Atheism is every bit as much a faith Christianity.
You have faith that no God exists, which is something that you can't prove, and I have faith that God does exist which is something I can't prove.
I think you are using the word "faith" wrongly here. I don't have faith that god does not exist, I simply lack the faith that he does. Not having faith in [A] does not equal having faith in [not A].
Back on topic: I remember buying the trilogy (for myself to read) and the lady at the till charged me full price for them. I mentioned the "3 for 2" deal that was advertised throughout the store, and she said "That's on adult fiction. These are kids books" which made me feel a bit embarrassed for some reason!
Anyway I enjoyed them very much. I'll have to read them again before watching the film.
I don't have faith that god does not exist, I simply lack the faith that he does.
But you still have to base your life on some basic faith system. As an Atheist you are putting your faith in the concept that humanity is on its own and that there is no purpose or meaning to life beyond what we can discern from the physical world. As a Christian I have faith that there is more to our existence than that, and I have faith that Christianity answers the question of what that is.
These books were written with the acknowledged purpose of providing an Atheistic alternate to the Narnia series. Narnia was written to promote Christianity whereas, "His Dark Materials" is being used to promote Atheism. There is no need to promote or evamngelize a non-faith.
We all park our faith somewhere no matter what we beleive.
thank you for not answering my question. you gave me what the author thought he is doing.
What specifically in HDM promotes atheism?
You do realize that attacking one position is not the same as supporting a different position, right? Which is why we tell creos that they have to support ID/creo/YEC/lunacy with more than attacks on evolution, because they aren't actually supporting their claim.
It is agreed that Pullman is an exceptional author and he has stated that his intent is to discredit Christianity.
Pullman is a supporter of the British Humanist Association and an Honorary Associate of the National Secular Society.
He openly objects to any Theistic belief. It seems to me that when a gifted author claims that he has a goal in writing a book that we can assume that he is likely to be successful.
I have only read about the books so I'm not going to attempt to be specific about what in them promotes Atheism, but when the book is aimed at discrediting Christianity specifically and Theism more generally then I think that we can safely assume that he is writing to give credence to his own faith which is Atheism.
Not to side with GDR - atheism isn't a faith, it's a lack of faith - but it's really untenable to try to interpret HDM as being compatible with theism. The characters in HDM prove that there's no God.
I read it as an attack against fundamentalism and barbarity.
I know it's really easy for moderate theists to read any argument against theism as being against "fundamentalism", but it's a bad habit.
I mean it's astounding the degree to which theists can apparently nod their heads all the way through the arguments of atheists and then say "oh, I'm sorry, I wasn't listening. I didn't think you were talking about my beliefs, just fundamentalism." Take a step back, moderates, and realize that the only thing that distinguishes you from the fundamentalists in our eyes is that fundamentalists have the courage of their convictions and you guys don't.
uh-huh. You haven't read the books. So then you can't really say what in HDM promotes atheism, can you? Then why did you say it did?
And again, attacking one position does not support a different position, in and of itself. And that, so far, is all you've quoted about Pullman, that he is discrediting Christianity.
Again, there is a difference betweeing discrediting/attacking a position and supporting a different position. Doing the first does not accomplish the latter. And doing the latter doesn't necessarily do the first.
Well, no they don't. In fact, you recently said that the authority was the only god they had in the book. So either there is a god in that book, or there isn't, and you've said both.
The part where they kill God
Well, again, they don't. They kill the second in command who has taken over god's role. God is this little guy locked up in a crystal. And when the crystal is broken, he floats away and disapears. And the angels in rebellion certainly don't think of him as god, but an imposter. And if god was able to be locked up and put away, he certainly doesn't seem like the god spoken of who is all powerful and all knowing. The only thing killed in this book is a specific idea of god, a largely fundamentalist idea of god, not the complete idea of god.
How long ago did you read this, anyway?
the only thing that distinguishes you from the fundamentalists in our eyes is that fundamentalists have the courage of their convictions and you guys don't
This isn't particularly true, either. I think it would be a little much to say that jar is the same as ray, except ray says things with courage. There's a clear difference between moderates and fundies of any stripe. And that is largely the fanaticism and the extreme rhetoric. You're not pegging me as a theist, are you?
quote:Atheism is every bit as much a faith Christianity. You have faith that no God exists, which is something that you can't prove, and I have faith that God does exist which is something I can't prove.
Actually, I'm an agnostic.
I don't have any religious faith in anything.
But tell me, do you have religious faith that Vishnu, or Loki, or Zeus, or Santa Claus don't exist?
quote:But you still have to base your life on some basic faith system.
No, you don't, actually.
quote:As an Atheist you are putting your faith in the concept that humanity is on its own
I don't actually know if humanity is on its own or not, but all the evidence seems to indicate that it is, so that's the working hypothesis I operate under until there's a reason to change it.
See the difference? No faith, just evidence.
quote:and that there is no purpose or meaning to life beyond what we can discern from the physical world.
I don't know if there is a purpose or meaning to this life other than that we determine for ourselves, but this certainly seems to be the case based upon the evidence. That is the working hypothesis I use, but I'll change it if there's ever evidence that I need to.
See the difference? No faith, just evidence.
quote:There is no need to promote or evamngelize a non-faith.
You don't think there's a need to promote the rejection of superstition in favor of rationality?
I'll bet you would agree that there is such a need if we were discussing the promotion of the Heaven's Gate cult, or Homeopathy, or any number of irrational beliefs you don't personally adhere to.