Showing posts with label James Holmes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Holmes. Show all posts

Survey - Why Do Atheists Care Whether Christians Believe in Christianity or Not?

0 comments
Recently, I wrote two posts indicating the relationship between the "mature social medium" in which we live, interact with, and that helps form our personal identity and self--in relation to the tragic shootings committed by James Holmes in Colorado. (Post 1; Post 2)

I argued that Christianity influences our "mature social medium" which then influences people such as James Holmes and others to act in the way they do.  The ancient Christian philosopher Pelagius also pointed this out long ago.  That is, the Christian version of salvation promoted by Augustine, leads to "moral laxity" as believers are "saved" regardless of their actions--no consequences in relation to their salvation.

James Holmes and the Perpetual Miracle Objection

0 comments
When it comes to the problem of suffering for a good omnipotent God, in my books I argue for the possibility of perpetual miracles from God that alleviate suffering among his creatures. I call it the Perpetual Miracle Objection. David Hume didn't use this exact phrase when he objected that the ordering of the world by general natural laws "seems nowise necessary" for God, but it's the same concept. Link. Let's apply this line of argumentation to what Holmes did and see another preemptive way God could have averted the massacre from happening if he exists and if he cares.

Omniscience Doesn't Exonorate God For The Colorado Movie Massacre

0 comments
Previously I've suggested some reasonable ways a good God could have stopped James Holmes from firing on innocent people in that Colorado theater without revealing himself, and without abrogating Holmes's free will. Link. But is there another way to exonerate God in what I call the Omniscience Escape Clause? Could God have overriding reasons based in his omniscience for allowing that horrible tragedy to happen? I don't think so at all. While this isn't impossible it's extremely improbable to the point of being virtually impossible.

Why James Holmes' Rampage is the Result of the Teachings of Christianity: Part 2

0 comments

This post is a follow up to my previous post,  Why James Holmes' Rampage is the Result of the Teachings of Christianity.  For clarification, I will restate my thesis from my previous post:

"One hypothesis was put forth by the Christian apologist, Rick Warren, in one of his latest tweets, when he said, "When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it." The implied hypothesis being, that it's the result of teaching science, and in particular, Darwinianism and materialism. I propose that there is a better explanation. My hypothesis, which is not new by the way, as I have pointed out numerous times, the great Christian philosopher Pelagius pointed out long ago, that if you promulgate the notion that people are born bad, and cannot help but to sin, but will still gain entrance into paradise as long as they "repent"-- they are more likely to sin, repent, sin, repent--and repeat when necessary. Pelagius was wise, and realized that this belief would lead to "moral laxity"--which is quite evident in our predominantly Christian society, and amongst Christians in particular. My hypothesis is that when Christians are taught they are "born sinners" and cannot help but to sin, as they are taught it is not possible for them to be perfect, and that they are nevertheless given the "free gift" of salvation, they will have more of a tendency to act immorally, or, when Christians are taught they live in a world that is dominated by Satan, that it leads to immorality. Either way, it leads to immorality and chaos, and Christianity provides believers with a basis for the belief that they are absolved from taking responsibility for their own bad behavior. Jesus does that for them."

James Holmes and the Free Will Excuse

0 comments
I call this the free will excuse because that's what it is. It's an attempt by believers to excuse God for the massacre in Colorado by James Holmes. I've already suggested reasonable ways a good God could've acted to avert this tragedy but didn't. Now I want to briefly address the objection that God does not interfere with our free choices, even if that means some of us will do heinous crimes on occasion.

Where Was God When James Holmes Walked Into That Crowded Theatre?

0 comments
Almost everything we know about God can be seen in what he did not do to avert this mass killing. God's inaction here is indistinguishable from him not caring at all, or not being powerful at all, or not being present at all, or not knowing anything at all. In fact, his inaction leads us to think he doesn't exist at all. David Hume suggested a line of argument that works very well here. If an Omni-God exists then he could have caused James Holmes to have a heart attack before leaving his apartment that day. He could have caused all of his guns to jam. He could have caused Holmes to suffer severe nausea at the very thought of doing this terrible deed, every time he thought of it. He could have had an accident on the way caused by a brake line leak. For believers to argue God remains hidden so as not to force obedience upon us, there is nothing about any of these suggested actions that would alert us to his presence. For believers to rhetorically ask how we know God doesn't intervene in other cases, the fact that he didn't intervene here, there, and so many many times elsewhere is strong evidence he doesn't act at all.

Innumerable things could have been done by this God to stop Holmes. But God was silent just exactly as if he doesn't exist at all. There is no noticeable difference in this present world where God is believed to exist from one where he doesn't exist at all. The notion of free will does not get believers off the hook either, unless they want to admit that this same God does not answer prayers. For surely there are believers across America and in every city and family praying every day for the safe protection of their loved ones and for people in general. So I put it to you. Either God's activity in our world is indistinguishable from his non-existence or he does not answer prayers. That's merely one of the many problems of belief in the light of this human tragedy.

James Holmes and Gun Control

0 comments
The NRA tells us that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." This is obvious. But it completely misses the target. People with guns can and do kill more people than they could without them. We've learned that James Holmes had an AR-15 assault rifle with a 100-round drum magazine. It could fire 50 to 60 rounds per minute in quick succession, a video of it can be seen below. While it seems no one could foresee his killing rampage in that Colorado theater, there is no reason this weapon or any like it should be sold in gun stores. Luckily it happened to jam on him. While it's true that the criminal mind can find such guns on the black market, there is no good reason they should be produced or sold legally. None. Give me one good reason. Just one. The issue I'm raising is not how to interpret the 2nd Amendment. The issue is why shouldn't the production and sale of these guns be banned? I think they should.

An Atheist Condemns the Colorado Movie Theater Massacre!

0 comments
James Holmes allegedly killed 12 innocent people and injured 59 others in a senseless act of violence. My heart goes out to all of the victims including the people of Aurora and the owner of the theater who's business will never be the same. There is a lot of commentary about this tragic incident and its repercussions in our free society. I would like to discuss why it was wrong. Do I even need to say why? Christians claim there is no reason an atheist can condemn such a horrific random act of violence on the supposition we have no objective basis for morality. By condemning this are we somehow acknowledging a foundation for objective morality in God?