Quote of the Day, by the Cynical Cipher

I agree with the evangelicals about almost nothing, but I do agree that there is something fundamentally wrong with humanity - but not for the reason they think.

Read more »

Quote of the Day, by Steven Bentley

John, your former friend Bill has his been convinced that he has in his possession a book of truths backed and endorsed by the creator god of the universe, to Bill, it's contents cannot be defeated, if you counter his truths, this proves to him that he is right and you are wrong, it has a built-in reverse psychology protection, if you disagree with his beliefs and his book of truths, then you're an adversary to his truths, therefore to him, you are an evil person and of a reprobate mind looking out only to destroy his faith and deceiving him to join you and Satan in the lake of fire at the judgment seat of Christ. Therefore to Bill, you're only out to deceive him and destroy his truth that he has been especially elected to receive through gods calling via the holy spirit. Link.

Quote of the Day, by Thomas Paine

I'm told this quote is from Thomas Paine:

To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.

I experienced this talking to such a person yesterday in my home town. She proceeded to preach to me as if I never preached the same things. So I asked her how often she gets to talk to a skeptic and she admitted hardly ever. I asked if she might be interested in listening to what one of us has to say. She said she wasn't interested. Then I asked, "If what you believe is wrong would you want to know?" She claimed to know she is right and proceeded to preach what I once preached not caring to learn what I knew.

Quote of the Day, By articulett

I think about my believing years, and it would have done me some good to hear people like Harris--or any smart person treating religious beliefs like the crazy delusions they are. When you treat these things with respect, then trusting people assume that there's something worthy of respect there-- that faith is something to be respected. I bet I would have found former preachers and priests turned atheists fascinating-- and there's growing numbers of them.

I'm glad we don't have to tiptoe around peoples' magical beliefs any more. I think there is a lot to be said for declaring the emperor naked. Of course believers will rush and swear that the emperor is wearing magical robes and that they saw them and that the silly person calling the emperor naked doesn't know anything deep about magical fabrics-- but the seeds of doubt will be planted in young minds and they will have a choice that many of us didn't have until later in life.

I do think that religion will mostly be associated with the less educated classes and the poorer in the future. One day people will wonder how it is that people could have ever really believed such crazy things.

Quote of the Day, by Christian Philosopher Richard Swinburne

I cannot see any force in an argument to the existence of God from the existence of morality. The Existence of God (p. 215).

If it doesn’t convince him why should it convince me, or anyone else for that matter?

Quote of the Day, by Bart Ehrman

Many of the books of the New Testament were written by people who lied about their identity, claiming to be a famous apostle — Peter, Paul or James — knowing full well they were someone else. In modern parlance, that is a lie, and a book written by someone who lies about his identity is a forgery.

Most modern scholars of the Bible shy away from these terms, and for understandable reasons, some having to do with their clientele. Teaching in Christian seminaries, or to largely Christian undergraduate populations, who wants to denigrate the cherished texts of Scripture by calling them forgeries built on lies? And so scholars use a different term for this phenomenon and call such books “pseudepigrapha.” Link. This is based on his book Forged: Writing in the Name of God--Why the Bible's Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are.

Quote of the Day, by Richard Swinburne on Faith ;-)

I suggest that, if the probability of the existence of God on someone’s evidence is not too low after adequate investigation, it would indeed be a best act to worship and repent before God. After all, if you receive a very expensive and much-desired present and it is unclear who has sent it, it would be bad not to write a very grateful letter to the person most likely to have sent it (even if it is not very likely that that person has sent it). You might express your gratitude in a conditional way (‘I’m assuming that you sent this’), but not to express any gratitude at all would be a bad thing. And if you have damaged the present, it would be bad not to apologize. A fortiori, if—although it is unclear who (if anyone) gave you life but the most likely candidate is a God—it would be very bad indeed not to express a very great amount of gratitude, and very considerable repentance.

--From the 2nd edition of Faith and Reason, page 223.

What's this about sending a letter to thank someone for a gift who is not very likely to have sent it, but the most likely to have done so? What's that mean? What does it mean to think the probability is "not too low"? How low can you go? Is this considered good apologetics? Oh, and one more thing, since we're talking about god here, which one? Usually believers will just conclude that they should thank the culturally dominant one. ;-)

Quote of the Day, by The Maverick Jester

It was one of my children that pushed me toward atheism. He did something that I didn't approve. In the bible, we learn that if one of god's children disappoints him and refuses to beg for forgiveness, he sends them to an eternity of torture. Until that incident with my son, I didn't understand how insane the concept of hell was. Never would I want my son to suffer. He could spit on me or hate me and I would still seek his good. There is nothing that he could do that would make me want him to be tortured forever-or even a minute. Once I began to question god about hell, I began to question him about everything. I didn't want to ask questions. I wanted to believe. But once the ball started rolling, I couldn't stop it. Link

Quote of the Day

When people quote the bible at me, they may as well be telling me they're crazy. It probably has the same effect as people quoting the Quo'ran, Book of Mormon, or Dianetics at me-- or even the Big Book of Greek Myths-- or casting a spell upon me. I think it's crazy that people believe in magic books in the 21st century. -- articulett

Quote of the Day, One More Time

In my world miracles like virgin births and resurrections do not happen. What world do you live in? If they do not happen now then they did not happen in the ancient past either. And that's how historians must view the evidence. Yesterday's evidence has lost all of its power to convince. We do not believe in miracle claims in today's world and we live in this world. So how much more so is it the case that we cannot believe they took place in the ancient past! We can interview people in today's world and we still don't believe they happened. How much more so is this the case in the ancient past where we cannot interview the people involved! The overwhelming numbers of Jews in the days of Jesus did not believe he resurrected even though they believed in a miracle working God named Yahweh and the Old Testament. How much more so then is it the case in our world that we cannot believe when miracles are supposed to establish that Yahweh did a particular miracle in the past! Again, if they do not happen in our day then they did not happen in the past either. What world are YOU living in? --John W. Loftus

Quote of the Day on the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF)

There is an entry on the Outsiders Test at Iron Chariots. Here's the dilemma it presents for believers:

On the one hand, believers who object to the OTF look like a person who argues in a court room that he does not want a fair impartial judgment, but rather a biased one from a biased judge who operates on double standards.

On the other hand, believers who accept the rationale for the OTF have a great amount of difficulty in arguing that the raw uninterpreted historical data without any culturally adopted Bayesian "priors" leads the historian to the conclusion that Jesus bodily arose from the dead.

Quote of the Day

For a religious faith to pass the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) it must be justified by the sciences. Period. If believers reject the sciences as a way to know the truth then let them propose a better alternative. So if the OTF is to be rejected, what do we put in its place? What’s the alternative?

Quote of the Day, by Jesse Bering

Does all this disprove God? Of course not. Science speaks only to the improbable, not the impossible. If philosophy rules the day, God can never be ruled out entirely, because one could argue that human cognitive evolution was directly and intentionally inspired by God, so we alone, of all species, can perceive Him (and reality in general) using our naturally evolved theory of mind. But if scientific parsimony prevails, and I think it should, such philosophical positioning becomes embarrassingly like grasping at straws. (The Belief Instinct, p. 195-6).

Quote of the Day

I cannot possibly check everything I believe. There is a trust element involved. I trust the sciences. I trust the consensus of the scientists. Why? Because in those areas where I have studied I agree with them. In fact, if believers were to stop and think about it they trust the sciences too, in an overwhelming number of areas. They just disagree with them in those few areas when the sciences contradict what some pre-scientific ancient agency detectors claimed in a group of canonized texts. -- John W. Loftus

Quote of the Day: Can God Not Defeat Iron Chariots?

"And the LORD was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." - Judges 1:19

There is a skeptical site called Wiki Iron Chariots based on this text that I recommend.

Quote of the Day, by Desertbarry

Anything can be explained and therein lies a problem of huge dimension. There is nothing so implausible, improbable, morally repugnant, intellectually confounding or absurdly contraditory but that it can be explained. It is not the fool or dunce who does this best but the clever, the imaginative, the articulate, the intellecually creative, the ingenious: think Platinga, Hick, Gutting or indeed anyone's favorite theistic apologist. So what option have we? Perhaps a greater appreciation for demonstration as opposed to explanation might give us a start in the right direction.

Quote of the Day, "Doubt is the Adult Attitude"

Doubt is the adult attitude. And only people who refuse to doubt will ask that I doubt my doubts. Doubt is a filter that helps me sift out what to believe from what not to believe. I cannot do away with that filter and remain an adult person who thinks critically.

Quote of the Day, by Albert Nolan

Albert Nolan in his book Jesus Before Christianity:

“To imagine that one can have historical objectivity without a perspective is an illusion. One perspective, however, can be better than another, [but] the only perspective open to us is the one given to us by the historical situation in which we find ourselves. If we cannot achieve an unobstructed view of Jesus from the vantage point of our present circumstances, then we cannot achieve an unobstructed view of him at all.” (p. 4)

In my world miracles do not happen, folks. What world are YOU living in?

Earth to Christians. Earth to Christians. There is a vicious circularity in your appeal to historical evidence. You cannot believe without historical evidence and yet you must approach said evidence from our present day perspective. The only way you can reach your historical conclusions is by assuming what needs to be shown based on your upbringing in a Christian culture and that's it. There can be no other reason why you conclude what you do. If in our world miracles do not happen then they did not happen in first century Palestine either. Q.E.D.

Quote of the Day, By Articulett

She wrote:

Either the natural world is all there is-- or an infinity of possible supernatural beings, forces, and realms are possible with no way to tell the real from the imaginary-- and yet every believer in the supernatural imagines they have figured out a way to do so!

Quote of the Day, By brdeadite99

Christianity is so stupid that mere words do not posses the power to fully express it. Every single year, historians, ex-Christians, scientists, skeptics, scholars, Jewish scholars & historians drive more and more coffin nails into the coffin lid of Christianity; and Christians are too asinine, vacuous, and brainwashed to admit or even face this fact. If they could just mind their business and keep their shit to themselves, they wouldn't be so noxious and intolerable. As it stands now, we'll have to break the back(and neck) of the Fundamentalist movement in order to ensure our nation's future. Link