyone else. I believe in magic, the one we create with our little great minds. The good stuff and the bad stuff. It’s all in us. What? You say that God made us? You say we are made from Is image? So does it mean that He knows how to love? Does it mean that He knows how to be a friend? A hater? A rapist? A musician? A doctor? A human like everyone else? What’s the difference? Why should I believe in an individual, far superior from everyone else as it seems, if He is like everyone else? All your theories collapse.
So if that sentence is not an “oblique reference to Descartes” it automatically becomes a “meaningless prattle”?
Really? I won’t even continue this argument.
Thanks for enforcing my point of view even more!
Would you care to elucidate the evidence that makes you conclude God does exist?
Right. Obviously you don’t have an answer for David’s question.
Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.
So he (anon) implies that what you say is also false. Everything is permitted, yet nothing is true. Should we believe in God or not. My times in Constantinople(Istanbul) were like a revelation to me. I found things that I wasn’t aware. My ancestors shared many memories and even if those memories were good they also shattered my conception of reality. I saw the past, the present and the future. It confused me. Do we need a symbol to follow? We need a guide? Or are we capable of taking our own mind as the master of ourselves?