Posts Tagged ‘new atheist’

Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris, falsely being treated representative of New Atheism: Richard Carrier

April 23, 2014

I have written following comments on Richard Carrier’s “Freethought Blogs”.
Topic: “Minor Corrections to Crossley’s Jesus in an Age of Neoliberalism” by Richard Carrier

April 23, 2014 at 9:22 am (awaiting moderation)

“Similarly, Crossley rightly takes to task the reactionary Islamophobia of Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris, but falsely treats that as representative of New Atheism, when in fact the bulk of the New Atheist movement has been consistently criticizing them for precisely these views.” Unquote

I read Hitchens book “God is not great”; and noticed that he had no in-depth study of Quran/Islam/Muhammad and generalized things from his experience with Christianity and had a biased view of Quran/Islam/Muhammad.

In the entire book Hitchens could not quote even a single verse from Quran in support of his views about Quran/Islam/Muhammad; though the title of the book suggests that his intention was to write the book against Islam.

I appreciate Atheists’ approach of being reason-oriented and hence drawing the attention of the Revealed Religions for reformation of the peripheral, mythical and superstitious creeds. They could go into the process of reformation while keeping the core teachings intact.

Thanks and regards

Atheists understand religion incorrectly

February 1, 2014

I have written a post at the “Fide Dubitandum” blog on the topic “Forget the Experts; What do the Most Ignorant People Think?”

February 1st, 2014 at 4:36 pm

@ Debilis
I agree with your worlds:

“This is why Dawkins, who has confessed to being ignorant of theology, is forced to interact with the lay-level view.”
This is also correct about Christopher Hitchens; with his shallow knowledge of Religion and especially about Islam/Quran/Muhammad; he only dealt with the ignorant or illiterate lay-level view and was applauded by the same level of atheists.

The One-True-God is not a physical or material being; He has created the Universe/s and everything in it; hence He is Omnipresent only by His attributes. He needs not to be present everywhere materially or physically. This has been very clearly mentioned in Quran:

[39:68] And they do not esteem Allah, with the esteem that is due to Him. And the whole earth will be but His handful on the Day of Resurrection, and the heavens will be rolled up in His right hand. Glory to Him and exalted is He above that which they associate with Him.

All material, physical and spiritual things and beings have been created by Him, therefore, to imagine or search for Him in these realms is not reasonable and is counterproductive.

I know that the literate Christians have the same concept; only the ignorant and lay-level Christians would disagree with it. Jesus was not a Christian-god or son-of-god literally as that would make (I take refuge in the One-True-God) Jesus the husband of Mary; and that no Christian believes.

In symbolic terms as explained in the Bible itself; yes Jesus was the loved one of God and one- with-God; in the sense that Jesus fulfilled the purpose for which he was sent by the One-True-God.

Atheists don’t understand this; may Allah open their hearts, mind and soul to understand it.

Even if they don’t understand, we can co-exist in this world peacefully.


The News:

One will, perhaps, love to read the following:

“Holy War”: Is it Armageddon? with its ” Peaceful Version”!

“Holy War”: Is it Armegiddon / Armageddon? – with its “Peaceful Version”! 1 | paarsurrey (

One will be taken aback to note that Armegiddon/Armageddon is nothing like as one would have imagined or known so far. It is not to be fought with any physical and destructive weaponry and or the lethal arsenal of the day. It is peaceful and in fact, I understand, had already been started and it is sown like a seed!

It was a debate between the Pauline-Christianity (represented by Mr. Abdullah Atham) and the Second Coming 1835-1908 , that took place in Urdu language and was published then by the name “Jang-e-Muqaddas” in 1893 ( 22 May 1893 to 5 June 1893) in the then British India and has been recently translated and published in English by the name “The Holy War”:

Click to access The-Holy-War.pdf


From: a peaceful Ahmadiyya Muslim

A purposeless universe giving birth to purposefulness; isn’t it weird?

January 14, 2014

January 14th, 2014 at 10:26 am
@ Arkenaten’s comments
Quoting your words:
“Coyne is probably correct in his assessment that the universe displays no purpose, but humans are not purposeless, and are able to create their own purpose ( if I have understood him correctly, from the piece).”.
A purposeless universe giving birth to humans who could create their own purposes isn’t it a weird concept?

Paarsurrey adds:

It is not only a meaningless concept but also a useless concept like Atheism.

I would like to quote here from Quran:

[23:113] God will say, ‘What number of years did you tarry in the earth?’
[23:114] They will say, ‘We tarried for a day or part of a day, but ask those who keep count.’
[23:115] He will say, ‘You tarried but a little, if only you knew!
[23:116] ‘Did you then think that We had created you without purpose, and that you would not be brought back to Us?’
[23:117] Exalted then be Allah, the True King. There is no God but He, the Lord of the Glorious Throne.

Plug: The Confidence of Jerry Coyne

January 14, 2014

Fide Dubitandum

Ross Douthat has been involved in an interchange with Jerry Coyne. I thought this comment was a very good response to the New Atheist position in general.

I tend to agree that, so long as Coyne and others continue to do exactly the things that Douthat accuses him of doing, their movement will do more to foster interest in religion than destroy it.

View original post

%d bloggers like this: