Evidence? What Evidence?
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed. But then there's this Bible Study book. What explains the so-called evidence asserted here?
A Traumatic, Dramatic Escape from Fundamentalism
Constant reminders of the damage done by religion
“Please don’t ask me, expect me, to think about it.” Whenever a religion has succeeded in embedding this attitude in the minds of its followers, it has a better chance of enduring and thriving. But humanity is not better off because the refusal to think remains a common response to reality. How many people have done enough study and research to grasp our place in the Cosmos? To understand why evolution is true, and how it works? To know why vaccines play a vital role in combatting disease? To realize why ongoing horrendous suffering—ongoing for thousands of years—destroys the idea that a powerful god so loves the world?
Michael Maletin on "My Atheist Journey: 10 Years Later. Why I Remain Atheist."
This video above by Michael Maletin is awesome! Be sure to watch it all. At the 24:25 mark my work on horrendous suffering is recommended. Very very cool! Get that book now on Amazon! It's never been less expensive.
"What's Coming Is WORSE Than A Recession" | Richard Wolff's Last WARNING
I regard Richard Wolff as a modern prophet of sorts. Toward the end of this excellent warning his analysis of the Trump phenomenon and it's dire consequences is spot on.
We Survived Yet Another Season of Christmas Irrelevance
Addressing irrelevance with reality and ridicule
We know nothing—absolutely nothing—about how and when Jesus was born. The birth narratives in Mathew and Luke have been studied and analyzed ad nauseam by scholars, and there is not a single scrap of history in either of them. With just a little bit of careful study, churchgoers could discover this truth—but they would have to ignore the pleading of clergy and apologists to take the stories at face value. Yet thousands of churches still put on Christmas pageants featuring Mary and Joseph arriving in Bethlehem, the baby Jesus dozing in a manger, surrounded by adoring shepherds and Wise Men. The Wise Men are a most unwelcome addition to the Jesus tradition. It is really not smart to add astrology to the mix of Christian theology, already spoiled by ancient superstitions and magical thinking. We read that astrologers from the East had seen Jesus’ star in the sky—and set off to worship him. This is a boast of the Jesus cult! It was a common belief in the ancient world that the births or accomplishments of important people were accompanied by special signs in the heavens.
America Is in Decline. Trump Will Not Reverse It. We Should Adopt a New World Order or Face Serious Consequences!
This is almost all new and important information to me! If you know something about world politics and economics take a look. Then let me know what you think. It's by Richard D. Wolff, an American economist and professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He's an expert on economic inequality and advocates for ways to empower workers by addressing systemic issues within the economy. This appears to be a few separate videos strung into one.
On Jerry Coyne, Richard Dawkins, and Steven Pinker Resigning from the Board of Freedom from Religion Foundation.
I'm not focused on what takes place in atheist organizations. However, I understand that wokeism is a hotly promoted and contested issue for atheists to debate. Here is Jerry Coyne's take on it: LINK. Here is Hemant Mehta's reply: LINK. I'll let my insightful commentors weigh in on this particular debate.
I wasn't going to comment on wokeism until this morning when I read a political piece, gleefully titled, "Woke is dead — let’s make sure it never comes back", a controversial title written by the controversial seasoned journalist Lionel Shriver.
I'm pretty sure the ologarths and audocrats are the gleeful ones. They won the Presidency because they were successful in getting the rest of us to focus on these type of issues rather than on good jobs for all, health care, climate change, free tuition for university students, and so on. Elon Musk, the richest person in history, is now ruling over the rest of us because of this strategy. I'm sure he and other filty rich people will make sure they don't have to pay their fair share of taxes. So whatever else can be said for and against wokeism, I hope it doesn't come up again in the next few presidential elections. Wokeism is where presidential candidates will come to die.
I wasn't going to comment on wokeism until this morning when I read a political piece, gleefully titled, "Woke is dead — let’s make sure it never comes back", a controversial title written by the controversial seasoned journalist Lionel Shriver.
I'm pretty sure the ologarths and audocrats are the gleeful ones. They won the Presidency because they were successful in getting the rest of us to focus on these type of issues rather than on good jobs for all, health care, climate change, free tuition for university students, and so on. Elon Musk, the richest person in history, is now ruling over the rest of us because of this strategy. I'm sure he and other filty rich people will make sure they don't have to pay their fair share of taxes. So whatever else can be said for and against wokeism, I hope it doesn't come up again in the next few presidential elections. Wokeism is where presidential candidates will come to die.
Rick O'Sheikh On the Problem of Holy Scriptures
By Rick O'Sheikh:
I have said it before, the problem with the Bible and the Koran is that they do not just contain some problematic parts, they contain nothing but problematic parts. Every page, almost every paragraph, has to be justified and explained away with some contorted and very flexible logic. There is no systematic way for the apologist to account for all the problems. The apologist has to resort to a different sort of "rationale" to explain away every little and every big problem. One problem is explained as a parable, for another one they say God reveals his truths as he judges the people ready to receive them, and or another part they try to blame bad translation, etc. So they have hundreds of inconsistent and illogical ways of "explaining" things.
The non-believer on the other hand has a systematic and logical way to debunk these books: They are the product of particular people at particular points in time and space, things written by themselves and for themselves at different times and by different people, then later compiled into books. These people wrote things the way their particular culture saw them at the time, and those cultures were very different from today's cultures. What looks bad to us in those books today looks bad because it is bad to us today, not because we are not understanding something, whereas it was not bad to those people back then and they understood it very well the way it was written. These book are obsolete now to say the least. Period.
I have said it before, the problem with the Bible and the Koran is that they do not just contain some problematic parts, they contain nothing but problematic parts. Every page, almost every paragraph, has to be justified and explained away with some contorted and very flexible logic. There is no systematic way for the apologist to account for all the problems. The apologist has to resort to a different sort of "rationale" to explain away every little and every big problem. One problem is explained as a parable, for another one they say God reveals his truths as he judges the people ready to receive them, and or another part they try to blame bad translation, etc. So they have hundreds of inconsistent and illogical ways of "explaining" things.
The non-believer on the other hand has a systematic and logical way to debunk these books: They are the product of particular people at particular points in time and space, things written by themselves and for themselves at different times and by different people, then later compiled into books. These people wrote things the way their particular culture saw them at the time, and those cultures were very different from today's cultures. What looks bad to us in those books today looks bad because it is bad to us today, not because we are not understanding something, whereas it was not bad to those people back then and they understood it very well the way it was written. These book are obsolete now to say the least. Period.
Religions Thrive on Naïve Ignorance
But also on arrogant and aggressive ignorance
A few months ago, an elderly Catholic women admitted to me that their priests told them not to think about what they learned as children in catechism. But I suspect this is a common approach of clergy everywhere: “Just believe that we know what we’re talking about—after all, we learned all there is to know about god in seminary—and our intense prayers keep us in touch with him.” Especially when eternal life is at stake, why take chances? “Of course, our church, our denomination, has it right.”
Hail Mary! Was Virgin Mary Truly the Mother of God’s Son?
Hail Mary! Was Virgin Mary Truly the Mother of God’s Son?
Catholic Christians pray the rosary, which is a string of beads representing creeds and prayers to be recited. Devout Catholics are considered to recite it every single day. In it the Apostles’ Creed made the cut, which is recited one time. The Glory Be (Doxology) is recited five times, the Lord’s Prayer is said six times, but the Hail Mary prayer is recited a whopping 150 times!
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
Logistics
and Mary the Mother of God.
We need to start by briefly considering some logistics. Consider first, the logistics of how a real mother named Mary could conceive of God (or God’s Son).
The ancients commonly believed that the woman contributes nothing to the physical being of the baby to be born. They thought the child was only related to the father. The mother was nothing but a receptacle for the male sperm, which grew to become a child.
Today, by contrast, with the advent of genetics, most Christian thinkers try to defend the virgin birth on the grounds that the humanity of Jesus was derived from Mary and that his divine nature was derived from God. They do this because they know something about genetics and know Mary must have contributed the female egg that made Jesus into a man. But this doesn’t adequately explain how Jesus is a human being, since for there to be a human being in the first place minimally requires that a human sperm penetrate a human egg. Until that happens we do not have the complete chromosomal structure required to have a human being.
Now of course, God could conceivably create both the human egg and the sperm from which to create life inside Mary’s womb. But if it’s a created human life then it’s not God, who is believed to be eternal, and the creator of everything, who came to suffer and die to atone for human sins as a sinless God. Other problems emerge when it comes to the supposed genealogies and fulfilled prophecies.
Nevertheless, what if God had a body? He did, didn’t he? Sure he did, even though later Christian theology describes God as a Spirit. God is described as walking and talking with Adam and Eve, who even tried to hide from him in the trees of the garden (Genesis 3:8-10). Later on, Jacob prevailed over God in an all night wrestling match, after which Jacob said, “I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” God also let Moses see his body, even his backside (Exodus 33). After monotheism arrived God was still seen as having a body. He sat on a throne (Ezekiel 1; Daniel 7; Matthew 25:31; Revelation 5:1), and he rewarded the faithful by allowing them to see his face (Matthew 5:8; 18:11; Revelation 22:3-4). The first martyr Stephen saw Jesus “standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7:56). Even at the end of times every eye will see him—and presumably recognize him—riding on a white horse to do battle with his enemies (Revelation 1:7; 19:11-21).[1]
So perhaps it isn’t too surprising Mormons still believe God has a body. But if so, they have to struggle with the virgin conception of Jesus. Was mother Mary a virgin or not? According to Brigham Young, the second president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “The Father came down and begat Jesus, the same as we do now.” Mormon apostle Bruce McConkie agreed, saying, “Christ was begotten by an immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers.” Two Mormon researchers ask us if it “is so disgusting to suggest God sired a son by sexual intercourse?”[2] Inquiring minds want to know.[3] But if God’s son was produced the old-fashioned way, his son Jesus was not conceived of a virgin after all!
The Spirit of Atheist Christmas Giving
In the spirit of atheist Christmas giving I’d like to make a shameless plug for donations to this blog, Debunking Christianity, the brainchild of John W. Loftus, noted atheist author and speaker. As John pointed out last March, the blog itself is ad-free (although John was not able to remove ads entirely from the Disqus discussions below the line). As John says, “I have no institutional support nor am I a paid employee of any atheist organization.” Which means the burden of keeping the site afloat financially falls on all of us. I found by direct empirical testing that it’s super easy to locate and click the yellow “Donate” button at the bottom of the right-side navigation links in the large-screen format of this site. So I call upon all my out-or-closeted atheist / agnostic / freethinker / Nones / fact-based / reality-curious sisters, brothers, and gender-fluids to donate early and often, as your circumstances allow, and as the “spirit” moves you.
John has been one of my favorite authors and editors for a while. If you’re like me, a complete nobody, it’s not every day that one of your favorite authors asks you to guest-blog. So I’m incredibly flattered and will always try my hardest to overlink. (I’ll also try hard to tell jokes, and likely fall short. But seriously, whenever I use a word that has a technical meaning which might not be obvious to every human alive, I like to put a link on it. “Overlinking” refers to documents containing “too many” links, which to me sounds rather alien, like being “too beautiful” or “too rich”, neither of which I can imagine nor have approximated.)
A Major Discussion of the Virgin Birth of Jesus!
This was a good discussion. Enjoy! Billing: "Father Ivanoff of Eastern Orthodox apologetics fame joins us with master historian and apologist Subdeacon Daniel Kakish as they dialogue with Dr. Robert Price and John Loftus, two of the foremost Atheists in the field. This will be a groundbreaking dialogue!"
The New Testament: Brought to You by Writers with Creative, Delusional Imaginations
Champions of theology, not history and fact
I have this fantasy: that (1) suddenly all devout churchgoers will become obsessed with studying the Bible, especially the New Testament, and that (2) they will also be gifted with critical thinking skills. Of course, this would be a nightmare for the clergy, who don’t want to be pestered with hard questions about so much in the Bible: “How does this possibly make sense?” “Why would Jesus have said such a thing?” “Is this really what our god is like?” For centuries, the clergy have promoted an idealized version of Jesus and his god, based on carefully chosen feel-good verses. All that would come to an end if the laity took Bible study seriously, and really applied their minds. So much really bad stuff is in full view.
The Lethal Combination of Evil and Stupidity
It’s putting the health of humanity in serious jeopardy
Allow me to begin with a long quote:
Allow me to begin with a long quote:
The Oblivious Devout Keep Christianity Chugging Along, Part 2
Horrible harms done by belief in Jesus
In my article of the same title, published here 22 November 2024, I described several ways in which the devout churchgoers manage to ignore basic realities that put their faith in huge jeopardy. Now I want to focus on one of the most damaging aspects of Christian history: the horrible outcomes of being devoted to, obsessed with, Jesus. Especially after the church achieved political power. Let’s look at a few of the consequences, a few of the things that the devout should work hard to bring within their horizons of awareness.
"How the New Testament Writers Used Prophecy," An Excerpt from "Why I Became an Atheist" pp. 353-59.
Heads up! I'm fairly excited for my upcoming 9,000 worded paper, "Did Virgin Mary Give Birth to the Son of God?" It's to appear on my page at the Secular Web within a couple of weeks. [The following essay was first published in December 2023]
"How the New Testament Writers Used Prophecy" by John W. Loftus.
One of the major things claimed by the New Testament in support of Jesus’ life and mission is that Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy (Luke 24:26–27; Acts 3:17–24). If God cannot predict the future as time moves farther and farther into the distance, as I questioned earlier, then neither can any prophet who claims to speak for God. As we will see with regard to the virgin birth of Jesus, none of the Old Testament passages in the original Hebrew prophetically applied singularly and specifically to Jesus. [In chapter 18, "Was Jesus Born of a Virgin in Bethlehem?"]. Early Christian preachers simply went into the Old Testament looking for verses that would support their view of Jesus. They took these Old Testament verses out of context and applied them to Jesus in order to support their views of his life and mission.9
Robert Conner Shared THIS!
LINK. It's pretty depressing for reasonable people in the U.S. as many readers will probably agree. For my part, I'm considering living in a different country for awhile. ;-) No, seriously!
Bertrand Russell’s Celestial Teapot Is More Credible than the Christian God
The quest for solid god-evidence has yielded nothing
There’s been a cartoon floating around on Facebook for a while, depicting a Christian woman asking a man, “What’s it like being an atheist?” He replies, “Do you think Zeus is real?” Her answer is “No”—to which he answers, “Like that.” Zeus is one of thousands of gods that have been invented by human beings, and embraced with varying degrees of enthusiasm. It has been so easy to jump to the god-conclusion; in the Book of Acts, chapter 28, we find the story of the apostle Paul arriving on Malta. As he was lighting a fire, a viper landed on his hand, which he shook off into the fire. But the locals were amazed: “They were expecting him to swell up or drop dead, but after they had waited a long time and saw that nothing unusual had happened to him, they changed their minds and began to say that he was a god.” (v. 6)
The Blasphemy of Heliocentrism
The Pareto distribution of bible verse citations
If you’ve listened to many church sermons, you may have noticed that they often cite verses from the church’s preferred translation of the bible, or allude to verses indirectly. If you were to write down all these verses, over time you’d build up quite the list. But you might need a lot of sermons before you could reconstruct an entire bible that way. That’s because many verses in the bible sound a bit problematic to modern ears, and don’t feature in a lot of sermons. Instead you might notice that your pastor is like a long-time touring musical act, well past its hitmaking heyday, which keeps on playing its hits. What people liked in the past, they can probably like again. A cynical or perhaps realistic observer might note that the most important skill for any church pastor is fundraising (“No bucks, no Buck Rogers”), and some bible verses work better than other verses for separating the marks I mean congregants from their money. Among the more successful pastors - in terms of attracting congregants and extracting money from them - we have Joel Osteen, whose preaching style, or so I’ve read, leans heavily into “uplifting” and away from “challenging.” Thus we wouldn’t expect to see successful pastors like Osteen engaging seriously and frequently with bible difficulties, as these seem to be bad for business.
The Oblivious Devout Keep Christianity Chugging Along
But its god, like thousands of others, will end up on the scrapheap of history
Many years ago I was the pastor of a small church in a small town in Massachusetts. I did the baptisms, marriages, and funerals. When a middle-aged woman in the congregation died, I officiated at the funeral, then at the burial. It was a beautiful day, sunny with a scattering of clouds. I so vividly recall that a sister of the deceased proclaimed, “She’s up there already, pushing the clouds around.” I was struck by the naivete of this comment. Was she just joking? I don’t think so. Here was a woman who apparently accepted the concept of the cosmos embodied in the Bible: we’re down here, and god is up there—somewhere—on his throne above the clouds. And because of this close proximity, the Christian god can keep a close watch on everyone and everything. He knows how many hairs are on our heads, he monitors all of the words we utter, and even knows what every human is thinking (how else would prayer work?) There are Bible verses to back up all of these ideas about god.
But human discoveries about the cosmos have moved us far beyond these naivetes.
Many years ago I was the pastor of a small church in a small town in Massachusetts. I did the baptisms, marriages, and funerals. When a middle-aged woman in the congregation died, I officiated at the funeral, then at the burial. It was a beautiful day, sunny with a scattering of clouds. I so vividly recall that a sister of the deceased proclaimed, “She’s up there already, pushing the clouds around.” I was struck by the naivete of this comment. Was she just joking? I don’t think so. Here was a woman who apparently accepted the concept of the cosmos embodied in the Bible: we’re down here, and god is up there—somewhere—on his throne above the clouds. And because of this close proximity, the Christian god can keep a close watch on everyone and everything. He knows how many hairs are on our heads, he monitors all of the words we utter, and even knows what every human is thinking (how else would prayer work?) There are Bible verses to back up all of these ideas about god.
Christian Scholarship Led me to Reject Christianity
[First Published in Nov. 2006] One of the reasons I have rejected Christianity is that I studied the Bible. That's right. I studied the Bible. As I did so, I didn't just read works published by Zondervan or InterVarsity Press. I read the works by Christian scholars from a wide variety of scholarly sources. I didn't read atheist works about the Bible so much as I mainly read scholarly Christian literature. What Christian scholars wrote led me to reject Christianity. For those of you who read my first self-published book in a "Letter to Dr. James Strauss" you know some of the books I read, and almost every book I mentioned (and there were plenty I didn't) was written by a Christian, or someone within the Christian tradition.
Now as we approach the Christmas season, Let's see what Christian scholarship says about the infancy birth narratives. Raymond Brown is the author of the massive 752 page book titled, Birth of the Messiah (updated 1999), and "Gospel Infancy Narrative Research from 1976 to 1986" (CBQ 48: 469–83, 661–80). Here are four points about the contents of Matthew and Luke that Brown mentioned in the Anchor Bible Dictionary (1996) ["Infancy Narratives in the NT Gospels"] (emphasis is mine):
--------------------------------
[For Richard Carrier's assessment of the date of the Nativity in Luke see here.]
(1) [Brown discusses the agreements between Matthew and Luke’s gospels, but those are obvious and not part of my point]
(2) Matthew and Luke disagree on the following significant points. In chap. 1, the Lucan story of John the Baptist (annunciation to Zechariah by Gabriel, birth, naming, growth) is absent from Matthew. According to Matthew, Jesus’ family live at Bethlehem at the time of the conception and have a house there (2:11); in Luke, they live at Nazareth. In Matthew, Joseph is the chief figure receiving the annunciation, while in Luke, Mary is the chief figure throughout. The Lucan visitation of Mary to Elizabeth and the Magnificat and Benedictus canticles are absent from Matthew. At the time of the annunciation, Mary is detectably pregnant in Matthew, while the annunciation takes place before conception in Luke. In chap. 2 in each gospel, the basic birth and postbirth stories are totally different to the point that the two are not plausibly reconcilable. Matthew describes the star, the magi coming to Herod at Jerusalem and to the family house at Bethlehem, the magi’s avoidance of Herod’s plot, the flight to Egypt, Herod’s slaughter of Bethlehem children, the return from Egypt, and the going to Nazareth for fear of Archelaus. Luke describes the census, birth at a stable(?) in Bethlehem because there was no room at the inn, angels revealing the birth to shepherds, the purification of Mary and the presentation of Jesus in the temple, the roles of Simeon and Anna, and a peaceful return of the family to Nazareth.
(3) None of the significant information found in the infancy narrative of either gospel is attested clearly elsewhere in the NT. In particular, the following items are found only in the infancy narratives. (a) The virginal conception of Jesus, although a minority of scholars have sought to find it implicitly in Gal 4:4 (which lacks reference to a male role), or in Mark 6:3 (son of Mary, not of Joseph), or in John 1:13 (“He who was born . . . not of the will of man”—a very minor textual reading attested in no Gk ms). (b) Jesus’ birth at Bethlehem, although some scholars find it implicitly in John 7:42 by irony. (c) Herodian knowledge of Jesus’ birth and the claim that he was a king. Rather, in Matt 14:1–2, Herod’s son seems to know nothing of Jesus. (d) Wide knowledge of Jesus’ birth, since all Jerusalem was startled (Matt 2:3), and the children of Bethlehem were killed in search of him. Rather, in Matt 13:54–55, no one seems to know of marvelous origins for Jesus. (e) John the Baptist was a relative of Jesus and recognized him before birth (Luke 1:41, 44). Rather, later John the Baptist seems to have no previous knowledge of Jesus and to be puzzled by him (Luke 7:19; John 1:33).
(4) None of the events that might have been “public” find attestation in contemporary history. (a) There is no convincing astronomical evidence identifiable with a star that rose in the East, moved westward, and came to rest over Bethlehem. In Matthew’s story this would have happened before the death of Herod the Great (4 b.c. or [Martin 1980] 1 b.c.). There have been attempts to identify the star with the supernova recorded by the Chinese records in March/April 5 b.c., or with a comet (Halley’s in 12–11 b.c.), or with a planetary conjunction (Jupiter and Saturn in 7 b.c.; Jupiter and Venus in 3 b.c. [Martin 1980]). (b) Even though the Jewish historian Josephus amply documents the brutality in the final years of Herod the Great, neither he nor any other record mentions a massacre of children at Bethlehem. Macrobius’ frequently cited pun (Sat. 2.4.11) on Herod’s ferocity toward his sons is not applicable to the Bethlehem massacre. (c) A census of the whole world (Roman provinces?) under Caesar Augustus never happened, although there were three Augustan censuses of Roman citizens. It is not unlikely that Luke 2:1 should be taken as a free description of Augustus’ empire-cataloguing tendencies. (d) Luke’s implication that Quirinius was governor of Syria and conducted a “first census” (2:2) before Herod’s death (1:5) has no confirmation. Quirinius became legate of Syria in a.d. 6 and at that time conducted a census of Judea, which was coming under direct Roman administration because Archelaus had been deposed (Brown 1977: 547–56; Benoit DBSup 9: 704–15). (e) Although this item differs somewhat from the immediately preceding one, Luke’s idea that the two parents were purified (“their purification according to the Law of Moses”: 2:22) is not supported by a study of Jewish law, whence the attempts of early textual copyists and of modern scholars to substitute “her” for “their” or to interpret the “their” to refer to other than the parents.
A review of the implication of nos. 1–4 explains why the historicity of the infancy narratives has been questioned by so many scholars, even by those who do not a priori rule out the miraculous. Despite efforts stemming from preconceptions of biblical inerrancy or of Marian piety, it is exceedingly doubtful that both accounts can be considered historical. If only one is thought to be historical, the choice usually falls on Luke, sometimes with the contention that “Those who were from the beginning eyewitnesses and ministers of the word” (Luke 1:2) includes Mary who was present at the beginning of Jesus’ life. See Fitzmyer Luke I–IX AB, 294, 298, for the more plausible interpretation that it refers to the disciples-apostles who were eyewitnesses from the beginning of Jesus’ public life (Acts 1:21–22) and were engaged in a preaching ministry of the Word. There is no NT or early Christian claim that Mary was the source of the infancy material, and inaccuracies about the census and purification may mean that Luke’s infancy account cannot be judged globally as more historical than that of Matthew.
--------------------------------
[For Richard Carrier's assessment of the date of the Nativity in Luke see here.]
The Role of the Bible in Damaging Christian Faith
Maybe that’s why the devout avoid reading it
Mark Twain once stated the dilemma: “It is not the things which I do not understand in the Bible which trouble me, but the things which I do understand.” How many of the laity throughout Christendom have made this same troubling discovery? And Twain was also right when he said that “faith is believing in something you know ain’t true.” How many of the faithful just shut their eyes, close their minds, stifle curiosity—and decide to trust what their clergy teach about god? Very few of the clergy, from the pulpit on a Sunday morning, will give this assignment: “Please, every one of you, read the gospel of Mark—all of it—this week. Read it carefully, critically, and write down the questions about it that occur to you. Be brave, even the toughest questions are welcome.”
Mark Twain once stated the dilemma: “It is not the things which I do not understand in the Bible which trouble me, but the things which I do understand.” How many of the laity throughout Christendom have made this same troubling discovery? And Twain was also right when he said that “faith is believing in something you know ain’t true.” How many of the faithful just shut their eyes, close their minds, stifle curiosity—and decide to trust what their clergy teach about god? Very few of the clergy, from the pulpit on a Sunday morning, will give this assignment: “Please, every one of you, read the gospel of Mark—all of it—this week. Read it carefully, critically, and write down the questions about it that occur to you. Be brave, even the toughest questions are welcome.”
Dr. Richard C. Miller Joins Our Manifesto
[In light of Dr. Miller stating on Facebook that he's taking a break due to the horrible way he's been treated for his research and scholarship, I'm reposting this tribute by Dr. Hector Avalos, first published Oct. 2016].
I am happy to report the addition of Dr. Richard C. Miller to our Manifesto for Secular Scriptural and Religious Studies.
Having begun with just two of us (myself and Dr. André Gagné of Concordia University in Montreal) in 2015, our Manifesto now has 20 signatories. It's a relatively small number, but just 15 years ago I would be hard pressed to name a single biblical scholar who was openly secular, atheist or agnostic.
Dr. Miller first came to my attention with an excellent article, “Mark's Empty Tomb and Other Translation Fables in Classical Antiquity” in The Journal of Biblical Literature (2010), the flagship peer-reviewed journal of the Society of Biblical Literature. Dr. Miller clearly showed parallels between Greco-Roman resurrection/empty tomb stories and those in the Gospels.
He subsequently published a book on Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity (2014), which renders him one of the most authoritative scholars of resurrection stories in early Christianity.
Johno Pearce on the triumph of the feels, low information people, messaging, and why Trump won.
This needs a wider reading from Johno Pearce on the triumph of the feels, low information people, messaging, and why Trump won. [From "Only Sky" which asks you to subscribe with an email] LINK
This one by Dale McGown [also on "Only Sky"] is deserving of a wider reading too, about temporary dictatorships: LINK
This one by Dale McGown [also on "Only Sky"] is deserving of a wider reading too, about temporary dictatorships: LINK
How Much Horrendous Suffering Can Christian Theology Tolerate?
The survival of the church depends on the devout not noticing
During my recent stay in London, I visited The Wiener Holocaust Library, which is an easy walk north of The British Museum. For a long time I have been following it on Twitter and—more recently—on Facebook, and wanted to see it in person. I have always been stunned that there are holocaust-deniers, because the evidence for this crime against humanity is massive. The Nazis themselves kept detailed records, confident that their elimination of Jews was an important contribution to the world, and they could hardly cover up the stark realities of the concentration camps. On this, see especially Martin Gilbert’s book, Atlas of the Holocaust (1993, 254 pages). Moreover, there is an abundance of survivor memoirs.
During my recent stay in London, I visited The Wiener Holocaust Library, which is an easy walk north of The British Museum. For a long time I have been following it on Twitter and—more recently—on Facebook, and wanted to see it in person. I have always been stunned that there are holocaust-deniers, because the evidence for this crime against humanity is massive. The Nazis themselves kept detailed records, confident that their elimination of Jews was an important contribution to the world, and they could hardly cover up the stark realities of the concentration camps. On this, see especially Martin Gilbert’s book, Atlas of the Holocaust (1993, 254 pages). Moreover, there is an abundance of survivor memoirs.
David Fitzgerald’s Toolkit for Dismantling Christianity
Religions Thrive on Fantasy, Deceit, and the Failure of Curiosity 
One of the biggest examples of deceit is this practice of Bible editors: printing the words of Jesus in red. Mainstream Bible scholars know the problem here: none of the Jesus-script in the gospels can be verified. The red print amounts to a claim that is not justified by any evidence. The gospels were written decades after the death of Jesus; their authors do not identify their sources; they never cite contemporaneous documentation (letters, diaries, transcripts) that would give us confidence that we’re reading real words of Jesus. Apparently, Bible editors couldn’t care less. Fundamentalist/evangelical editors insist that the Jesus-script was divinely inspired, so the red print is entirely in order. But then they have to write books, articles, doctoral dissertations to explain away the awful Jesus-script, e.g., the hate-your-family verse (Luke 14:26); I didn’t come to bring peace, but a sword (Matthew 10:34-36); drinking Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood are magic potions for achieving eternal life (John 6:53-57). There are so many of these.
One of the biggest examples of deceit is this practice of Bible editors: printing the words of Jesus in red. Mainstream Bible scholars know the problem here: none of the Jesus-script in the gospels can be verified. The red print amounts to a claim that is not justified by any evidence. The gospels were written decades after the death of Jesus; their authors do not identify their sources; they never cite contemporaneous documentation (letters, diaries, transcripts) that would give us confidence that we’re reading real words of Jesus. Apparently, Bible editors couldn’t care less. Fundamentalist/evangelical editors insist that the Jesus-script was divinely inspired, so the red print is entirely in order. But then they have to write books, articles, doctoral dissertations to explain away the awful Jesus-script, e.g., the hate-your-family verse (Luke 14:26); I didn’t come to bring peace, but a sword (Matthew 10:34-36); drinking Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood are magic potions for achieving eternal life (John 6:53-57). There are so many of these.
Breaking the Grip of Indoctrination
Brainwashing is a disaster
It is a common feature of religions that their devout followers are confident that they’ve “got it right.” Because, of course, their leaders have convinced them that they are exclusive custodians of the truth, and there are severe penalties for disagreeing or disbelieving. Since there have been thousands of religions making such claims, we can be sure they’re all pretense and nonsense. On occasion over the years, I have asked a few devout Christian friends to read/critique various chapters of the books I’ve written: I genuinely wanted their perspectives. But they usually refused, because they didn’t want to read anything that might put their faith in jeopardy (which was a big clue that they have major doubts that they don’t want to think about). One Catholic woman did agree to read one of my chapters on the gospels. Her primary reaction was shock: she didn’t know that Jesus was expected to come back. Another was angry to learn that there is Jesus-script demanding hatred of family—and even life itself—for anyone who wants to be his disciple. Several Catholics have told me they were not encouraged to read the Bible, so I was hardly surprised.
Franky Schaeffer's Warning: The Theocrats Are Coming!
Don't believe me? Then listen to Schaeffer. Heed his warning Christians. He's the son of Francis Schaeffer, the philosopher/theologian who wrote "The Christian Manifesto" in 1980. That book and others helped ignite the recent modern American desire for theocracy, democracy be damned!
The High Vulnerability of Christian Belief
Why do its faithful followers fail to notice?
How many Southern Baptists drive by Catholic Churches on the way their own churches? And vice versa? Does it never cross their minds that there are major differences in their versions of Christianity? They can’t both be right. Yet these believers trust the priests and ministers who have taught them since their earliest years. When we broaden the perspective, it’s obvious that the problem becomes more extreme: there have been thousands of different religions—and all of them teach as absolute truths their own ideas about god(s). Religions push the importance of taking it all on faith. “Please don’t think about it: you must trust that your priest or minister has a firm grasp of the absolute truth.”
How many Southern Baptists drive by Catholic Churches on the way their own churches? And vice versa? Does it never cross their minds that there are major differences in their versions of Christianity? They can’t both be right. Yet these believers trust the priests and ministers who have taught them since their earliest years. When we broaden the perspective, it’s obvious that the problem becomes more extreme: there have been thousands of different religions—and all of them teach as absolute truths their own ideas about god(s). Religions push the importance of taking it all on faith. “Please don’t think about it: you must trust that your priest or minister has a firm grasp of the absolute truth.”
See, Al Gore Told You So.
Hurricanes have been in the news lately, thanks to the United States getting whacked by hurricanes Helene and Milton in quick succession. The two hurricanes followed intersecting tracks, with some areas of the U.S. state of Florida getting grazed or hit by both storms.
‘It’s mindblowing’: US meteorologists face death threats as hurricane conspiracies surge
Fact, we're dealing with angry, utterly stupid people. Say it isn't so! LINK.
Will Humanity Ever Escape the Grip of Religion?
It’s unlikely—we seem to be cursed with it forever
There are now more than eight billion humans on the planet, and a significant portion of this total has been indoctrinated by hundreds of different religions. The great irony, of course, is that these religions have never been able to agree about god(s). The supreme irony is that there are thousands of different Christian brands, and they differ significantly in their beliefs about god. This alone is evidence that religion is guesswork, which makes the fanatical attachment to it puzzling indeed. What can we do to escape this curse?
"Crying Won't Help You, Praying Won't Do You No Good"
Here's the discussion with regard to Milton and Trump's Mar-a-Lago. [For the record I hope there's minimal loss of life as possible and that the rescuse operations are as successful as possible. No god can help us, no prayers, only people who care.
Here's A Link To My Debate On Horrendous Suffering with Don McIntosh
My debate with Dr. Don McIntosh (M.S., M.Div., Dr.Apol.) on horrendous suffering is now found in one helpful shareable link below. McIntosh is the Editor-in-Chief of the "Trinity Journal of Natural & Philosophical Theology," from which our papers can be found. LINK.
"How to Be an Honest Life-Long Seeker of the Truth" by John W. Loftus
This excerpt is from my book How to Defend the Christian Faith: Advice from an Atheist, published by Pitchstone Publishing in 2015. LINK. You'll be taken to a website maintained by my publisher. Click around to see other essays written by other authors. I'm happy to be one of them.
The Stupidity Factor in the Survival of Religion
And the major role of ignorance as well
Mike Pence has declared that he doesn’t believe in evolution, but has also said that, when he dies, he’ll asked god if evolution is fact or fiction. This represents a special brand of stupidity, fortified by colossal ignorance. The literature on evolution is vast—is Pence just unaware of it, and can’t be bothered by curiosity? And does he really imagine that a creator deity with billions of galaxies under supervision will take the time to sit down for a chat with him about stuff he should have learned about before he died? Of course, when such a prominent Christian voices his rejection of evolution, this gives permission to the devout to embrace the stupidity and ignorance. I personally witnessed another special brand of stupidity a few years ago—I’ve told this story before, but it’s worth repeating: ten days after the Sandy Hook school massacre in December 2012 (20 kids and 6 adults murdered), a devout Catholic woman offered this explanation: “God must have wanted more angels.” Not even the pope is stupid enough to say such a thing—although the stupidity level at the Vatican is incredibly high.
About the Vice-Presidential Debate Last Night
This is a good commentary on the debate last night between JD Vance and Tim Waltz.
LINK to Huffington Post.
Reasonable People Cannot Believe!
When Theology Collides with Science and History
Deities and miracles vanish
For thousands of years, humans have been imagining and inventing gods. Once ideas about gods have been locked into human brains, fierce loyalties and certainties develop. People who claim privileged knowledge of the gods emerge—the priestly classes—and they do their best to enforce “correct” beliefs and behaviors. Today we call them clergy, and there are thousands of different brands, all of whom are confident of the “truths” they advocate.
Seth Andrews VS. God: Who is the Better Intelligent Designer?
This is really good stuff as usual! At about 39:17 Seth Andrews recommends my book, "God and Horrendous Suffering." He recommends Dr. Abby Hafer's book too!
Buy my book here!
Buy my book here!
Horrendous Suffering Reduces the Probability of a Loving God to Zero
In the classic American play, Inherit the Wind (by Jerome Lawrence and Robert Edwin Lee), about the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, we find this exchange between the characters based on William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow:
Bryan: “I do not think about things I do not think about.”
Darrow: “Do you ever think about things that you do think about?”
Darrow: “Do you ever think about things that you do think about?”
THERE IS NO ROOM FOR POLITICAL VIOLENCE!
Now I have a personal request. I want everyone to watch this YouTube video linked below. The lesson is clear and absolutely important:
THERE IS NO ROOM FOR POLITICAL VIOLENCE!
You see, my wife and I are also poll workers. It's terrible that Trump incites political violence. But he does. Election workers should never be targeted for doing our job! I hope you agree and spread this same message.
LINKThe Desperate Embrace of Abusive Religion by the Devout
Clint Heacock’s new book shines a bright light on this reality
The Preface to this book is a grabber. Twelve-year old Clint had arrived home from soccer practice, looking forward to the family dinner. But there was no one home; instead of the usual buzz of activity, nothing. Clint went into a panic: had the Rapture happened, and he was left behind? He wouldn’t get to meet Jesus and go to heaven? I won’t offer a plot spoiler here—where the family actually was—but this incident is a stunning example of abusive religion. Here was a kid who had been told by people he trusted, from his days as a toddler, that Jesus would one day return to collect a select group of true believers for their trip to heaven. And woe to those who weren’t among those selected.
McIntosh and Horrendous Suffering
[This article is forthcoming in the Trinity Journal of Natural & Philosophical Theology, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (Fall 2024) in collaboration with the Trinity Graduate School of Apologetics and Theology. The version presented here is slightly different in formatting from the print version. Used with permission.]
Why Religion Is Being Held Strictly, Bluntly Accountable
Critical thinking skills have kicked in 
There is perhaps nothing more stunning, more shocking, than clergy who have realized that their religion is false—and decided to tell this truth to the world. There’s the famous cartoon by John Billette depicting a priest getting into costume for worship, and confiding to his assistant: “Every Sunday I’m tempted to tell the congregation that it’s all bullshit, but I’m in too deep now.” John W. Loftus, Dan Barker, and Tim Sledge come to mind: clergy who were in really deep, and found the courage to describe their realization that the Christian religion has far too many flaws. It just doesn’t make sense, and cannot be taken seriously. The three ex-clergy just mentioned have written many books about the shortcoming of their abandoned faiths, but there are others who have published their stories, e.g., Jerry Dewitt, John Compere, Drew Bekius, Kenneth Daniels, Bob Ripley, David Ramsey.
I describe my own loss of faith in an article I published here last May, How Christianity Disintegrated Right in Front of Me.
The Obsession of Religion with Eternal Life, the Ultimate Scam
A tale of two deathbeds
A few years ago, a devout Catholic woman told me she was having a tough time finding a new job. Since I was a career coach at the time, I offered to give her a book on effective job search. I was stunned by her response: “I don’t read books. Even when I was in college, I didn’t read books. I passed the tests because I kept very good notes in class.” And she confessed that was very protective of her faith; she didn’t want it damaged in any way, because she was eager to see her mother again in heaven.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)