Dr. Ken Pulliam is Dead

My good friend and fellow ex-Christian former minster is dead. His wife Cheryl announced this today on Facebook:

This is Ken's wife. My husband passed away suddenly and unexpectedly yesterday from a massive heart attack. I thought you would like to know. He was 50. Cheryl

This was Ken's Facebook page. This was his Blog page.

This is a Facebook page dedicated to his memory.

He will be personally missed by me as the first skeptic I met online and one of my greatest encouragers. Be assured that people will know of him and remember him. Just days ago he submitted his chapter to me for the anthology The End of Christianity. He was writing a book about the atonement. That work would have been a tour de force unmatched by anything produced so far. His keen intellect and grasp of the issues were evident in everything he wrote. I will miss him, and I wish his family the very best during this time of grief.

25 Hot Topics for a New Book

I'm coming up with 25 hot topics for a Christian scholar and I to discuss in a book. I think I'll separate my questions into different categories: science, epistemology, ethics, history, psychology, Bible, theology (soteriology, Jesus, eschatology, hermeneutics), and so forth. This particular scholar is a new breed of evangelical who won't be caught off-guard with your typical fundamentalist stumpers. Thanks for all your suggestions so far. Don't assume if I use what you suggest that I didn't already think of it.

25 Hot Topics for a New Book

I had previously mentioned that a Christian scholar and myself are co-writing a book. We've just made it out of the planning stage. We had to have a book proposal with a promise of appealing to readers. Well, we've settled on one tentatively titled "God or Godless? Fifty Five Minute Debates." It will be designed for people who want some short answers (500 words each) to hot topics surrounding the theist/atheist debates. I am to come up with 25 hot topics and he will come up with 25 more. While I don't think short answers get the job done right, they can be interesting and informative just the same. Which ones would you suggest for me?

Sin: Something Critics of Christianity Should Talk About More

So argues Chris Hallquist. Yes, let's preach a bit more about sin, brothers and sisters. Do I hear an Amen!?

Newspaper in Canada: "Take the Outsider Test for Faith"

Hey, I think this is way cool. Just think, even though the OTF has been "refuted" so many times by so many people it still survives! Perhaps this reporter hasn't seen the refutations, eh? ;-)

Why Catholicism is Child's Play

Our modern perception of the Roman Catholic Church as the janitor of old buildings and the provider of a different geriatric every few years to amuse us with his favourite tricks whilst hiding behind bullet proof glass, is in itself a testament of the degree to which we have separated ourselves from the theocratic oversight of this institution. None of the twenty thousand who were slaughtered at the Massacre of Béziers by Papal instruction could have dreamed of a time when the Holy See’s authority would be reduced to a symbolic figment of an ignorant past. Yet the indoctrination and violent imposition that shaped dark age Europe and resisted the development of our secular modern societies so violently still retains much of its grotesque authority.

The Atheists are Coming...

Indicative of a larger pattern, atheist and agnostic students will return to campus this fall with a better chance than ever of finding groups of like-minded young people. The Secular Student Alliance (SSA), a national organization devoted to supporting nonreligious student groups, reported having a record 219 campus affiliate groups, up from 159 in 2009 and 100 in 2008.

"And a little child will lead them..." Isaiah 11:6

Watch this if you want to see something spooky:

Skeptics and Another Natural Explanation for the Resurrection Narratives

Christians claim that until skeptics can agree on an alternative natural explanation to the resurrection accounts told in the Gospels that the Gospels should be accepted as the truth. They further claim that by offering other natural explanations to these accounts it shows that skeptics are merely grasping at straws to reject the claims of the gospel. But these accusations are Balderdash! They're not even close...not even in the ballpark...not even on the radar.

A Rare Picture of Me Without My Cowboy Hat, and an Interview

In the picture I was pretty much sauced at the recent Texas Freethought Convention, which was absolutely wonderful! I sobered up for the interview a week or more later with the Oklahoma Atheists podcast. *hiccup* Enjoy.

Christopher Rollston on the Rise of Monotheism in Ancient Israel

Monotheism in ancient Israel was a late(r) development, certainly not part of early Israelite religion. Within this article, the basic biblical and epigraphic evidence is employed, with frequent reference to seminal secondary studies. Link to a pdf.

There are Honest Christians Who Want Real Answers to Real Questions

Like Roscoe.

What the Bible Really Says About God and Sex

Michael Coogan's book God and Sex was a page turner for me. Not only is it about two of my favorite subjects *ahem* but it is a one stop shop to learn about a complete range of sexual issues in the Bible by a biblical scholar. We learn about sexual terminology in the Hebrew culture like "hands" "feet" "flesh" "nakedness" and "to know." When Ruth uncovered Boaz's feet (Ruth 3:7-8) guess what she was probably doing folks, yep, probably giving him some head--Yeahhhh baby!!!!

Was Jesus Wrong? by Franky Schaeffer

This is a review of The Human Faces of God by Thom Stark. It's also a request to Christians: admit that the Bible is a mess and stop passing on its toxicity to us.

Thom Stark begins his book like this: "In the beginning was the Argument, and the Argument was with God, and the Argument was: God. God was the subject of the Argument, and the Argument was a good one. Who is God? What is God like? What does God require of us?"

Stark shows that the Bible isn't just self-contradictory on a few historical details but that within the pages of the Bible is an argument and not just an argument with the outside world: The Bible is an argument with itself.

If you want to be informed about what the Bible really says and how Christianity came into existence -- if you want to know how to respond to Evangelicals trying to convert you to their brand of fundamentalism, read this book. If you're a former Evangelical, or a former Christian, who gave up on faith because you just couldn't reconcile your moral and intellectual integrity with the mythology and immorality-touted-as-righteousness that is pervasive throughout the Bible, then read this book. Link

Christians, Where Are the Real Answers to Real Questions?

Having heard it all--quite literally--Christians have no answers to the questions that need to be answered. When someone wants to know some real answers to real questions of theirs, all they get is circular logic, Socratic definitions pursued down the rabbit hole, splitting hairs, logical gerrymandering, re-framing the questions differently to suit one's faith, The Omniscience Escape Clause, The Faith Trump Card, and so many logical fallacies it can make one nauseous. The interesting thing about this is that only when someone decides they want real answers to real questions do they see this for what it is. And at that point it's easy to see through the platitudes and non-answers offered by Christians in response. Here's another example of someone looking for real answers to real questions, and you can see the end result.

What's It Like Dealing With Mormons Every Day?

Well that's what I've been doing for two months shy of five years here on a daily basis. On day one these Mormons tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, that I was never a Mormon, that I'm not criticizing their kind of Mormonism, that I have not shown their faith to be impossible, which is an impossible standard, and so forth, coming from the scholarly types as well as the kids in Junior High who think they can argue against me. They use non-sequiturs, red herrings, special pleading, begging the question, and either/or fallacies then beat their chests and crow about how they have refuted me and all atheists. Then comes day two, which is more of the same ignorance. Then comes day three. For nearly five years. I'm tired of playing nice. I'm turning over to the dark side. They are buffoons, utterly devoid of the ability to recognize they are brainwashed who repeat platitudes as if they are something new and profound which I have never heard or thought of before.

How to Avoid the Question: Lessons from Professor Rauser

Don't get me wrong. I like Professor Randal Rauser. I think he's creative, intelligent, and a nice guy to boot. But he doesn't seem to care at all that Anne Askew was tortured and burned at the stake even though God had a multiple number of ways to keep that from happening. I wrote about Anne here.

So far he does not want to deal with her case. He wants me to chase him down the rabbit hole of definitions about what kind of a revelation God should have produced, sort of like following a Socratic method, which would end up being more interesting to him than the particular case before us. He'd rather play Pharisee by discussing what it means to work on the Sabbath day rather than help someone in need. I'd rather discuss concrete examples, people, good people who suffered because his God was inept. He doesn't get it. He's far too gone as the brainwashed person he is. He cannot be helped, not by me. So I write for other people who are reading this exchange. I do this quite a bit, really. Here then is the problem he fails to see with regard to the Anne Askew's of this world.

Thom Stark Interviewed About His New Book

Q. Who is the Yahweh of the Israelites?

A. Well as scholars like Frank Cross, Chris Rollston, Mark Smith and others have demonstrated and have known for some time, the earliest texts in the Hebrew Bible give a strong indication that the early conception of Yahweh was that he was an ancient Near Eastern tribal deity. As I argue in my book, following Rollston, the Song of Moses in Deut 32 indicates that Yahweh was believed to have been one of the children of the Canaanite deity El Elyon (God Most High). The song describes how the nations were originally formed, and what it says is that the peoples of the earth were divided up according to the number of El Elyon’s children (the junior members of the divine pantheon). Yahweh, Israel’s patron deity, was one of Elyon’s children.

The best evidence suggests that Yahweh did not begin as the “only true God” of later Jewish monotheism; he did not begin as the creator of the world. Yahweh began as a young, up-and-coming tribal deity whose prowess among other gods mirrored Israel’s aspirations vis-a-vis surrounding tribes and nations.

Quote of the Day, by Silver Bullet Concerning Randal Rauser (and it applies to many Christian Scholars)

Randal believes that the Christian god would have his bible written by people so that it is indistinguishable from any other book that people have written - full of contradictions, depicting the flawed human knowledge of the time, unclear, employing the same technics that people use when they write, like irony, etc.

In fact, Randal believes that the Christian god didn't even interfere in any way with the actual writing and compilation of the Christian bible - that was all done by people and people alone. Randal has written that he believes that the Christian god, when he created the universe, did so with the full foreknowledge that people would evolve billions of years later to independently write exactly the book that the Christian god would want them to write, full of human flaws and appearing as an all too human creation, as his bible.

Where's Waldo? I'm Right Here...

...arguing with professor Randal Rauser. See what you think.

I'm Back On the Marriage Market

I've married plenty of women in my days. No I'm not a polygamist. I've performed many weddings. I never thought I'd do so again even though I've been asked more than a dozen times, and turned them all down. Until tonight. For as a newly ordained minister with the First Church of Atheism I'm conducting my first wedding in years. If anyone would like me to perform your wedding just contact me and I'll get the job done without the religious mumbo jumbo. For a secular humanism church I'm also a minister with the Universal Life Church whose only creed is an "adherence to the universal doctrine of religious freedom: 'Do only that which is right.'"

I'll also do atheist funerals with dignity and respect for those who have lost loved ones without the religious mumbo jumbo.

Did God Do Anything to Rescue the Chilean Miners?

The Chilean miners had spent a record 69 days in the heat of the collapsed mine who were believed to be dead for the first 17 days and then found "miraculously alive" we're told. Mario Gomez had said, "We are going to get out with God's help." When rescued Alberto Avalos said, "This is a miracle from God."

But was this a miracle? I for one am ecstatic they were all rescued. The rescue itself is an amazing story of the massive effort by engineers and scientists around the world. But we should give thanks where thanks are due, and I see no evidence God did anything to save them. Believers simply count the hits and discount the misses. If this is seen as a hit, then believers must also count all of the misses. The recent Pakistan Flood is one such miss.

God and the Burning of Anne Askew

Here's a link to tell you about Anne Askew. What was done to her is horrific. There were so many injustices done to her in the name of God it's hard to take it all in. This was a barbaric Christian society. If I were God I would be embarrassed for not telling believers to be civilized democratic loving people. If I were God I would be embarrassed for not telling a society of believers that men do not own women. If I were God I would be embarrassed for not coming to her aid in some miraculous manner. If I were God I would be embarrassed for not giving people divine guidance about such matters. I would hide my head in shame if I were God. I would confess my guilt and turn away from my uncaring incompetent ways. And I would let my defenders know they too need to repent for not caring about the Anne's under Christian rule. I would repent for being an uncaring incompetent deity, for that's the kind of God that exists if one exists at all.

Religion: It’s almost like being in love

When I criticize Christianity believers will say I was never a Christian because I now treat it like it really is, a belief system of doctrines. Christians tell me instead it's a relationship with God-in-Christ. You know, the more I think of it the more they are right. They DO treat their religion like it's a relationship. They are madly and passionately in love. The problem is that there is no object of their love, and this is a problem of enormous consequences, primarily in that people in love are blind to their lover's faults.

Think of all of those young couples “in love” who are at each other’s throats only a couple years later. While they are in the romantic love stage, they are “caught up in the emotion.” Their lover can do no wrong. Their lover is perfect. Their lover has no faults; oh, sure he or she has idiosyncrasies, but nothing that could possibly impede this relationship. At least not until the fairy dust settles and they are able to start seeing each other as flawed human beings, sometimes horribly flawed. Amazing as it seems, strong emotions can cause massive distortions in perceptions. They can make A look like Not-A. Strong emotions can also completely shut down our ability to think self-critically. Link

Quote of the Day, by Jeffrey A. Myers

Faith is a belief in an unknown or unrealized proposition in spite of evidence that the belief is incorrect. Faith is clearly NOT a belief in an unknown or unrealized proposition that is SUPPORTED by the evidence, because if that belief was supported by the evidence, it ipso facto does NOT REQUIRE Faith. [See on Faith]

Can God Exist if Yahweh Doesn't?

William Lane Craig in his debate with Peter Slezak, at 68 minutes in says: "I think that if you agree with me that there are certain things that are really right and wrong like child abuse, cruelty, and slavery then you will agree with me that we need God as a transcendent foundation for those objective moral values."

There is a problem though. The God that William Lane Craig is appealing to, Yahweh, does NOT condemn child abuse, cruelty, or slavery. So I simply cannot figure out how Craig's argument is supposed to work! Link

Thomas Jefferson on the Outsider Test for Faith

In a private letter to his nephew Peter Carr, Jefferson offers some advice on how to study religion, which represents the OTF that I defend:

'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009

Thomas Huxley vs. Bertrand Russell on the Definition of Agnosticism

[Written by John W. Loftus] Thomas Huxley invented the word agnostic, and by it he meant skepticism:

Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle... Positively the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, do not pretend conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable. Link

Bertrand Russell defined it differently:

Quote of the Day, by Mark Priestap, a Christian Father

We can be timid as parents to explain the wrath of God to our children because we’re afraid they’ll be too frightened and want nothing to do with him. But we are forgetting that the fear of God is a means God uses to stir up in us the desire to be forgiven by him..."Gospel fear" is a powerful weapon against unbelief. Far from being something to avoid, it is crucial to our children’s salvation and sanctification. Link

Hat Tip to Shawn Willis

60 Minutes On a Historic Film: Market Street 1906

Morley Safer reports on a mystery that was solved about a 100-year-old film that we now know was made on San Francisco's Market Street just days before the 1906 earthquake. Link

I find this story fascinating for it's a film of San Francisco days before an earthquake destroyed what we're looking at. It's like we have detailed foreknowledge of what's to take place in just a few days. We know when looking at it the people in the film will suffer, many of them will die. What would YOU do if you had that foreknowledge? What did God do? Are we better than God? I would think so. For we would warn them.

Does modern cosmology supply the materials that can fill gaps in the traditional arguments for the existence of God?

by Jonathan Pearce, enjoy:

In view of the belief that there has been a shift in the landscape of modern philosophy, with regards to the respectful position now adopted by theists, it is important to reassess this landscape at regular intervals. This is not particularly due to new philosophies being developed ex nihilo, but more in light of the nature of modern physics, and the constant change involved in the discipline. The assumptions that underlie most premises in cosmological arguments are often open to debate, and they depend, in no small part, on present physical and cosmological understanding. Since these are shifting sands of understanding, then philosophers must be cautious when making truly assertive and dogmatic claims. Though there are very good arguments indeed for remaining agnostic on many theories (to adopt a truly Pyrrhoian[1] sceptical approach), there is still an attractive quality about holding a definite position, whether as part of a cumulative case, or in isolation, in order to inform a worldview. That being said, all too often, worldviews inform people’s interpretation of evidence, rather than the opposite.

Two Important Philosophical Questions and Christian Theology

The first question is What do you mean by that? The second one is How do you know? Now let's apply this to the statement: Jesus died for our sins. What sense can we make of it? How can anyone know it's true?

Re-formulating William Lane Craig's 4 Facts Resurrection Argument

I am going to demonstrate with completely sound reasoning why the most reasonable conclusion based on the evidence is that Chippy the squirrel rose from the dead.

There are four historical facts which must be explained:
1. Chippy's burial
2. The discovery of the empty tomb
3. His post-mortem appearances
4. The origin of a few people's belief in his resurrection

Link.

Science On What Happened Before the Big Bang?

They are the biggest questions that science can possibly ask: where did everything in our universe come from? How did it all begin? For nearly a hundred years, we thought we had the answer: a big bang some 14 billion years ago.

But now some scientists believe that was not really the beginning. Our universe may have had a life before this violent moment of creation.

Horizon takes the ultimate trip into the unknown, to explore a dizzying world of cosmic bounces, rips and multiple universes, and finds out what happened before the big bang.

How About Some Self-Promotional Blus[h]ter Too?

I’m a John Loftus junkie. I go to his blog almost daily. Every once in a while a blogger catches my fancy, and Debunking Christianity got me hooked. At least a couple of times a week I read something on his blog I think of reproducing here...His blog is a one stop blog for current atheist news and thoughts on-line.... Blush.

The Problem of Belief

Here's something that calls out for an explanation and no amount of Bible verses will help. What is the content of salvific faith (i.e. the kind of belief that saves a person)? What must someone believe to be saved? Simple? Not so fast. A child who confesses Jesus is lord is saved, right? I dare anyone to ask a ten year old what she thinks of Jesus, what it means to say he is lord, whether she thinks he is God, God-in-the-flesh, the 2nd person of the trinity, or a really really big guy, and so on and so forth. Ask her to define each of her words. Anyone can say "Jesus is lord" then. Does doing so save a person unless said person has the correct detailed theology that goes with it? There is no doubt in my mind that a child holds to heretical ideas when asked about them. OR, she's expressing words she has no clue as to their meaning. But if so, then there are surely professing Christians of all ages, probably most of them, who think they are saved but are not, and this could be........YOU! Since this must be the case if one is saved by faith, this is a barbaric way to base a person's salvation upon--that not only must believers express the right words but also have the proper understanding of them.

The “evidence” for Jesus’ resurrection, debunked in one page

That's what Chris Hallquist has done. See what you think.

Dr. Avalos' Radio Interview

Dr. Avalos comments on his chapters in The Christian Delusion and much more in an interview with the Minnesota Atheists. Dr. Avalos podcast

I'll be in South Bend, Indiana, Thursday Night

I'm speaking at 7 PM on the Outsider Test for Faith, so come on out if you live nearby to the River Park Library, located at 2022 Mishawaka Avenue, South Bend, Indiana.

The Delusionary Thinking of Both Matt Flannagan and Paul Copan

[Written by John W. Loftus] According to Thom Stark, both Matt Flannagan and Paul Copan have backed themselves into a corner in order to defend their faith. "According to the Bible, Yahweh killed children, and ordered others to kill children. There's no way to get around that fact," but watch them try. As I have said before, defending the Christian faith makes smart people look stupid. Check it out.

PBS Program, God in America

I watched the first two episodes last night. The other episodes will air tonight and tomorrow. Watch them if you have the time. This program is excellent. I highly recommend it. What aired last night is now online. Don't miss this. There's a lot it doesn't deal with of course, but it's really good. If this program is correct then I now understand perfectly why a deist/skeptic like Thomas Jefferson was elected President!

God as an Explanation vs. a God Who Acts in the World

This is a distinction that makes a difference. It also makes a great deal of sense. Believers think that if their concept of God can explain the cosmos then automatically ipso facto they have arrived at the God they believe in, who acted in the world. Nope. Not by a long shot. For a god might explain the cosmos and yet not be Yahweh. And even if Yahweh is that god, he might not have raised Jesus from the dead. And even if Yahweh raised Jesus from the dead, he might not be the classical theistic God of Anselm.

I'm Headed to the Texas Freethought Convention

I'm making final preparations today to fly to Texas to speak on the Outsider Test for Faith. I'll get to connect with some good people on the schedule, so this will be good. Come out if you can or wish me luck. Next week I'm giving the same talk Thursday night near South Bend, Indiana (more later). If you need a speaker consider me. Link.

God Cannot Exist if Yahweh Didn't.

Yahweh did not exist. He is much too tribal of a god, created the world in conflict with the sea God Rahab, married to Asherah, accepted child sacrifice, commanded genocide, forbid worship of all other gods (didn't deny their existence), and chose Israel like the others gods did to other nations.

Bayesian Background Priors

[Written by John W. Loftus] A lot is made by Christian philosophers about their background "priors" when assessing the truth of Christian theism. Their claim is that with their particular "priors" they are warranted in concluding from those "priors" the evidence leads them to their faith. My claim is that they have the cart before the horse, big time, bad time.

Thom Stark's Book, "The Human Faces of God" is Available

Thom Stark's book is The Human Faces of God: What Scripture Reveals When It Gets God Wrong (and Why Inerrancy Tries to Hide It). To read some glowing blurbs see below. I heartily recommend it as well, having seen a digital pre-pub copy. A must read book!

Quote of the Day, by Robert and Ken Pulliam

Robert: "I think that without Internet access, I would still be a believer today. I might have wondered why the Bible gives permission to beat slaves, and I might have asked my preacher about it, but I don't think I would have searched the local libraries to find atheist authors and see what they had to say!...but entering 'Yahweh genocide' in a search engine (with the intent of finding a Christian response) can easily land us upon a site like this." Ken: "The printing press was instrumental in bringing about the Reformation in the 16th century, and I think the internet will have an even greater impact." Link

Ed Babinski Responds to "The Infidel Delusion"

Check it out!

The Irrational Christian: The John Loftus Trinity Argument

Some things are hard to explain in a video, but Rhetorical Bullshit gives it a try:

My Thoughts on Sam Harris's New Book, "The Moral Landscape"

There truly is something new about the New Atheism now. See what I wrote about this new book on Amazon.com. You'll have to scroll down to it.

Quote of the Day, by Biblical Scholar Michael Coogan

The point I’m trying to make is...that everyone, whether they are aware of it or not, uses the Bible selectively. Link.

This was said in an interview about his new book God and Sex: What the Bible Really Says.

High Stakes Intelligent Designing

This is both an entertaining and informative video:

Bill O'Reilly vs. Bill Maher On Religion - 09/30/10

See what you think below:

Dan Barker's Email

Ever get an email also addressed to several others and the discussion goes on an on between the people involved? Dan and I were tagged in one of them recently. I had written a response earlier that basically said this. After a Christian responded Dan wrote:

Praise God for the Candiru Parasite! Isn't God Good?

When did God create the Candiru parasite? And why didn't he tell us how to avoid it? Seems to me a good God who cared for us would at least tell us, don't you?

The Outsider Test Resonates With Many People

If it's so blatantly misguided I wonder why it resonates with so many people?

A Proposed Scientific Test For the Truth of Christianity

Ask some non-believing outsiders what they think of the so-called evidence for Christianity. Ask, oh, let's see where should I start, Muslims, Hindu's, Buddhists, Christian Scientists, witch doctors...

Calculate the conversion rates and get back to me. But there's more to it:

Defending the Christian Faith Makes Brilliant People Look Stupid...

Yep, just click and read through this. As you can see they don't like me. I entered the fray a bit later. Be sure to read my links. "Tim" is professor Timothy McGrew.

God and Sex, by Michael Coogan

I saw this book at the bookstore yesterday by biblical scholar Michael Coogan. It looks really good. I just ordered it.

Harry McCall on God, Yahweh and Elohim

Harry wrote:

The word θεὸς “Theos” (God) in the major Liddell & Scott, et. al., Classical Greek Lexicon published by Oxford University Press: "God is defined by the deities of ancient Roman and Greece. As such, the Greek Classical textual tradition links “God” directly with the Classical Gods and not with the Christian pagan god Yahweh. When Rome left the Gods that had made them great and became Christian, the mighty Roman empire began its decline until it was sacked. It was Christianity and its god that ushered in the Dark Ages at the end of this great Classical period."

The Outsider Test Disallows Faith

So many people are writing about the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) I can't keep up anymore. I've made my arguments. Let them talk among themselves about it. The test is straightforward, simple and elegant. It's all about not having any double standards when critically evaluating religious faiths. In the end, the OTF disallows faith when examining the reasons to accept or re-evaluate a religion. For having faith in one's own culturally inherited religion unfairly exempts that religion from an objective evaluation.

What this means is that when examining Christianity a person who is already a Christian cannot punt to faith when encountering problems, since doing this is disallowed by the OTF. In fact, to the degree a person must repeatedly do this is the degree his or her religious sect is false. One cannot have his thumb of faith on the weighing scales. One is left with reason and evidence. No more using the omniscience escape clause either. Christians must seek to justify what they consider the facts apart from faith.

My contention is that Christians cannot do this. My contention is that this is NOT any fault with the OTF itself since it is a reasonable, objective and fair test. The fact is that Christianity MUST pass the OTF. Otherwise, people who could not be convinced to believe because they were raised as outsiders will be thrown into hell. If Christianity does not pass the OTF God is to be blamed when outsiders cannot be convinced to believe. So there can be no legitimate objection to the OTF. Q.E.D.

The Implications of the Book Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)

From the description of the book we read:

Backed by years of research and delivered in lively, energetic prose, Mistakes Were Made but Not by Me offers a fascinating explanation of self-deception—how it works, the harm it can cause, and how we can overcome it.

I read it and loved it. Fascinating stuff here about cognitive dissonance and how we deceive ourselves to resolve it. The implications of this book are that we should all be skeptics and trust the sciences. Let me briefly explain.

Yes, I Am Pretty Certain I'm Right

I am as certain that Christianity is false as Christians are that people are wasting time and money on cold fusion. [I know someone is trying to make headway in that field so don't get me wrong]. I am as certain that Christianity is false as I am that Scientology or Mormonism is false. If I'm risking hell you would think I must be sure of it, right?

We are all justifiably certain that some ideas and theories are wrong. It's easy to do. We merely conclude the case has not been made.

But these are not beliefs of mine. I am not affirming anything. I'm denying something. I deny the cases have been made. Some cases I have never even considered before, but tell me of them and I'll deny them without further thought. We all do this. So I am not doing anything out of the ordinary when I do so.