Yuyutsu
Please supply the percentage of Ausralians who answer to belonging to a Religion in the Census. The splly the percentage of Australians who attend Church regulary

There is equally no honour in the self-righteous Atheist who seeks to 'destroy' religion. What is the difference between a self-righteous fundamentalist Christian/Muslim etal and a self-righteous Atheist. Yep, Atheists get tired of the self righteous morality of the various religious fundamentalists so why mimic it?

Yes there is evil concocted in the name of some religions and there are Churches that turned a blind eye to wrong doings. Many Atheists believe that human destiny has to eventually reach a higher ethical plane based on a natural will to do right, but many do still find comfort in a belief in a 'higher power' (not of the human). Nothing good is ever gained by force as even the Christian religion has learned over the millenia.

I have no problem with the vast majority of Christians, Muslims, Pagans, Witches, Hindus, Buddhists (insert belief system here) as long as their beliefs do not adversely impact on others.

That is the bottom line. Atheism is not a religion, there is no 'typical' atheist so why all the push for activism? What is the purpose of 'destroying' religion? Destroy instead the evil done in the name of religion instead. Please don't claim to represent all atheists in your mission.

Let people believe what they will - part of a civilised society is defending the rights of people to choose a spiritual path - what right do atheists have to dictate to others what they should believe. Isn't there enough of that claptrap from the fundamentalists?

The focus should be on lobbying governments to truly reflect their secular values ie. no free ride for religious organisations in terms of tax freedoms, pushing religious agendas in public schools, funding of visits of religious leaders, allowing continued discrimination of minority groups and women in some religious communities.

The best security for one's beliefs is secularism. Let religion be self sustaining, our personal lives and beliefs should not IMO be the concern of governments other than to provide legislation that protects the rights of theists and non-theists alike.

There is a hint of 'Father knows best' here Yuyutsu:

"There are millions in Australia who ardently apply themselves to come closer to God. Many among them are not conscious about this; many among them cannot put words to their inner urge to unite with God; and many among them are agnostics or atheists who do not even acknowledge that God exists (for God to exist is an inner contradiction, because that would have placed a limitation upon Him and reduce Him to the level of an object, but never mind this subtle detail for now)."

So, pardon me for asking, but if these millions are unaware of this, how come you have the inside running?

I confess to not being able to boast of my close association with millions of Australians, but the ones I have known over the last 40 years would be far removed from your claims.

Even the bishops and priests I've met seem to have serious doubts about the authenticity of it all.

A religious leader is someone who professes to be one, someone who self-nominates, or is appointed, who feels they are, and takes a lead.

Is there a difference between 'the path of religion' and the 'path of pretence' of religion?

How often have we heard the cry, 'Oh, he's not a real xtian'?

Is there such a beast anywhere?

Doesn't that just depend on where one sits?

Eccles, I think those multi-millions who do not attend church, might be the ones who are unaware of their unconscious seeking after gods. So you won't win that one with this chap.

A J Philips

Advances in science, especially in fields of biology and cosmology, have produced compelling evidence to support the view of intelligent design and hence the existence of God.

The leading atheist of the past 50 years Antony Flew became a theist in the face of new discoveries in science.

"Flew was a strong advocate of atheism, arguing that one should presuppose atheism until empirical evidence of a God surfaces. He also criticised the idea of life after death, the free will defence to the problem of evil, and the meaningfulness of the concept of God.

However, in 2004 he stated an allegiance to deism, and later wrote the book There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, with contributions from Roy Abraham Varghese."(wikipedia)

You may like to view a video clip in which he said why he changed his position.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1e4FUhfHiU&feature=related

There are now many scientists that are leaving atheism because of the "The Anthropic Principle" (fine tuning of the universe)in cosmology http://www.2001principle.net/2005.htm

Dear Bugsy

haven't seen you for a while. Welcome!

You ask "How can a heart become pure without Christ?" and you offer an answer, "Exercise"

But there is a hidden problem in that answer.

"What".....is "pure"?

This is a core Biblical issue and a philosophical one at the same time.

"PURITY"... a discussion.

Dictionary:

1. The quality or condition of being pure.
2. A quantitative assessment of homogeneity or uniformity.
3. Freedom from sin or guilt; innocence; chastity: "Teach your children . . . the belief in purity of body, mind and soul" (Emmeline Pankhurst).
4. The absence in speech or writing of slang or other elements deemed inappropriate to good style.
5. The degree to which a color is free from being mixed with other colors.

Clearly there are 2 major meanings. The qualitative for substances and the moral for people.

For the Moral, we must ask "what" is moral purity?

The Bible defines this as a closeness to God, a one-ness with Christ and the values expressed in the Scriptures.

"blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God" Matt 5:8

This assumes an understanding of "Purity" which can only exist against a backdrop of the whole Old Testament revelation.

Apart from that, it could mean anything one wishes it to.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/053.sbt.html#004.053.386

Al Mughira an Officer in Caliph Umar's invading Army, said in response to the Persians enquiring as to 'why' the Muslims were invading them - "Our Lord, our Prophet has commanded us to fight you until you worship Allah alone"

But he adds a most disturbing qualification:

"Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."

Not my idea of "purity".

Good on you, pelican:
"The best security for one's beliefs is secularism. Let religion be self sustaining, our personal lives and beliefs should not IMO be the concern of governments other than to provide legislation that protects the rights of theists and non-theists alike."

However you ask why a push for activism? I think the clue lies in your first paragraph: "What is the difference between a self-righteous fundamentalist Christian/Muslim etal and a self-righteous Atheist."

As one of the chapters in The Australian Book of Atheism noted, what images do you see when you read the words "religious fundamentalist" versus "atheist fundamentalist"? The former is likely to be a suicide bomber. The latter is more likely to be Richard Dawkins "with a bit of color in his cheeks." No real comparison.

If religion was merely a matter of private belief, there would be no need for "activist" atheism beyond the normal conversations between people who care about and seek the truth. Unfortunately too many religions are heavily into public agitation in order to inflict creationist nonsense and/or moral guilt on innocent children and to pressure politicians into giving them financial favours or passing laws against things that are none of their goddamn business. And of course we even have the ones out to kill us.

The idea that secularism is good and that governments should "protect the rights of theists and non-theists alike" is a secular idea, itself the product of secular "activism". Unfortunately the price of such liberties is perpetual vigilance - which includes fighting the claims of religion in public forums.