Introducing myself

[The Gentleman Atheist]

At any rate, I believe that for the most part His role was spiritual as opposed to political/military. To use a cliche: He was in the soul-saving business.

Well, sadly it is unsurprising that an all-too-obvious (especially given the context) quote from Marlowe or any of the other great poets of English literature are overlooked or misinterpreted. If the truth is to be told, then you must know that I am a great lover of English literature, and I have been peppering this thread with many quotes of our past great masters of the word – as I do with much of my correspondence. I feel greatly redeemed when you and others take note. Sadly – with a few notable exceptions – this is not a most observant forum.

That being said, I do find it odd that you choose to resurrect Marlowe's moniker, in light of so much of the controversy surrounding his own religious beliefs or dis-beliefs. Do you feel that these accusations (really similar to high treason, in those days) were merely disinformation, manufactured and promulgated by the political – let me search for the proper dysphemism here – "untouchables" of the day?

Yet, we were discussing Napoleon, were we not? I find myself to also be an admirer (though perhaps not a "lover") of french literature also. You may have noted my quoting of Rousseau earlier in this thread – your thoughts there would also be appreciated. In any case, where were we? Oh yes: Napoleon was a somewhat bright, but ambitious fellow, and made every attempt to appear du pareil au même with others of the French writers of the time (the late Rousseau included). Sadly for him, he was in letters – as in the field of battle – a mere imitator. Given Napoleon's spoken views on religion, and the pattern of hackeyed fluster that we see in his writing, we can easily assume that the letter that you cite is merely an attempt at the french style of the time – and indeed still the centre-piece of all french culture – sarcasm. Ergo, Napoleon is not saying that the Galilean messiah is truly divine. He is instead despairing of all of the men who are equally lost to the word as to the sword. If it were not rendered as so much clumsy doggerel, then I might call it quite witty.

Long live our noble Queen!

The Gentleman Atheist

 

[marlowe007]

That being said, I do find it odd that you choose to resurrect Marlowe's moniker, in light of so much of the controversy surrounding his own religious beliefs or dis-beliefs. Do you feel that these accusations (really similar to high treason, in those days) were merely disinformation, manufactured and promulgated by the political – let me search for the proper dysphemism here – "untouchables" of the day?

As much as it pains me to say, I think Marlowe's atheism was substantive. Whether or not the Baines note was bonafide, there is external evidence to the effect that he was spreading the doctrine of nonbelief amongst his fellow students during his time at Corpus. If it looks like a duck...

You may have noted my quoting of Rousseau earlier in this thread – your thoughts there would also be appreciated.

Sorry, but I couldn't find you quoting him anywhere.

Rousseau is a-okay in my book. Of all the Enlightenment philosophès, he was one the few to openly defend religion (or the noble lie, call it what you will) and vocally oppose atheism & cruder forms of secularism, but churchmen still bashed him for his denial of Original Sin, which contrasted his belief in the spontaneous goodness and future perfectibility of man. For this, in addition to his identification of grace with nature, I think he is best classified as a Pelagian.

Given Napoleon's spoken views on religion, and the pattern of hackeyed fluster that we see in his writing, we can easily assume that the letter that you cite is merely an attempt at the french style of the time – and indeed still the centre-piece of all french culture – sarcasm. Ergo, Napoleon is not saying that the Galilean messiah is truly divine. He is instead despairing of all of the men who are equally lost to the word as to the sword. If it were not rendered as so much clumsy doggerel, then I might call it quite witty.

I think your first analysis of Bonaparte's discourse was more cogent than your second; and I do agree that his reduced worldly stature played a parte (excuse the pun) in his sensitivity to religion. How could one ever feel more vulnerable, more alone in this universe? If there are no atheists in foxholes, there can't be very many in prison islands and deathbeds.

That he was sincere in maintaining the divinity of Christ is strongly evidenced by his later conversion to Catholicism.

 

[oi_antz]

Right then! Oi,

I see that you also reply in two testaments. For all of your talk of resurrection and rebirth, you christians are truly incorrigible. Haha!

I am happy to be called incorrigible, however my name is Anthony and if you prefer informality then you may use Antz.

I find the chronology of your narrative a bit confusing at points. Do you say that you were attending a bible college whilst your struggle with christianity persisted and also during your baptism at 17?

No I was a rebellious teenager until I was brought into the church by my Grandmother.

I am interested to know what was the verse that "proved" god to you and "broke" you. Is it the same that you currently use in your signature – the John 6:67-68, NLT?

This is the verse which broke my pride (only after I had surrendered it you must know), and enabled me to begin regarding the almighty God with due respect.

1 John 4

Test the Spirits

1Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

I am pleased to hear that you are doing well – and that politeness is still appreciated.

The Gentleman Atheist

Thankyou for having an honest query of my faith, please do not hesitate to ask for further testimony, as I am sure you cannot understand that which I have come to understand unless you were to walk a lifetime in my shoes. Sadly, the pitfalls of human communication make this an impossible wish to grant but if any time you are prepared to know Jesus then your wish may be granted by Jesus Himself.

 

[Pandorra]

Well, what people or events did originally bring you to the christian faith?

When I was 5 years old I was knocked down by a car and my mother prayed for my life and told me how God answered her prayers. I became a Christian at that moment and have continued in the faith up until the present day, and have never looked back.

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

As much as it pains me to say, I think Marlowe's atheism was substantive. Whether or not the Baines note was bonafide, there is external evidence to the effect that he was spreading the doctrine of nonbelief amongst his fellow students during his time at Corpus. If it looks like a duck...

Yes… but does it weigh as much as a duck? I do find it interesting to note examples such as Marlowe, in light of the much-vaunted image of the Enlightment as the genesis of all atheism. I find it encouraging to know that not all men were given to irrationality prior to this time. As a christian, do you find such examples as Marlowe (or anyone since Diagoras, really) to be a wellspring of self-analysis? I am curious to know your thoughts.

I think your first analysis of Bonaparte's discourse was more cogent than your second; and I do agree that his reduced worldly stature played a parte (excuse the pun) in his sensitivity to religion. How could one ever feel more vulnerable, more alone in this universe? If there are no atheists in foxholes, there can't be very many in prison islands and deathbeds.

I would not have thought it. Are you one of the sort that parades a purported "deathbed conversion" as some sort of christian victory in a pettifogging theological battle? Really, how absolutely childish. You know that you should let people die with honour, rather than politicize their final hours, when they are helpless to defend themselves. In any case, I will let my young friend the unfortunate Mr. Hitchens speak to those of you who do malign the dignity of any person in their final days. His is the position to say so, at this time, and it does appear that his "pre-emptive strike" has been required.

I do not prefer to rant like an unruly irishman, but this atheists in foxholes nonsense is rather offensive, don't you think? I assure you from knowledge and experience that a man might serve his nation honourably, while caring a nought for any supernatural thing. Please do not defame your own good character by denying this simple truth.

In fact, in just one post you have hit upon two of the silliest and categorically repudiated (and refuted) notions in the whole of the theism/atheism argument. What is wrong with you? Are you an agitator? I would prefer that you keep your statements on firmer theoretical ground.

That he was sincere in maintaining the divinity of Christ is strongly evidenced by his later conversion to Catholicism.

I believe that this "conversion" also holds true to my image of Napoleon as a sarcastic gadfly. What better way to irritate the good, protestant Englishmen around him than to convert to catholicism? Napoleon played with catholicism like everything else. He would adopt and drop philosophies like so many mouchoirs de poche parfumés. To say Napoleon was a catholic is like saying Napoleon was a Frenchman.

Like The Duke of Wellington, I await your response.

The Gentleman Atheist

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

This is the verse which broke my pride (only after I had surrendered it you must know), and enabled me to begin regarding the almighty God with due respect.

I am afraid that I do not follow the logic of your interpretation of the verse. I am afraid that I may be the most recent of a long petition of persons begging you for your thoughts on these words, but I must crassly throw decorum to the wind and ask, for I am most curious.

I do humbly beg your forgiveness.

The Gentleman Atheist

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

When I was 5 years old I was knocked down by a car and my mother prayed for my life and told me how God answered her prayers. I became a Christian at that moment and have continued in the faith up until the present day, and have never looked back.

This does seem to be a compelling reason to convert to one of the monotheisms. It was nice of this god to lend you a hand. I will make a big wager that it saved a great deal of hassle with the NHS and all of those silly surgeons. Still, when I research the health care plans outlined in the bible (eye for eye, etc.) I can not find accurate directions to the bureau's district office. Perhaps you might be able to direct me?

The Gentleman Atheist

 

[Chesterton]

I do not prefer to rant like an unruly irishman, but this atheists in foxholes nonsense is rather offensive, don't you think?

I've heard many atheists claim that most religious people are only religious out of fear. Are you disputing that here?

I assure you from knowledge and experience that a man might serve his nation honourably, while caring a nought for any supernatural thing.

Out of curiousity, in what campaign, in what battles did you fight?

I believe that this "conversion" also holds true to my image of Napoleon as a sarcastic gadfly. What better way to irritate the good, protestant Englishmen around him than to convert to catholicism? Napoleon played with catholicism like everything else. He would adopt and drop philosophies like so many mouchoirs de poche parfumés. To say Napoleon was a catholic is like saying Napoleon was a Frenchman.

Your interpretation of Napoleon's statement as sarcasm was silly, but this is sillier still. As you note, to be French was already to be nominally Catholic. There was no point to be made in making it official, especially when it would have required him to swallow his prodigious pride and submit to the Christianity which you would have us believe he must have disdained as much as he disdained the English around him.

But this is mere arguendo on my part; I don't much believe the fellow really existed anyway. I've only seen writings about him.

 

[marlowe007]

As a christian, do you find such examples as Marlowe (or anyone since Diagoras, really) to be a wellspring of self-analysis? I am curious to know your thoughts.

Diagoras, Marlowe, Voltaire, and so forth, were doubtless rebels against their surrounding environments, but I do not consider them to be the free and independent thinkers for which they styled themselves as. Atheists delude themselves when they claim the monopoly on Freethought, and pretend that it is somehow mutually exclusive with adherence to principles. I also have my doubts as to the feasibility of 'independent thought' in and of itself, in the truest sense of the term. Unless one lives in a vacuum, everything one thinks is ultimately linked to something, and dependent upon prior data gained from an outer source.

I would not have thought it. Are you one of the sort that parades a purported "deathbed conversion" as some sort of christian victory in a pettifogging theological battle? Really, how absolutely childish. You know that you should let people die with honour, rather than politicize their final hours, when they are helpless to defend themselves. In any case, I will let my young friend the unfortunate Mr. Hitchens speak to those of you who do malign the dignity of any person in their final days. His is the position to say so, at this time, and it does appear that his "pre-emptive strike" has been required.

I do not care how intellectually bankrupt it may seem to the likes of others; for a Christian late repentance is something to behold and cherish. What you call a "helpless" position is simply God's inner-working upon the individual.

As for Hitchens, whom I wish the very best, it is quite understandable from his pov that a hardening to religion at his juncture is the best course of action to take, for his entire life's work and subsequent legacy is at stake. In his case, a theif-on-the-cross moment would be the equivalent of Edison making a last-minute confession that Tesla was the greatest scientist of all time.

I believe that this "conversion" also holds true to my image of Napoleon as a sarcastic gadfly. What better way to irritate the good, protestant Englishmen around him than to convert to catholicism? Napoleon played with catholicism like everything else. He would adopt and drop philosophies like so many mouchoirs de poche parfumés. To say Napoleon was a catholic is like saying Napoleon was a Frenchman.

LOL! That's laughable. Napoleon converted to peeve-off the British, talk about holding a grudge. Well, I'm never gonna make it across that English channel, so the least I can do is fire a shot from my deathbed: "Bless me, Father Vignali, for I have sinned. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen....Take that, you limey swine!"

 

[onemorequestion]

Interesting Van,

The tool God used in my conversion was also a movie, "A Thief in the Night," about Christian martyrs at the guilloutine. Reminds me of the verse...
"And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire..."Jude 23

That movie certainly pushed me over the edge to Christ as well. It was a long time searching through the intense feelings of having a young body that desired selfishness exclusively, and comparing the wierd feelings of caring about my family and friends, to the world as reality and not illusion.

I became a Christian out of feelings and facts.

There is no way our emotions drive us to evolutionary outcomes. If anything, they prove we are not just a smart monkey that likes drame and comedy in others as well as ourselves.

Jesus is far too much fact than metaphor to come up with a conclusion that the whole Christian thing is wishful thinking. It and Jesus is a ruthless form of beauty that leads to a conclusion.

 

[brinny]

it's so beautiful here today....fall is approaching...a time of year i find most delightful.

What's the weather like where you are?

 

[onemorequestion]

Yes… but does it weigh as much as a duck? I do find it interesting to note examples such as Marlowe, in light of the much-vaunted image of the Enlightment as the genesis of all atheism. I find it encouraging to know that not all men were given to irrationality prior to this time.

That is the inability to see through any lense but the ones you prescribe for yourself. That of course being humanism's preset and limited sight.

To even hint that the New Testament is written by goofballs that were hysterical reactionaries is to put on the mantle of ignorance and call it a crown of enlightenment. Just because you demand the intellectual highground.

The biggest problem with atheism, is that it seems to close the minds of its proponents rather than to create the process of enlightenment:

"There is no God, because babies are born blind." Or, "I can't watch inappropriate contentography free of guilt."

Whichever comes first.

That's as shallow a thinking as the demand of atheism based on evolution. A "fact" that only the strong survive is a proof of evolution/atheism (Mr Dawkins)? That's as sensible a theory proven that is shattered by enlightement thought process. Weak-knee saps that couldn't punch their way out of wet paper bag, that have comfy college jobs they can never lose, proves otherwise to that "fact."

Christian reality makes more sense when applied to the human condition now and forever more. Atheism? Rejected by reality.

 

[onemorequestion]

Well, sadly it is unsurprising that an all-too-obvious (especially given the context) quote from Marlowe or any of the other great poets of English literature are overlooked or misinterpreted. If the truth is to be told, then you must know that I am a great lover of English literature, and I have been peppering this thread with many quotes of our past great masters of the word – as I do with much of my correspondence. I feel greatly redeemed when you and others take note. Sadly – with a few notable exceptions – this is not a most observant forum.

That being said, I do find it odd that you choose to resurrect Marlowe's moniker, in light of so much of the controversy surrounding his own religious beliefs or dis-beliefs. Do you feel that these accusations (really similar to high treason, in those days) were merely disinformation, manufactured and promulgated by the political – let me search for the proper dysphemism here – "untouchables" of the day?

Yet, we were discussing Napoleon, were we not? I find myself to also be an admirer (though perhaps not a "lover") of french literature also. You may have noted my quoting of Rousseau earlier in this thread – your thoughts there would also be appreciated. In any case, where were we? Oh yes: Napoleon was a somewhat bright, but ambitious fellow, and made every attempt to appear du pareil au même with others of the French writers of the time (the late Rousseau included). Sadly for him, he was in letters – as in the field of battle – a mere imitator. Given Napoleon's spoken views on religion, and the pattern of hackeyed fluster that we see in his writing, we can easily assume that the letter that you cite is merely an attempt at the french style of the time – and indeed still the centre-piece of all french culture – sarcasm. Ergo, Napoleon is not saying that the Galilean messiah is truly divine. He is instead despairing of all of the men who are equally lost to the word as to the sword. If it were not rendered as so much clumsy doggerel, then I might call it quite witty.

Long live our noble Queen!

The Gentleman Atheist

Well, sadly it is unsurprising that an all-too-obvious (especially given the context) quote from Marlowe or any of the other great poets of English literature are overlooked or misinterpreted. If the truth is to be told, then you must know that I am a great lover of English literature, and I have been peppering this thread with many quotes of our past great masters of the word – as I do with much of my correspondence. I feel greatly redeemed when you and others take note. Sadly – with a few notable exceptions – this is not a most observant forum.

That being said, I do find it odd that you choose to resurrect Marlowe's moniker, in light of so much of the controversy surrounding his own religious beliefs or dis-beliefs. Do you feel that these accusations (really similar to high treason, in those days) were merely disinformation, manufactured and promulgated by the political – let me search for the proper dysphemism here – "untouchables" of the day?

Yet, we were discussing Napoleon, were we not? I find myself to also be an admirer (though perhaps not a "lover") of french literature also. You may have noted my quoting of Rousseau earlier in this thread – your thoughts there would also be appreciated. In any case, where were we? Oh yes: Napoleon was a somewhat bright, but ambitious fellow, and made every attempt to appear du pareil au même with others of the French writers of the time (the late Rousseau included). Sadly for him, he was in letters – as in the field of battle – a mere imitator. Given Napoleon's spoken views on religion, and the pattern of hackeyed fluster that we see in his writing, we can easily assume that the letter that you cite is merely an attempt at the french style of the time – and indeed still the centre-piece of all french culture – sarcasm. Ergo, Napoleon is not saying that the Galilean messiah is truly divine. He is instead despairing of all of the men who are equally lost to the word as to the sword. If it were not rendered as so much clumsy doggerel, then I might call it quite witty.

Long live our noble Queen!

The Gentleman Atheist

Please excuse me TGA.

I am onemorequestion.

I too am an Atheist. In fact I am part of the most succesful atheist movement in history.

I am Christian.

"I am the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by me."

- Jesus called Christ

Once you believe that and stand with the movement, you are part of the largest atheist movement in history.

There are NO god's but the One Jesus proclaims.

See, we are brothers of a sort.

Welcome. I know just how you feel on many things.

 

[Chesterton]

I do not prefer to rant like an unruly irishman, but this atheists in foxholes nonsense is rather offensive, don't you think? I assure you from knowledge and experience that a man might serve his nation honourably, while caring a nought for any supernatural thing. Please do not defame your own good character by denying this simple truth.

For some reason, I just remembered that even Mr. Verlaine felt he should seek help when he found himself in a hole:

Foxhole foxhole, too much danger
Foxhole foxhole, where's my guardian angel?

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

I've heard many atheists claim that most religious people are only religious out of fear. Are you disputing that here?

I am neither disputing it nor making an argument for the case. It is not something that I have thought about. What is your opinion on the matter?

I don't much believe the fellow really existed anyway. I've only seen writings about him.

Touché, as Napoleon might have said, had he existed.

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

Diagoras, Marlowe, Voltaire, and so forth, were doubtless rebels against their surrounding environments, but I do not consider them to be the free and independent thinkers for which they styled themselves as.

This is an interesting area of research. I am reading on it right now. I promise to continue this with you, perhaps as a separate thread.

Atheists delude themselves when they claim the monopoly on Freethought, and pretend that it is somehow mutually exclusive with adherence to principles. I also have my doubts as to the feasibility of 'independent thought' in and of itself, in the truest sense of the term. Unless one lives in a vacuum, everything one thinks is ultimately linked to something, and dependent upon prior data gained from an outer source.

This seems to be a common confusion for theists – and even some "freethinkers" – entirely understandable, as the word is built on somewhat of a corrupt etymology. If you study the dictionary meaning, then you will see what I mean. It should be apparent that by definition we can not have a christian or an islamic "freethinker". I struggle with this term myself. Language does not always serve its masters.

As for Hitchens, whom I wish the very best, it is quite understandable from his pov that a hardening to religion at his juncture is the best course of action to take, for his entire life's work and subsequent legacy is at stake. In his case, a theif-on-the-cross moment would be the equivalent of Edison making a last-minute confession that Tesla was the greatest scientist of all time.

Are you implying that Edison believed that Tesla was the greater inventor, and purposefully hid his "co-opting" of Tesla's work? I am curious to know how you are drawing this comparison with Christopher.

LOL! That's laughable. Napoleon converted to peeve-off the British, talk about holding a grudge. Well, I'm never gonna make it across that English channel, so the least I can do is fire a shot from my deathbed: "Bless me, Father Vignali, for I have sinned. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen....Take that, you limey swine!"

It is just a theory, but certainly I did intend its risibility. If we can not laugh at Napoleon, then who is it that can we laugh at? [The GA inserts smilie face here – JMA]

Looking forward to continuing our conversation about pre-enlightenment atheism.

The Gentleman Atheist

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

I became a Christian out of feelings and facts.

I am having difficulty following the logic of your post/theology. I am even having some difficulty following its syntax. This leads me to suspect that you became a christian out of a confusion of feelings and facts.

Remember that the words "theology" and "logic" do share a common root.

Goodness! It seems that it is etymology day for the Gentleman Atheist. It's all Greek for me! Ha ha ha!

In any case, thanking you for your input.

The Gentleman Atheist

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

What's the weather like where you are?

Oh Brinny, it is simply lovely here. If I look from the East windows of the manor I see rain and fog rolling across the darkened fen. I could not have asked for a more pleasant day.

Thank you for asking. It is good to know that you are also appreciating this lovely weather. Cheerio!

The Gentleman Atheist

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

That is the inability to see through any lense but the ones you prescribe for yourself. That of course being humanism's preset and limited sight.

To even hint that the New Testament is written by goofballs that were hysterical reactionaries is to put on the mantle of ignorance and call it a crown of enlightenment. Just because you demand the intellectual highground.

The biggest problem with atheism, is that it seems to close the minds of its proponents rather than to create the process of enlightenment:

"There is no God, because babies are born blind." Or, "I can't watch inappropriate contentography free of guilt."

Whichever comes first.

That's as shallow a thinking as the demand of atheism based on evolution. A "fact" that only the strong survive is a proof of evolution/atheism (Mr Dawkins)? That's as sensible a theory proven that is shattered by enlightement thought process. Weak-knee saps that couldn't punch their way out of wet paper bag, that have comfy college jobs they can never lose, proves otherwise to that "fact."

Christian reality makes more sense when applied to the human condition now and forever more. Atheism? Rejected by reality.

Please excuse me TGA.

I am onemorequestion.

I too am an Atheist. In fact I am part of the most succesful atheist movement in history.

I am Christian.

"I am the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by me."

- Jesus called Christ

Once you believe that and stand with the movement, you are part of the largest atheist movement in history.

There are NO god's but the One Jesus proclaims.

See, we are brothers of a sort.

Welcome. I know just how you feel on many things.

Dear OMQ,

I am afraid that I do not follow you at all. You seem… are you perhaps angry about something? I can not say what I might recommend for this particular condition.

The Gentleman Atheist

 

[The Gentleman Atheist]

For some reason, I just remembered that even Mr. Verlaine felt he should seek help when he found himself in a hole:
Foxhole foxhole, too much danger
Foxhole foxhole, where's my guardian angel?

Ah, Chesterton, yes, that is a favourite translation.
I am not sure that this couplet is a plea for help so much as a poetic exposition of the meekness of human beings and their ready willingness to sacrifice themselves to things that have so much less value than their bodies, minds, &tc. It is really quite surprising that these words might have preceded the existentialist movement, but I suppose that those later thinkers were merely building upon the previous literature and political events of their nation.

Thank you for posting these lines for us to reflect upon.

The Gentleman Atheist