What on earth will they think of next?
My great-grandfather was an atheist.
He could not believe in Our Lord and Father. He read, he discussed and he tried his best but he could not say that he believed; and this led to a great deal of persecution from among some of his family (including his parents) who were all members of the Congregationalist Church.
It appears that the biggest obstacle to his recognition that God does indeed exist was the issue of suffering. How could there be a God who allows suffering in the world?
He came from a family who were not afraid to say what they thought and be open to discussion on the topic. They also practiced what they preached and indeed, his son followed in his footsteps. He became a committed Pacifist and a Conscientious Objector during WWII. He told the authorities he would do anything except fight. Threats of jail would not deter him and so they appointed him to be an ambulance driver which was dangerous work indeed when you were stationed in London during the Blitz and yet even today he is known in the village as a 'Conchie' despite the fact that he died nearly forty years ago...
Anyway, to return to my original point: my great-grandfather was an atheist. But he was not a bad man. His belief was in doing good during one's life on earth so that one could die at peace.
He would ever have condoned this stupid waste of money which could have been better put towards assisting in alleviating the suffering of those in need. . . It isn't even as though they are sure about their stance!
Bye the way it is still freezing here and now the school heating system has packed up...
Luckily all is snug and cosy in the royal apartment!
PS
The picture comes from the Telegraph article
5 comments:
You know what I found most interesting? The "probably" in their public proclamation. Seems that not even the atheist can commit fully to their own ideology without having a shred of doubt. I’ve also noted that famed Richard Dawkins - who is plagued by an irrational animosity towards religion - is endorsing the campaign of the non-believer.
If I was searching for God and wanted a sound, rational, and constructive discussion with various sources who held different types of beliefs, I would avoid Dawkins like the plague. He is nothing but psychological excess baggage, with little to no substance.
How very true. That is just one of the things that makes me think that this so-called publicity for the cause is a complete waste of time and money that could be put to better use.
He knows the secrets of our hearts, and I wonder how many who publicly proclaim their faith are a long way further from Him than people like your great-grandfather.
As for Richard Dawkins, he just seems so adolescent to me, and, for such a clever man, so silly.
Very true Elderflower, and after seeing him on that programme the name of which I forget, but which was coming from Croydon, I think he will have a lot of explaining to do once his time is 'up'
Very true Elderflower, and after seeing him on that programme the name of which I forget, but which was coming from Croydon, I think he will have a lot of explaining to do once his time is 'up'
Post a Comment