<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: TIA Tuesday: The beast and the bank</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/2008/11/04/tia-tuesday-the-beast-and-the-bank/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/2008/11/04/tia-tuesday-the-beast-and-the-bank/</link>
	<description>The theology of Reality</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Sep 2011 22:49:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chigliakus</title>
		<link>http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/2008/11/04/tia-tuesday-the-beast-and-the-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-4731</link>
		<dc:creator>Chigliakus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:04:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/?p=501#comment-4731</guid>
		<description>Speaking of attempting to prove God&#039;s existence have any of you seen the Turek vs. Hitchens debate?  http://richarddawkins.net/article,3286,Turek-vs-Hitchens-Debate-Does-God-Exist,Christopher-Hitchens-Frank-Turek

I found Hitchens to be rather disappointing, I think he could have easily won the point on Turek&#039;s &quot;no objective morality without God&quot; - he even came close more than once - but ultimately failed.  A close friend whom I often talk religion with said that even though he agrees with Hitchens&#039; position he thought Turek won the debate.  I got the impression that Turek read Hitchens&#039; book and came prepared for the debate while Hitchens couldn&#039;t care less about Turek&#039;s book and wasn&#039;t really prepared for Turek&#039;s arguments.  Hitchens came off looking closed-minded while Turek, whom we know reasons backwards from his desired conclusion, managed to appear respectful and genuinely interested in what Hitchens had to say.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Speaking of attempting to prove God&#8217;s existence have any of you seen the Turek vs. Hitchens debate?  <a href="http://richarddawkins.net/article,3286,Turek-vs-Hitchens-Debate-Does-God-Exist,Christopher-Hitchens-Frank-Turek" rel="nofollow">http://richarddawkins.net/article,3286,Turek-vs-Hitchens-Debate-Does-God-Exist,Christopher-Hitchens-Frank-Turek</a></p>
<p>I found Hitchens to be rather disappointing, I think he could have easily won the point on Turek&#8217;s &#8220;no objective morality without God&#8221; &#8211; he even came close more than once &#8211; but ultimately failed.  A close friend whom I often talk religion with said that even though he agrees with Hitchens&#8217; position he thought Turek won the debate.  I got the impression that Turek read Hitchens&#8217; book and came prepared for the debate while Hitchens couldn&#8217;t care less about Turek&#8217;s book and wasn&#8217;t really prepared for Turek&#8217;s arguments.  Hitchens came off looking closed-minded while Turek, whom we know reasons backwards from his desired conclusion, managed to appear respectful and genuinely interested in what Hitchens had to say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: galloway</title>
		<link>http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/2008/11/04/tia-tuesday-the-beast-and-the-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-4721</link>
		<dc:creator>galloway</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:45:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/?p=501#comment-4721</guid>
		<description>&quot; Vox knows that the evidence for the Bible is weak (to say the least), and he began TIA with a disclaimer announcing that he would not be attempting to prove that God is real. &quot;

I&#039;ve often wondered why some intelligent people, who normally display great powers of deductive reasoning when applied to mundane matters, have these reasoning powers leave them when it comes to matters of god and religion. Is it that they are so afraid of having their existences end that they will grasp any way out, even nonsensical religious dogma? The real question at hand is not whether Dawkins or Harris got their statistics right in the red-state blue- state arguments, but rather, IS THERE A GOD? As Deacon points out, Vox chooses to not even attempt this at the very beginning of his book. Sigh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8221; Vox knows that the evidence for the Bible is weak (to say the least), and he began TIA with a disclaimer announcing that he would not be attempting to prove that God is real. &#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve often wondered why some intelligent people, who normally display great powers of deductive reasoning when applied to mundane matters, have these reasoning powers leave them when it comes to matters of god and religion. Is it that they are so afraid of having their existences end that they will grasp any way out, even nonsensical religious dogma? The real question at hand is not whether Dawkins or Harris got their statistics right in the red-state blue- state arguments, but rather, IS THERE A GOD? As Deacon points out, Vox chooses to not even attempt this at the very beginning of his book. Sigh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kenneth</title>
		<link>http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/2008/11/04/tia-tuesday-the-beast-and-the-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-4692</link>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/?p=501#comment-4692</guid>
		<description>My father and uncle were debating in the 1940&#039;s whether Hitler or Mussollini was the anti-christ.  Pauline thought was that Jesus was coming back in the 1st century.  

The huge popularity of &quot;end times&quot; novels, etc point a beacon at human non-rational mental organization, the evolutionary ad hoc construction of the human brain and the absolute need to keep hammering away with reasoned arguments.  If we are to be saved from an ending time  holocaust it won&#039;t be accomplished by followers of 1st century apocolyptic prophets (of which Revelations in only one by the way).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My father and uncle were debating in the 1940&#8242;s whether Hitler or Mussollini was the anti-christ.  Pauline thought was that Jesus was coming back in the 1st century.  </p>
<p>The huge popularity of &#8220;end times&#8221; novels, etc point a beacon at human non-rational mental organization, the evolutionary ad hoc construction of the human brain and the absolute need to keep hammering away with reasoned arguments.  If we are to be saved from an ending time  holocaust it won&#8217;t be accomplished by followers of 1st century apocolyptic prophets (of which Revelations in only one by the way).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jim</title>
		<link>http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/2008/11/04/tia-tuesday-the-beast-and-the-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-4691</link>
		<dc:creator>jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:52:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.evangelicalrealism.com/?p=501#comment-4691</guid>
		<description>Back in 1975, shortly after I&#039;d become a Christian, I picked up a book by one of these end-times prophecy guys...can&#039;t recall the author, but he was popular at the time. He predicted the rapture would come in September. Problem was, the date had already passed. 

At some point in my reading, an errant page fell out in my lap. It was actually a loose leaf insert, an addendum to the original prediction. It explained that, because of some confusion interpreting the Jewish feast days, the number of horns on the dragon&#039;s head, the tune played during the sounding of the trumpets-yada, yada, yada-the ACTUAL coming of the Lord was scheduled for September of 1976 or 1977. I&#039;ve always wondered if there were further updates before the book went out of print...hehehehehe!

Of course, none of this ever bothers to the faithful. As you&#039;ve pointed out, the contrived or coincidental hits are all that matter, and the rest is either shortly forgotten, or explained away. It&#039;s the same mindset that gives God all of the credit, and none of the blame.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Back in 1975, shortly after I&#8217;d become a Christian, I picked up a book by one of these end-times prophecy guys&#8230;can&#8217;t recall the author, but he was popular at the time. He predicted the rapture would come in September. Problem was, the date had already passed. </p>
<p>At some point in my reading, an errant page fell out in my lap. It was actually a loose leaf insert, an addendum to the original prediction. It explained that, because of some confusion interpreting the Jewish feast days, the number of horns on the dragon&#8217;s head, the tune played during the sounding of the trumpets-yada, yada, yada-the ACTUAL coming of the Lord was scheduled for September of 1976 or 1977. I&#8217;ve always wondered if there were further updates before the book went out of print&#8230;hehehehehe!</p>
<p>Of course, none of this ever bothers to the faithful. As you&#8217;ve pointed out, the contrived or coincidental hits are all that matter, and the rest is either shortly forgotten, or explained away. It&#8217;s the same mindset that gives God all of the credit, and none of the blame.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

