I’ve challenged my friend and former professor, Dr. William Lane Craig, to debate the merits of Christianity vs Atheism. Below you can see the results of a poll we did here at DC on such a debate:
A Craig/Loftus Debate?
---------------------------------
It’s inevitable 31 (6%)
It won’t happen 85 (18%)
It would be exciting 121 (26%)
It doesn’t interest me 20 (4%)
It would be a tie 13 (2%)
Loftus by a lip 31 (6%)
Craig by a nod 21 (4%)
Loftus by a wide margin 39 (8%)
Craig by a wide margin 82 (17%)
Loftus would get trounced ;-) 106 (22%)
Craig would get trounced ;-) 44 (9%)
--------------------------------------------
I personally like debates. While I don’t think debates settle any issues they can be both entertaining and educational. They can and do advance our understanding.
Dr. Craig has said he won’t debate me but I don’t think this is set in stone. If there is a demand for it I think he will debate me. This is not the only challenge I’ve issued, anyway. Since I personally like to be challenged I have issued several of them. Care to take up one of them?
Over at Evaluating Christianity there is a primer on debating Dr. Craig. There’s not much new in it. Besides, what he wrote is easier said than done during a debate.
On the subject of debates have you seen the wonderful movie The Great Debaters? The setting is the 1930’s when a debate team from a small African American college in Texas debated their way up to Harvard's team, and won! It’s both a moving and an informative story which I recommend very highly.
April 16, 2009
April 15, 2009
The Indiana Atheist Bus Campaign!
If Indiana can do it then surely other cities and states can too. Come on, join in!
April 13, 2009
Thanks for the Encouragement, I Think. ;-)
Two weeks ago I was frustrated and wrote a post threatening to quit Blogging. As a lightning rod I get attacked from both sides of the fence. Six hours later after sleeping on it I deleted that post. During the night several people commented and made me realize I needed to focus on the people who appreciate what I do. Some people suggested I take a break and do something different. Maybe I will, and maybe I won't, we'll see. But below are some of the positive comments I received from the people I'll focus on from now on, who motivate me. I just want to say thanks, I think. ;-)
I can handle the ignorant Christians who attack me. That's what ignorant Christians constantly do because they cannot effectively deal with my arguments. Intelligent Christians are a different story. Some of them are using my book in their college classes on apologetics and atheism and even openly expressing the hope that my work will be recognized over the other new atheists, since I am a worthy opponent and since I treat their faith respectfully. I am the only skeptic permitted to post something at Answering Infidels and the first atheist to be asked to present a paper at a regional meeting of the Evangelical Philosophical Society. My work is also being recognized in other prestigious places as well.
But what bothers me the most are the ignorant skeptics who also attack me. I’ve said before that skeptics do not have a corner on rationality, and I still think that’s true. Some skeptics attack me because some Christians attack me! Think of the idiocy of this!? These skeptics conclude I must be as bad as these Christians say I am. But then these skeptics have not read my book or much that I write here on this blog either. And they have no clue what it’s like to be a lightning rod where Christians feel the right, no, the religious duty, to personally attack me (and these attacks are getting more and more desperate). I am personally attacked because I am honest about my personal ugly past. Of course I get upset when they do so and sometimes I fire back. Most self-respecting people would. I don't take lightly to personal attacks from ignorant Christian people who think they can dismiss my arguments by doing so. Other times I have more restraint by not responding at all. So to these ignorant skeptics I say: Get off you're high moral horse and become informed.
I’m personally attacked because I promote my book quite a bit. But if the astounding recommendations of it are even half on the mark it’s something to promote, especially when the only atheist writers that most of these ignorant skeptics know about are the so-called famous new atheist writers, like Harris, Dawkins and Hitchens. I’ve explained why I promote it right here.
Some skeptics attack me because I don't allow anonymous comments and/or that I delete some ignorant comments and/or abusive ones. If I allowed anonymous comments then this place would degenerate to an ignorant name-calling free for all, at least, that's what happens every time I try it. We have a comment policy. Read it and abide by it. No respectful intelligent comment will be deleted. I want a reasonable, respectful discussion/debate, or none at all!!!
I’m attacked because some skeptics claim I’m arrogant. That seems to be a bit of sour grapes to me. And arrogance is in the eye of the beholder anyway. Even if so, and I deny this, who gives a shit? Nietzsche was certainly arrogant, and yet he helped change the western world. Deal with my arguments. If they’re good ones that’s all skeptics should be concerned about.
It’s also claimed that I either have a Messiah or a martyr complex. But there's no messiah or martyr complex here with me at all. Just passion; lots of it.
So to these ignorant skeptics I say that if you don't have the same passion nor the same goals, then please don't discourage those of us who do.
-------------
Here then are the positive responses to my post threatening to quit Blogging.
I can handle the ignorant Christians who attack me. That's what ignorant Christians constantly do because they cannot effectively deal with my arguments. Intelligent Christians are a different story. Some of them are using my book in their college classes on apologetics and atheism and even openly expressing the hope that my work will be recognized over the other new atheists, since I am a worthy opponent and since I treat their faith respectfully. I am the only skeptic permitted to post something at Answering Infidels and the first atheist to be asked to present a paper at a regional meeting of the Evangelical Philosophical Society. My work is also being recognized in other prestigious places as well.
But what bothers me the most are the ignorant skeptics who also attack me. I’ve said before that skeptics do not have a corner on rationality, and I still think that’s true. Some skeptics attack me because some Christians attack me! Think of the idiocy of this!? These skeptics conclude I must be as bad as these Christians say I am. But then these skeptics have not read my book or much that I write here on this blog either. And they have no clue what it’s like to be a lightning rod where Christians feel the right, no, the religious duty, to personally attack me (and these attacks are getting more and more desperate). I am personally attacked because I am honest about my personal ugly past. Of course I get upset when they do so and sometimes I fire back. Most self-respecting people would. I don't take lightly to personal attacks from ignorant Christian people who think they can dismiss my arguments by doing so. Other times I have more restraint by not responding at all. So to these ignorant skeptics I say: Get off you're high moral horse and become informed.
I’m personally attacked because I promote my book quite a bit. But if the astounding recommendations of it are even half on the mark it’s something to promote, especially when the only atheist writers that most of these ignorant skeptics know about are the so-called famous new atheist writers, like Harris, Dawkins and Hitchens. I’ve explained why I promote it right here.
Some skeptics attack me because I don't allow anonymous comments and/or that I delete some ignorant comments and/or abusive ones. If I allowed anonymous comments then this place would degenerate to an ignorant name-calling free for all, at least, that's what happens every time I try it. We have a comment policy. Read it and abide by it. No respectful intelligent comment will be deleted. I want a reasonable, respectful discussion/debate, or none at all!!!
I’m attacked because some skeptics claim I’m arrogant. That seems to be a bit of sour grapes to me. And arrogance is in the eye of the beholder anyway. Even if so, and I deny this, who gives a shit? Nietzsche was certainly arrogant, and yet he helped change the western world. Deal with my arguments. If they’re good ones that’s all skeptics should be concerned about.
It’s also claimed that I either have a Messiah or a martyr complex. But there's no messiah or martyr complex here with me at all. Just passion; lots of it.
So to these ignorant skeptics I say that if you don't have the same passion nor the same goals, then please don't discourage those of us who do.
-------------
Here then are the positive responses to my post threatening to quit Blogging.
For what its worth, there really isn't anyone else out there that uses your approach. I think you're good for both sides, and hope you keep it up. Cheers.
david
Hey, did the U.S. quit when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor?
Hell no!
Don't you, either.
There are a lot of us that like what you're doing--we appreciate your style.
Regards,
Jim
This has quickly become one of my favorite sites. We atheists need to be armed with the best information possible when battling the nonsense of christianity. You offer a unique insider viewpoint not available anywhere else. I fully appreciate that you do this voluntarily and I'm very thankful that you do.
I personally don't tend to read the comment sections of most blogs because they are so often trolled by the wretches of society.
MikeB
I'm sure you get a thousand E-mails like this a day, but I thought I'd drop you a line anyway. I'm an avid reader of your blog and I've read your book at least twice over. I can't imagine myself in your shoes where everyone is a critic and every Joe Internet has his own unwarranted opinion on how you could do things better and I can't even begin to empathize with that. So I thought I'd add a short list of things I think you do well:
- Clear lucid writing that a layman like I can understand.
- Outsider Test of Faith
- Guest Posts from Christian Scholars
- Your sense of fairness.
I hope your spirits get lifted soon John! Take care.
Pat.
If you weren't receiving that kind of (frustrating) feedback you would only know that nobody is listening.
I really enjoy reading every post on this blog, but until now I have sat silent behind the veneer of Google Reader.
Remember, for every dicey comment you receive from some halfwit troll you have a handful (or more) of grateful readers who sincerely appreciate not only what you say, but how you say it.
I hope that my words offer some small consolation.
aNDo
What ever you decide is the best for you to do John is what you should do.
Let me just say though this Kiwi far away on the other side of the world is honestly thankful for all you do!, and specially having made this blog available with the knowledge that`s contained within.
However lifes very busy and provides plenty enough stress so most of us would totally understand if you felt this extra stress of this blog was something you didnt need.
That being said im sure i can say that many would miss it. Thats what happens when good things stop.
I agree very much with david !,"For what its worth, there really isn't anyone else out there that uses your approach. I think you're good for both sides, and hope you keep it up. Cheers.."
Gandolf
If you do stop, let this be my chance to thank you. I've only commented a few times, not feeling quite up to the intellectual bar that's usually presented here, but I've enjoyed reading your blog, especially how you include some of the refutations and comments on popular Christian apologetics.
Whatever you decide, thanks. I'm not about to write a personal story, but let it be known that you have helped me.
Best wishes.
Acheron
As a frequenter of this blog I think you do nothing short of a public service, John. I wish all atheists had such commitment.
openlyatheist
If defending and promoting atheism is not what you want to do, that's fine. If you're "losing it" because of critical blog comments, maybe this isn't what you should be doing.
Or maybe it is.
You're a smart man, educated in Christian apologetics, converted by the evidence (and personal experience, of course), honest enough to tell your story, and hard-working enough to devote a lot of energy to your case even though there's no money in it. You're a rare gem, John, and I think you have a lot to offer.
I take criticism from both sides, but I've only been at this for a few months. I can imagine after a while it would get overwhelming. I tend to abstract it all and see arguments doing battle - to which I am only a spectator. Maybe that helps. But it's hard to do that when someone makes specific attacks on you.
John, I hope you keep up the good work!
Luke
You're a bastion of reason in a world dominated by fairy tales. don't give up, your message needs to continue to reach and influence others in a way only you can manage.
i'm not sure you realize how valuable, relevant, and appreciated your work has become to many.
for what it's worth, keep it up.
Brenden
I've got to say that I really enjoy this blog and I like the approach you take in the matter. This is an informative blog because of the approach you take, there's no need for you to be another Dan Barker or Richard Dawkins - it's odd that anyone should want you to be that. The more voices the better, especially when there's more opinion and more choice.
Kel
Skeptics are attacking you? I don't know why, but they should be more supportive. I enjoy this blog.
Oliver
Hey John, hang in there, you are doing good work. Remember: no good deed goes unpunished.
:)
aprice2704
Just wanted to take a minute to say :
Do. Not. Quit.
Please?
Thanks,
a former fundamentalist evangelical (due in no small part to your book).
Daniel
I just want to say thank you for your website, your books, and your interviews. Rather by design or accident, you’re on the front lines of a difficult and near impossible battle. In my profession, I know what it’s like to have my words in print or presentations made to the public, where every word is analyzed to levels you never thought possible. And I know the feeling of wanting to tell others to stand up, make their own comments and put their position on the public line to face the scrutiny, if not the projectiles. But for every one who throws a stone, there are many, many more who are humbled and deeply appreciative for your work and respectful of your journey.
As my journey takes me to a place I never imagined I would find myself, your work is making my trip possible, more intellectually honest, and with the sense that I can take the small steps because of your giant ones. I sincerely thank you.
Lance
Please don't give in just because some morons can't understand what you're trying to do here. Your well written and insightful articles are well repected by all my friends and we would be devastated if you were to stop blogging. Keep up the good work man, your contributions to the debate are priceless.For people who think what I do is helpful I'd really appreciate some financial help in these very hard economical times. To do so click here to learn more, and thanks in advance for anything you can do.
Mike
April 12, 2009
Did God Cause This To Happen?
I am an atheist and I had no intentions of celebrating Easter Sunday. However, since I had some work around the home place to do such as trenching in a water line, I rented a trenching machine from the local equipment rental on Saturday and decide to use Easter morning to plow the water pipe in.
As it happened, I started the water line run next to my chain link gate when the digger caught a tree root throwing the digger into the fence tearing down the gate.
While I was removing the digger from the fence, a neighbor stopped by on his way home form church and told me that God does not approve of working on the Lord’s Day (especially Easter) and God jammed the digger into the fence to stop me.
I let him express his view, but told him I didn’t agree with him or Christianity and after a few short exchanges, he left. I would have told him a lot more, but, hey, he’s my neighbor. (I was only stopped long enough to remove the fence from the digger and then finished the running the water line.)
So what do you think?
It is my honest conviction that Christianity functions by correctly defining random events to re-enforce a positive supernatural functioning view of God. (I’m convinced my neighbor saw an opportunity to re-enforce his view of God when he came upon me this Easter Sunday.)
Thus, if an event is interpreted correctly, it builds up or re-enforces a believers view that God is in control and does indeed functions in the world. However, if a wrong interpretation is applied to an event, it hurts the faith of the believer. To many of these bad or poor interpretations can be detrimental to one’s Christian faith(Thus the main function of the Sunday morning sermon).
I find most Christian believers have a spiritual tool box full of just the right interpretations to keep God on his throne and in a positive spotlight. Some of which are:
A. God knows the total picture.
B. God lets things happen to teach people a lesson.
C. God is in control, but wants us to use our Free Will.
D. Or, if all else fails: Satan causes things to hurt people in his war against God.
As it happened, I started the water line run next to my chain link gate when the digger caught a tree root throwing the digger into the fence tearing down the gate.
While I was removing the digger from the fence, a neighbor stopped by on his way home form church and told me that God does not approve of working on the Lord’s Day (especially Easter) and God jammed the digger into the fence to stop me.
I let him express his view, but told him I didn’t agree with him or Christianity and after a few short exchanges, he left. I would have told him a lot more, but, hey, he’s my neighbor. (I was only stopped long enough to remove the fence from the digger and then finished the running the water line.)
So what do you think?
It is my honest conviction that Christianity functions by correctly defining random events to re-enforce a positive supernatural functioning view of God. (I’m convinced my neighbor saw an opportunity to re-enforce his view of God when he came upon me this Easter Sunday.)
Thus, if an event is interpreted correctly, it builds up or re-enforces a believers view that God is in control and does indeed functions in the world. However, if a wrong interpretation is applied to an event, it hurts the faith of the believer. To many of these bad or poor interpretations can be detrimental to one’s Christian faith(Thus the main function of the Sunday morning sermon).
I find most Christian believers have a spiritual tool box full of just the right interpretations to keep God on his throne and in a positive spotlight. Some of which are:
A. God knows the total picture.
B. God lets things happen to teach people a lesson.
C. God is in control, but wants us to use our Free Will.
D. Or, if all else fails: Satan causes things to hurt people in his war against God.
Death and Life on Easter
It’s Easter; I have memories of getting up early year after year as a child to go to Easter Sunrise Service. We gathered somewhere outdoors, simulating the women and disciples who went to Jesus’ tomb in the early morning on the day of his resurrection. We sang certain hymns that were only for Easter – “Christ the Lord is ris’n today, Ha-a-a-a-He -lelujah,” “He lives! He lives! Christ Jesus lives today. He walks with me and talks with me, along life’s narrow way!” I liked it – the brisk early morning, the feeling of life and hope, the joy of the music. Unlike a lot of other church experiences, it was a day of celebration. And what a profound message – death has been conquered! Just put your faith in Christ.
And now? It’s been many years and I’m no longer a Christian. I do not believe I will continue after I die. In my work as a psychologist, I work with people coming out of religion. There are many issues to deal with, and top or the list for many is this question of death and hellfire. The indoctrination is deep and insidious, a form of child abuse in my opinion. Even without hell, the idea of nonexistence (if that is the direction of change in belief), is sometimes a bitter pill to swallow. Fundamentalist Christianity downgrades a human lifetime compared to eternity and denigrates the whole world as fallen. How many times were we told to focus on where we will be in the hereafter? The result is fear, because no one is certain, and also neglect of the life that we have now.
For those of you who are anxious today and struggle with the idea of death, I can tell you that it is possible to stop fearing damnation. I certainly have and many other former believers have too. It is a phobia indoctrination that serves the religion. If you think you should believe “just in case,” think about what you would be missing. Essentially, your life. The greatest challenge for a human is to know about death, and live fully in the face of it. Other animals can more easily “be here now,” and we can learn from them. However, we have more awareness and it is our existential dilemma to make peace with death.
In a way, we do continue on. Our molecules get rearranged and become other things; nothing is lost, not one atom. All matter and energy in the universe is conserved, according to physics. I find it beautiful to walk in a forest and see a fallen tree where it is decomposing, nourishing the earth, and causing new life to spring up. And if you worry about your soul, ask yourself, “Where were “you” before you were born?” Is that so frightening?
No, we are better off paying attention to the present. This life is limited but so are a lot of things. The Christian attitude of denigrating life because it is short makes no sense. Is a wonderful meal any less wonderful because it ends? When you are listening to incredible music, are you upset because you know the piece will finish? Hopefully not, and we can extend that lesson to life itself. People who have a brush with death often learn to appreciate life in a special way. Our time on this earth is precious. Perhaps when we cherish our days, honor what is possible, love our fellow humans as best we can, and look at the world with awe and wonder, we can achieve a spirituality of a different kind. Of our own free will, we can commit acts of random kindness and dance for no reason at all. Death be damned.
For the recovering fundamentalist, reclaiming intuition and learning to trust one’s inner wisdom is an exciting process. We are not empty, weak, incapable, or bad. We are all interconnected and a part of our amazing universe. Even Einstein said thinking we are individuals is an illusion.
One day, when I was a little discouraged, I wrote to myself from the wise part of me (yes, we are all multiples), and then wondered about that voice. This is what emerged, and it applies to all of us, so I hope you find a bit of inspiration too. I asked where the encouragement was coming from:
“This is from the force that makes the new shoot grow between concrete slabs. This is from the symmetry of fractals. This is from the incomprehensible distance of space, this is from the sound waves that blend and beat and tell you to dance, this is from the little child that looks at you clearly with no fear and says hi, this is from the unadulterated force of the sea under you and all around you when you swim in the ocean, the sea that takes no prisoners when the tide comes in, the sea that spawned life, and the same sea that sends a wave spreading up the sand to your bare feet, with rhythmic purring caress, bringing you the gems that make you smile - the perfect tiny shell, the fragment of blue glass that you tuck in your pocket.
“This is from the cosmic red afterglow of the big bang. This is from all eleven dimensions, from all the things you don't understand and like that you don't understand. This is from the parallel universes that come with the eleven dimensions, penetrating the membrane. This is from the aquifer beneath all of you, the source feeding flashes of human greatness. This is from the massive network of fungus, hidden from view under seemingly separate plants. This is from the power behind the form, the elusive explanation, the delectable mystery. I only have one thing to say to you right now - and that is REMEMBER ME. You are not alone. You always have a reason to go on. and there is no choice; you will go on anyway. Ineffable and inexorable, both. The tide is coming in again today; the ocean has not been deciding.”
Happy Spring.
Marlene Winell
marlenewinell.net
mwinell@gmail.com
Recovery retreats May 1-3, June 5-7
And now? It’s been many years and I’m no longer a Christian. I do not believe I will continue after I die. In my work as a psychologist, I work with people coming out of religion. There are many issues to deal with, and top or the list for many is this question of death and hellfire. The indoctrination is deep and insidious, a form of child abuse in my opinion. Even without hell, the idea of nonexistence (if that is the direction of change in belief), is sometimes a bitter pill to swallow. Fundamentalist Christianity downgrades a human lifetime compared to eternity and denigrates the whole world as fallen. How many times were we told to focus on where we will be in the hereafter? The result is fear, because no one is certain, and also neglect of the life that we have now.
For those of you who are anxious today and struggle with the idea of death, I can tell you that it is possible to stop fearing damnation. I certainly have and many other former believers have too. It is a phobia indoctrination that serves the religion. If you think you should believe “just in case,” think about what you would be missing. Essentially, your life. The greatest challenge for a human is to know about death, and live fully in the face of it. Other animals can more easily “be here now,” and we can learn from them. However, we have more awareness and it is our existential dilemma to make peace with death.
In a way, we do continue on. Our molecules get rearranged and become other things; nothing is lost, not one atom. All matter and energy in the universe is conserved, according to physics. I find it beautiful to walk in a forest and see a fallen tree where it is decomposing, nourishing the earth, and causing new life to spring up. And if you worry about your soul, ask yourself, “Where were “you” before you were born?” Is that so frightening?
No, we are better off paying attention to the present. This life is limited but so are a lot of things. The Christian attitude of denigrating life because it is short makes no sense. Is a wonderful meal any less wonderful because it ends? When you are listening to incredible music, are you upset because you know the piece will finish? Hopefully not, and we can extend that lesson to life itself. People who have a brush with death often learn to appreciate life in a special way. Our time on this earth is precious. Perhaps when we cherish our days, honor what is possible, love our fellow humans as best we can, and look at the world with awe and wonder, we can achieve a spirituality of a different kind. Of our own free will, we can commit acts of random kindness and dance for no reason at all. Death be damned.
For the recovering fundamentalist, reclaiming intuition and learning to trust one’s inner wisdom is an exciting process. We are not empty, weak, incapable, or bad. We are all interconnected and a part of our amazing universe. Even Einstein said thinking we are individuals is an illusion.
One day, when I was a little discouraged, I wrote to myself from the wise part of me (yes, we are all multiples), and then wondered about that voice. This is what emerged, and it applies to all of us, so I hope you find a bit of inspiration too. I asked where the encouragement was coming from:
“This is from the force that makes the new shoot grow between concrete slabs. This is from the symmetry of fractals. This is from the incomprehensible distance of space, this is from the sound waves that blend and beat and tell you to dance, this is from the little child that looks at you clearly with no fear and says hi, this is from the unadulterated force of the sea under you and all around you when you swim in the ocean, the sea that takes no prisoners when the tide comes in, the sea that spawned life, and the same sea that sends a wave spreading up the sand to your bare feet, with rhythmic purring caress, bringing you the gems that make you smile - the perfect tiny shell, the fragment of blue glass that you tuck in your pocket.
“This is from the cosmic red afterglow of the big bang. This is from all eleven dimensions, from all the things you don't understand and like that you don't understand. This is from the parallel universes that come with the eleven dimensions, penetrating the membrane. This is from the aquifer beneath all of you, the source feeding flashes of human greatness. This is from the massive network of fungus, hidden from view under seemingly separate plants. This is from the power behind the form, the elusive explanation, the delectable mystery. I only have one thing to say to you right now - and that is REMEMBER ME. You are not alone. You always have a reason to go on. and there is no choice; you will go on anyway. Ineffable and inexorable, both. The tide is coming in again today; the ocean has not been deciding.”
Happy Spring.
Marlene Winell
marlenewinell.net
mwinell@gmail.com
Recovery retreats May 1-3, June 5-7
April 11, 2009
Easter Sunrise Blasphemy
It's Easter today and that means countless Christians will be at their respective houses of worship praising and thanking the god that made them for sending Jesus Christ to die on the cross for their sins and for his being raised from the grave. You may or may not be planning to attend one of these pagan put-ons known as Easter sunrise services, or like me, you may actually despise them. Either way, I want you to hear why I feel the way I do.
I hate Easter. About the only thing I love around this time of year are those discounted chocolates in pretty-colored packages that are on sale in the stores. But that's it. I hate everything else about it. The cool weather leaves and the warmer weather comes. What's to like?
I hate that it's a holi-(read “holy”)-day. To me as an atheist, this is a red flag reminder that society is still not above having holy days—days with vile histories that have been exalted by blood god worshippers through the centuries who possess the arrogance to think that the world would end without their putrid, bloody offerings. It’s sick, I tell you!
Add to that, Easter time means that the religious nuts can't help but wear their nuttiness on their sleeves with their nauseating talk of alters and blood and redemption and how worthless and worthy of burning we humans are. It's creepy stuff!
Actually, I agree with Christians that the human race is worthy of burning, but for different reasons. The human race may be a pitiable race that should be reduced – along with our planet – to a burned-out cinder, but that’s because we are brutal and cruel and egotistical enough animals to not know when to shut up about how awesome we are as a race and how great our planet is, not because our original parents offended one of the blood gods.
Easter means I have to see those big, “in your face” banners that spread across intersections and streets that advertise these sacred bunny events, and that means more people are out and about shopping. But the restaurants I love will be closed! That frustrates the hell out of me (or hell into me, depending on how you look at it.) Sometimes, I swear up and down that this is how Jeebus is getting back at me for defecting!
And am I the only one who finds it odd that Jesus Christ's religion condemns most sex and all pornography and yet embraces symbolism with a holiday that identifies with worship of an ancient fertility goddess? Worshippers of Diana used to get together at the temple and get naked and fornicate in the name of God like...rabbits!
That settles it. God is a hypocrite, probably with his own stash of porn. Or maybe he just watched humans have sex in olden times, but has since been trying to beat his addiction with the help of Christ. Could be.
Then there are the radio broadcasts and telecasts of emotional preachers who have to remind everyone with emphatic, high-pitched voices that a dead guy came to life on a certain day and how that event long ago will someday help us. But it hasn't helped us yet. None of our friends and loved ones and family who died in war or of cancer or Legionary’s Disease have come out of the ground yet. They're still there, but that shouldn't surprise us. Religions are big on making big claims, including impossibly big claims like the dead being raised to life.
The Bible has made this claim before. Just look. Matthew 27:52, “And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose.” Did this really happen? If it did, wouldn't we have evidence for it? I rest my case. Religion is bogus. Christianity is bogus.
But what's the real import of this holiday? Like Christmas, it's not really spiritual. It never was. Spiritual is a man or a woman who tells the truth even though doing otherwise would not result in being caught. No religion can claim a monopoly on virtues. Holidays are about feeling satisfied, about gluttony, about materialism. They are also about piety—Saturnalia style. It gets back to man being happy. It's hedonism, but with a mask on. What a shame!
All this oohing and ahhing to a ghost, all these churches filled with believers, all these prayers and colored baskets of eggs and pretty banners and billboards that say “He is risen” won't move God to rid the world of a single evil. It won't stop lunatics from shooting up malls or post offices. It won't stop one child from dying of starvation or dear sweet Aunt Olga from dying of breast cancer. And all the church-sponsored Easter egg hunts in the world won't cause God to bless one infertile churchgoing couple who can't have children of their own, and it won’t stop unfit parents from doing the naughty and having more kids they can’t take care of.
I'm going to be sleeping in this Easter like I have for the last seven. Together with my cozy bed and the internet, I'll make it. These big bags of chocolates will help!
(JH)
I hate Easter. About the only thing I love around this time of year are those discounted chocolates in pretty-colored packages that are on sale in the stores. But that's it. I hate everything else about it. The cool weather leaves and the warmer weather comes. What's to like?
I hate that it's a holi-(read “holy”)-day. To me as an atheist, this is a red flag reminder that society is still not above having holy days—days with vile histories that have been exalted by blood god worshippers through the centuries who possess the arrogance to think that the world would end without their putrid, bloody offerings. It’s sick, I tell you!
Add to that, Easter time means that the religious nuts can't help but wear their nuttiness on their sleeves with their nauseating talk of alters and blood and redemption and how worthless and worthy of burning we humans are. It's creepy stuff!
Actually, I agree with Christians that the human race is worthy of burning, but for different reasons. The human race may be a pitiable race that should be reduced – along with our planet – to a burned-out cinder, but that’s because we are brutal and cruel and egotistical enough animals to not know when to shut up about how awesome we are as a race and how great our planet is, not because our original parents offended one of the blood gods.
Easter means I have to see those big, “in your face” banners that spread across intersections and streets that advertise these sacred bunny events, and that means more people are out and about shopping. But the restaurants I love will be closed! That frustrates the hell out of me (or hell into me, depending on how you look at it.) Sometimes, I swear up and down that this is how Jeebus is getting back at me for defecting!
And am I the only one who finds it odd that Jesus Christ's religion condemns most sex and all pornography and yet embraces symbolism with a holiday that identifies with worship of an ancient fertility goddess? Worshippers of Diana used to get together at the temple and get naked and fornicate in the name of God like...rabbits!
That settles it. God is a hypocrite, probably with his own stash of porn. Or maybe he just watched humans have sex in olden times, but has since been trying to beat his addiction with the help of Christ. Could be.
Then there are the radio broadcasts and telecasts of emotional preachers who have to remind everyone with emphatic, high-pitched voices that a dead guy came to life on a certain day and how that event long ago will someday help us. But it hasn't helped us yet. None of our friends and loved ones and family who died in war or of cancer or Legionary’s Disease have come out of the ground yet. They're still there, but that shouldn't surprise us. Religions are big on making big claims, including impossibly big claims like the dead being raised to life.
The Bible has made this claim before. Just look. Matthew 27:52, “And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose.” Did this really happen? If it did, wouldn't we have evidence for it? I rest my case. Religion is bogus. Christianity is bogus.
But what's the real import of this holiday? Like Christmas, it's not really spiritual. It never was. Spiritual is a man or a woman who tells the truth even though doing otherwise would not result in being caught. No religion can claim a monopoly on virtues. Holidays are about feeling satisfied, about gluttony, about materialism. They are also about piety—Saturnalia style. It gets back to man being happy. It's hedonism, but with a mask on. What a shame!
All this oohing and ahhing to a ghost, all these churches filled with believers, all these prayers and colored baskets of eggs and pretty banners and billboards that say “He is risen” won't move God to rid the world of a single evil. It won't stop lunatics from shooting up malls or post offices. It won't stop one child from dying of starvation or dear sweet Aunt Olga from dying of breast cancer. And all the church-sponsored Easter egg hunts in the world won't cause God to bless one infertile churchgoing couple who can't have children of their own, and it won’t stop unfit parents from doing the naughty and having more kids they can’t take care of.
I'm going to be sleeping in this Easter like I have for the last seven. Together with my cozy bed and the internet, I'll make it. These big bags of chocolates will help!
(JH)
As You Celebrate The Horror of Easter
-=A Human Sacrifice=-
and flaunt your little dead men on a stick, check your facts, most things that Easter depends on don't cross-check. [edited 4/15/2009. added links]
- Biblical scripture is no more accurate than other writings that cover the same period of time. Not what you'd expect from the revealed word of God.
- The story of passover, Jesus, and a dying and rising god all are of a type of theme of folklore that pervaded the Near East during that period of time.
- Moses, existence hasn't been verified yet. He may never have existed, and may be a version of Sargon of Akkad. If he didn't exist, then all the things that depend on him in the Bible need to have their accuracy and reliability re-assessed.
- The exodus hasn't been verified yet, but it is clear that if it did happen, it didn't happen as it is described in the Bible.
- The author of Genesis or authors of Genesis cannot be identified, therefore neither can their credentials or if they were in a position to know. Therefore the information is of low quality.
- Adam obviously never existed, and if he did the scripture is so inaccurate so as to make the story more dubious than not. There was never a time when he and Eve would have been alone, and his first son went out and founded a town or a city. Towns and Cities started popping up after 10,000 BC.
- Jesus never clearly stated he was God. The phrase used to support the claim of Jesus as God are of the type that are used by Jews to express their belief that God lives in all of us and we influence the world through him by our actions that he approves of.
- The Jews never said he was the Messiah, he never qualified. The Messiah was supposed to be a politician and engineer. Jesus wasn't even close to being an engineer, if he was he could have showed them how to make the world a better place by speeding up the invention of quite a few things, likewise if he were God.
- The principle that all of us have done things so egregious to warrant the death penalty is itself egregious. Name one thing that you have done that you should be put to death for.
- The principle that someone else can suffer the death penalty for us to resolve the problem is similarly egregious. Should anyone be punished not to mention given the death penalty for things that you do? Is the death penalty Just?
- The principle that a Sacrifice can appease a God has been shown to be flawed because all the other Gods that required a sacrifice have been shown to be folklore. What makes Yahweh any different?
- The principle that a Human Sacrifice can appease a God has been shown to be flawed because all the other Gods that required a Human Sacrifice have been shown to be folklore. Are you okay with the Human Sacrifice to absolve you of Sin?
- The principle that a perfect God WANTS a sacrifice is highly doubtful. You can't say he's perfect if he's not in a perfect state, and if wants something then he's missing something.
- If we are flawed, God is responsible because he made us this way.
- It is possible to be compelled to unacceptable behavior by biological factors, and unacceptable behavior, is in the eye of the beholder, even if we all agree that killing children is bad. God ordered children to be ripped from their mothers wombs and William Lane Craig defended it in one of his forums if you can believe that.
- The authors of the Gospels cannot be identified, therefore neither can their credentials or if they were in a position to know. Therefore the information is of low quality.
- The Gospels themselves don't agree, making them unreliable by definition of criteria that determines if information is unreliable.
- The Gospels depend on one of the most unreliable forms of evidence, Eye Witness Testimony.
- Theology behind Easter depends on Paul. He set it up. But he wasn't in a position to know, because he wasn't there at the beginning. The story of his conversion is unreliable because there are two slightly different versions of it and if you go to bible gateway.com and look up both of them, using multiple Bible versions and analyze them, you can have even more versions depending on which translation they used. I know because I've done it to prepare for a forthcoming article.
- Paul, like Jesus referenced a non-existent Adam, therefore the source of the information in both cases was not divine, but from scripture, which is of demonstrably low quality because the authors, the authors credentials and the authors position to know are all unverifiable.
- Its simple, since there was no Adam, and Jesus didn't qualify to be the Messiah, and Jesus was not God because he referenced Adam which demonstrates that he had no supernatural knowledge, then he was just one of the people that got caught for rabble rousing around the passover and put on the cross for six hours. The Koran says he didn't die, and the fact that there is no body, and the fact that many people survived crucifixion, especially for such a short period of time supports that theory
Now please get rid of all those disgusting dead men on a stick that are displayed everywhere and hanging around your necks.
FURTHER READING
A LIST OF PREMISES AS ARTICLES REFUTING GENESIS 1-11 AND ROMANS 5 SO FAR
P1. The Interconnectedness of The Ancients - Demonstrates the robust ancient civilizations at the time and that Canaan, Israel and Judah were central to them. Discusses trade routes, seafaring, the link between whales and the Leviathans of Mythology and how long it would take to get from one civilization to another by sea.
P2. Genesis 1:1-25 Is An Amalgam of Near Eastern Creation Myths. Demonstrates the prior existence of key elements of the story of the creation of the Universe that appears in Genesis.
P3.Genesis 1:26-1:27, Creation of Humans in Near Eastern Myths And The Paleolithic Era. Demonstrates that the physical evidence contradicts the story of the making of the first humans in Genesis.
P4.GENESIS 1:28-2:4a, Be Fruitful And Multiply, Founder Effect and Genetic Diversity. This Article shows that even if the physical evidence didn't refute the special creation of the first humans, Adam and Eve, in Genesis 1:27, the problem of Genetic Diversity known as the "Founder Effect" would eventually lead to crippling genetic mutations or extinction.
P5.Genesis 2:4b-20 Man Made From Earth Is Folklore, Conflated River Elements and the Myth of Adapa. This Article shows that the concept of man made from earth spans cultures and geographical boundaries, the rivers are confused between geographical areas and has many elements from pre-existing Near Eastern Myths such as "The Myth of Adapa.
P6. Genesis 2:21-25: Woman From Rib and Mother Goddesses of Near Eastern Myths. This Article shows that in the second creation story in genesis the concept of woman made from bone, earth and antler pre-existed the writing of Genesis, spanned cultures and geographical boundaries and that Eve shares aspects of Goddesses in Ancient Near Eastern Mythology.
and flaunt your little dead men on a stick, check your facts, most things that Easter depends on don't cross-check. [edited 4/15/2009. added links]
- Biblical scripture is no more accurate than other writings that cover the same period of time. Not what you'd expect from the revealed word of God.
- The story of passover, Jesus, and a dying and rising god all are of a type of theme of folklore that pervaded the Near East during that period of time.
- Moses, existence hasn't been verified yet. He may never have existed, and may be a version of Sargon of Akkad. If he didn't exist, then all the things that depend on him in the Bible need to have their accuracy and reliability re-assessed.
- The exodus hasn't been verified yet, but it is clear that if it did happen, it didn't happen as it is described in the Bible.
- The author of Genesis or authors of Genesis cannot be identified, therefore neither can their credentials or if they were in a position to know. Therefore the information is of low quality.
- Adam obviously never existed, and if he did the scripture is so inaccurate so as to make the story more dubious than not. There was never a time when he and Eve would have been alone, and his first son went out and founded a town or a city. Towns and Cities started popping up after 10,000 BC.
- Jesus never clearly stated he was God. The phrase used to support the claim of Jesus as God are of the type that are used by Jews to express their belief that God lives in all of us and we influence the world through him by our actions that he approves of.
- The Jews never said he was the Messiah, he never qualified. The Messiah was supposed to be a politician and engineer. Jesus wasn't even close to being an engineer, if he was he could have showed them how to make the world a better place by speeding up the invention of quite a few things, likewise if he were God.
- The principle that all of us have done things so egregious to warrant the death penalty is itself egregious. Name one thing that you have done that you should be put to death for.
- The principle that someone else can suffer the death penalty for us to resolve the problem is similarly egregious. Should anyone be punished not to mention given the death penalty for things that you do? Is the death penalty Just?
- The principle that a Sacrifice can appease a God has been shown to be flawed because all the other Gods that required a sacrifice have been shown to be folklore. What makes Yahweh any different?
- The principle that a Human Sacrifice can appease a God has been shown to be flawed because all the other Gods that required a Human Sacrifice have been shown to be folklore. Are you okay with the Human Sacrifice to absolve you of Sin?
- The principle that a perfect God WANTS a sacrifice is highly doubtful. You can't say he's perfect if he's not in a perfect state, and if wants something then he's missing something.
- If we are flawed, God is responsible because he made us this way.
- It is possible to be compelled to unacceptable behavior by biological factors, and unacceptable behavior, is in the eye of the beholder, even if we all agree that killing children is bad. God ordered children to be ripped from their mothers wombs and William Lane Craig defended it in one of his forums if you can believe that.
- The authors of the Gospels cannot be identified, therefore neither can their credentials or if they were in a position to know. Therefore the information is of low quality.
- The Gospels themselves don't agree, making them unreliable by definition of criteria that determines if information is unreliable.
- The Gospels depend on one of the most unreliable forms of evidence, Eye Witness Testimony.
- Theology behind Easter depends on Paul. He set it up. But he wasn't in a position to know, because he wasn't there at the beginning. The story of his conversion is unreliable because there are two slightly different versions of it and if you go to bible gateway.com and look up both of them, using multiple Bible versions and analyze them, you can have even more versions depending on which translation they used. I know because I've done it to prepare for a forthcoming article.
- Paul, like Jesus referenced a non-existent Adam, therefore the source of the information in both cases was not divine, but from scripture, which is of demonstrably low quality because the authors, the authors credentials and the authors position to know are all unverifiable.
- Its simple, since there was no Adam, and Jesus didn't qualify to be the Messiah, and Jesus was not God because he referenced Adam which demonstrates that he had no supernatural knowledge, then he was just one of the people that got caught for rabble rousing around the passover and put on the cross for six hours. The Koran says he didn't die, and the fact that there is no body, and the fact that many people survived crucifixion, especially for such a short period of time supports that theory
Now please get rid of all those disgusting dead men on a stick that are displayed everywhere and hanging around your necks.
FURTHER READING
A LIST OF PREMISES AS ARTICLES REFUTING GENESIS 1-11 AND ROMANS 5 SO FAR
P1. The Interconnectedness of The Ancients - Demonstrates the robust ancient civilizations at the time and that Canaan, Israel and Judah were central to them. Discusses trade routes, seafaring, the link between whales and the Leviathans of Mythology and how long it would take to get from one civilization to another by sea.
P2. Genesis 1:1-25 Is An Amalgam of Near Eastern Creation Myths. Demonstrates the prior existence of key elements of the story of the creation of the Universe that appears in Genesis.
P3.Genesis 1:26-1:27, Creation of Humans in Near Eastern Myths And The Paleolithic Era. Demonstrates that the physical evidence contradicts the story of the making of the first humans in Genesis.
P4.GENESIS 1:28-2:4a, Be Fruitful And Multiply, Founder Effect and Genetic Diversity. This Article shows that even if the physical evidence didn't refute the special creation of the first humans, Adam and Eve, in Genesis 1:27, the problem of Genetic Diversity known as the "Founder Effect" would eventually lead to crippling genetic mutations or extinction.
P5.Genesis 2:4b-20 Man Made From Earth Is Folklore, Conflated River Elements and the Myth of Adapa. This Article shows that the concept of man made from earth spans cultures and geographical boundaries, the rivers are confused between geographical areas and has many elements from pre-existing Near Eastern Myths such as "The Myth of Adapa.
P6. Genesis 2:21-25: Woman From Rib and Mother Goddesses of Near Eastern Myths. This Article shows that in the second creation story in genesis the concept of woman made from bone, earth and antler pre-existed the writing of Genesis, spanned cultures and geographical boundaries and that Eve shares aspects of Goddesses in Ancient Near Eastern Mythology.
April 10, 2009
Faith in the Illogical: The Evolution of a Relative God and Its Theology
The major problem with Christian theology is that it is so confusing and contradictory from what we learn and experience in everyday reality of life, that one is forced to either simply give up or rely on faith in order to follow it.
Just an objective casual reading of the English Bible reveals an evolving god based in a limited cultic setting of Canaan who is bound in a contract called a “covenant” to a small group of people know as the Hebrews. This a covenantal contract that binds all these local Hebrew is a standard ancient Near Eastern type of covenant that binds all gods of the neighboring areas to their chosen Semitic people also.
But one thing is clear; as Yahweh grows, so must the theology that defines him. This is easily seen in the J and E accounts of Genesis as later edited by P in order to keep God relevant and up to date.
Plus, this ancient god has a number of different names in Hebrew, but the ancient use of Yahweh (J) and God (E) are his major titles especially in the limited god of Genesis 3 who walks, talks and has limited knowledge (God has to ask Adam and Eve what happened (Gen. 3) and latter, Cain where Able is? (Gen. 4).
What we have is the old classic question: Which came first: The Chicken or the Egg? Or, as applied here: Which came first: God or Theology? For the objective mind, logic shows that as theology advances or changed, the concept of God also advances and changes. What theology shows is that humans learn by their past religious mistakes and put out new editions of God.
Even if one does not follow the editing of the Hebrew text into J,E,P,D and their subtexts, one is soon faced with the fact that the god of the Patriarchs is not the same God found in Second Isaiah (40 - 66), nor the God to the nations as preached by the Later Prophets. When theology moves on; so must Yahweh.
It is when we get to the New Testament with its Greek language pregnant with Greek philosophical terms and concepts that the old god Yahweh has now completely faded into an ancient past and a new revised theology emerges from the Hebrew Bible as translated into the Septuagint (LXX) which is itself quoted in the so called New Covenant / Testament. Now the limited Yahweh ceases to exists and what is left metamorphose into the Classical Greek term Theos or what know as “God” universal.
To shorten this post and stimulate discussion, I would like to engage the human mind in some basic fundamentals of logic with the underlying question focused on how Christians live their daily lives on one level of logic, which could cost them their lives if not followed closely, only to accept the illogics of evolved theology which one must force one’s brain accept illogically by faith grown denial just to worship this concept call “God“.
So here are some questions about this God at Passover (Easter) drawn from my everyday logic: (Take a shot at one or more)
A. If Jesus knowingly went up to Jerusalem at Passover to die, did Jesus commit suicide? If not, why not? Can a human suicide be an acceptable sacrifice?
B. If Jesus and God are ONE (Incarnation), did God commit suicide with Jesus or did the doctrine of the Incarnation cease at the time of the crucifixion as believed by some ancient Christian heresies? (In other words, did God “jump ship” and, if so, when?)
C. If it grieved God to have to give up his only begotten son, Jesus; how did God get himself into this “Catch 22” situation? If he can’t get out of his own theological sin trap, is the old local Hebrew god Yahweh (who is now become the universal God in the New Testament (and especially in Paul)) subordinate to another even higher GOD to whom this God must take his marching orders from?
D. Can Christian theology finally become so contradictory and illogical that it will be rejected (as atheists do now) or will it require more and more faith just to counter the increasing illogics of its theology as our own tangible world becomes more logical? Will the only answer to the illogics of Christian Theology be the rapidly increasing growth of Christian sects and cults (over 20,000 now) where all are trying to make logical sense out of the all this illogical theology (where most are claiming to have been given the real truth as a way to proselytizes converts)?
E. In short, will the evolution of God and theology ever stop?
Just an objective casual reading of the English Bible reveals an evolving god based in a limited cultic setting of Canaan who is bound in a contract called a “covenant” to a small group of people know as the Hebrews. This a covenantal contract that binds all these local Hebrew is a standard ancient Near Eastern type of covenant that binds all gods of the neighboring areas to their chosen Semitic people also.
But one thing is clear; as Yahweh grows, so must the theology that defines him. This is easily seen in the J and E accounts of Genesis as later edited by P in order to keep God relevant and up to date.
Plus, this ancient god has a number of different names in Hebrew, but the ancient use of Yahweh (J) and God (E) are his major titles especially in the limited god of Genesis 3 who walks, talks and has limited knowledge (God has to ask Adam and Eve what happened (Gen. 3) and latter, Cain where Able is? (Gen. 4).
What we have is the old classic question: Which came first: The Chicken or the Egg? Or, as applied here: Which came first: God or Theology? For the objective mind, logic shows that as theology advances or changed, the concept of God also advances and changes. What theology shows is that humans learn by their past religious mistakes and put out new editions of God.
Even if one does not follow the editing of the Hebrew text into J,E,P,D and their subtexts, one is soon faced with the fact that the god of the Patriarchs is not the same God found in Second Isaiah (40 - 66), nor the God to the nations as preached by the Later Prophets. When theology moves on; so must Yahweh.
It is when we get to the New Testament with its Greek language pregnant with Greek philosophical terms and concepts that the old god Yahweh has now completely faded into an ancient past and a new revised theology emerges from the Hebrew Bible as translated into the Septuagint (LXX) which is itself quoted in the so called New Covenant / Testament. Now the limited Yahweh ceases to exists and what is left metamorphose into the Classical Greek term Theos or what know as “God” universal.
To shorten this post and stimulate discussion, I would like to engage the human mind in some basic fundamentals of logic with the underlying question focused on how Christians live their daily lives on one level of logic, which could cost them their lives if not followed closely, only to accept the illogics of evolved theology which one must force one’s brain accept illogically by faith grown denial just to worship this concept call “God“.
So here are some questions about this God at Passover (Easter) drawn from my everyday logic: (Take a shot at one or more)
A. If Jesus knowingly went up to Jerusalem at Passover to die, did Jesus commit suicide? If not, why not? Can a human suicide be an acceptable sacrifice?
B. If Jesus and God are ONE (Incarnation), did God commit suicide with Jesus or did the doctrine of the Incarnation cease at the time of the crucifixion as believed by some ancient Christian heresies? (In other words, did God “jump ship” and, if so, when?)
C. If it grieved God to have to give up his only begotten son, Jesus; how did God get himself into this “Catch 22” situation? If he can’t get out of his own theological sin trap, is the old local Hebrew god Yahweh (who is now become the universal God in the New Testament (and especially in Paul)) subordinate to another even higher GOD to whom this God must take his marching orders from?
D. Can Christian theology finally become so contradictory and illogical that it will be rejected (as atheists do now) or will it require more and more faith just to counter the increasing illogics of its theology as our own tangible world becomes more logical? Will the only answer to the illogics of Christian Theology be the rapidly increasing growth of Christian sects and cults (over 20,000 now) where all are trying to make logical sense out of the all this illogical theology (where most are claiming to have been given the real truth as a way to proselytizes converts)?
E. In short, will the evolution of God and theology ever stop?
I Challenge YOU!
Since I personally like to be challenged, I in turn issue challenges to people who visit DC. Here are several links to the biggest challenges I've issued so far:
My main book reading challenge is called the Debunking Christianity Challenge.
But I have also issued a different kind of book reading challenge to all conservative Christians.
If you want to debate me then I challenge you to do this!
Not to be left out, here is a strategy type of challenge to all skeptics.
Some people are stepping up to some of these challenges. Depending on who you are and what you believe, I challenge YOU! Are you up to it?
My main book reading challenge is called the Debunking Christianity Challenge.
But I have also issued a different kind of book reading challenge to all conservative Christians.
If you want to debate me then I challenge you to do this!
Not to be left out, here is a strategy type of challenge to all skeptics.
Some people are stepping up to some of these challenges. Depending on who you are and what you believe, I challenge YOU! Are you up to it?
April 08, 2009
The Golden Rule: a Parallel Analogy to The Outsider Test for Faith
Dr. James McGrath wrote something that I think expresses my Outsider Test for Faith. It's the Golden Rule, and he claims this is a Christian way to do historical studies, See for yourself...
To read more from McGrath about the historian's methods see this link.
One doesn't have to be committed in advance to history's inability to deal with miracles in order to begin to realize that one cannot claim that Christianity is grounded purely in history while other traditions are at best shrouded in myth. One simply has to apply the most basic Christian principle to one's investigation of the competing claims. That's what happened in my case. I didn't know that much about historical methodology yet as an undergraduate interested in defending and spreading his faith.Here's the link.
But I did know about fairness, about treating others as you would want them to treat you. The Golden Rule.
And so what does it mean to do history from a Christian perspective? It doesn't mean to allow for miracles in the Biblical stories while assuming that, when the cookies are missing and your child says he or she doesn't know what happened to them, that you're dealing with a lie and theft rather than a miracle. It doesn't mean defending Christian claims to miracles and debunking those of others, nor accepting Biblical claims uncritically in a way you never would if similar claims were made in our time.
It means doing to the claims of others what you would want done to your claims. And perhaps also the reverse: doing to your own claims, views and presuppositions that which you have been willing to do to the claims, views and presuppositions of others.
Once one begins to attempt to examine the evidence not in an unbiased way, but simply fairly, one cannot but acknowledge that there are elements of the Christian tradition which, if they were in your opponent's tradition, you would reject, debunk, discount, and otherwise find unpersuasive or at least not decisive or compelling.
To read more from McGrath about the historian's methods see this link.
What Do the London Times, The Society of Biblical Literature, and Prometheus Books Have in Common? Lil Ole Me.
Here are some exciting developments for this no-name first time author...
The London Times Religion editor is going to review my book soon. He wrote:
-----------------
Along with Dr. Hector Avalos I've been invited to the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in New Orleans to be on a panel discussing Bill Maher's Religulous movie.
----------------
Prometheus Books just gave me the initial approval for a book of chapters I proposed to edit by people such as Drs. Hector Avalos, David Eller, John Beversluis, Richard Carrier, Valerie Tarico, Robert M. Price, along with Harry McCall, Dan Barker, Edward T. Babinski, Matthew Green, yours truly, and some others. More on this later but not now.
The London Times Religion editor is going to review my book soon. He wrote:
"The role of science in bringing – or not bringing – us to the threshold of religious belief is discussed in The Future of Atheism (SPCK) and other new books such as John Loftus’s Why I Became an Atheist (Prometheus Books) and David Ramsay Steele’s Atheism Explained (Open Court). Watch out, too, for a different kind of work – I Don’t Believe in Atheists (Continuum) by Chris Hedges, a journalist on the New York Times. Though himself an unbeliever, Hedges has harsh things to say about some of religion’s contemporary despisers. He warns that the science-religion debate is far from resolved, and that fundamentalism does not infect one side of the argument alone. The TLS will carry reviews of all these books in the near future."Here's the Link.
-----------------
Along with Dr. Hector Avalos I've been invited to the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in New Orleans to be on a panel discussing Bill Maher's Religulous movie.
----------------
Prometheus Books just gave me the initial approval for a book of chapters I proposed to edit by people such as Drs. Hector Avalos, David Eller, John Beversluis, Richard Carrier, Valerie Tarico, Robert M. Price, along with Harry McCall, Dan Barker, Edward T. Babinski, Matthew Green, yours truly, and some others. More on this later but not now.
Newsweek Front Page Story: The Decline and Fall of a Christian Nation
Below are some quotes from the lead article:
...the percentage of self-identified Christians has fallen 10 percentage points since 1990, from 86 to 76 percent.
While we remain a nation decisively shaped by religious faith, our politics and our culture are, in the main, less influenced by movements and arguments of an explicitly Christian character than they were even five years ago. I think this is a good thing—good for our political culture, which, as the American Founders saw, is complex and charged enough without attempting to compel or coerce religious belief or observance. It is good for Christianity, too, in that many Christians are rediscovering the virtues of a separation of church and state that protects what Roger Williams, who founded Rhode Island as a haven for religious dissenters, called "the garden of the church" from "the wilderness of the world."
Still, in the new NEWSWEEK Poll, fewer people now think of the United States as a "Christian nation" than did so when George W. Bush was president (62 percent in 2009 versus 69 percent in 2008). Two thirds of the public (68 percent) now say religion is "losing influence" in American society, while just 19 percent say religion's influence is on the rise. The proportion of Americans who think religion "can answer all or most of today's problems" is now at a historic low of 48 percent. During the Bush 43 and Clinton years, that figure never dropped below 58 percent.Here's the Link
April 07, 2009
Prof. James McGrath on Historical Studies and Methodological Naturalism
He said:
Good, now let's turn to the Bible...
On methodological naturalism, I don't see how historical study can adopt any other approach, any more than criminology can. It will always be theoretically possible that a crime victim died simply because God wanted him dead, but the appropriate response of detectives is to leave the case open. In the same way, it will always be possible that a virgin conceived, but it will never be more likely than that the stories claiming this developed, like comparable stories about other ancient figures, as a way of highlighting the individual's significance. And since historical study deals with probabilities and evidence, to claim that a miracle is "historically likely" misunderstands the method in question.
Link.
Good, now let's turn to the Bible...
A New Phrase for Your Funk and Wagnalls: "pulling a Loftus."
For future reference, Victor Reppert can first be credited with using this line. ;-)
A Critique of Mark Linville's, "The Moral Poverty of Evolutionary Naturalism"
Mark's chapter on this is to appear in the upcoming Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, eds, William Lane Craig and J. P. Moreland. Common Sense Atheism charges that Linville commits the Genetic Fallacy. It's an interesting argument, one that cuts both ways and one that needs to be addressed, something Keith Parsons has weighed in on here, and also here. What do you think?
Chris Hallquists New Book: UFOs, Ghosts, and a Rising God: Debunking the Resurrection of Jesus.
This book is unique in that it compares the claim that Jesus arose from the dead with other paranormal claims. Since modern claims to the paranormal have better attested evidence to them than Jesus rising from the dead, if we reject the former we should also reject the latter. This is a very informative book. He has done his research. I heartily recommend it. You can get it here.
April 06, 2009
Dr. William Lane Craig: "I Will Not Debate John W. Loftus"
That's right. That's what he said...in so many words.
I learned from DC member Darrin at the Carrier/Craig debate that Craig said he would not debate his former students. That's what he said.
I am now classed with a group of people, i.e., the people comprised of his former students. And Dr. Craig says he will not debate anyone in that class of people. Okay, I guess. But given the fact that I'm probably the only member of this class of people who wants to debate him he might as well have said: "I will not debate John W. Loftus."
I've heard him say this before about former students, so it’s not really like he’s singling me out, or is it?
While I was a student of his he said something I thought was odd at the time. This was back in 1985 at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He said "the person I fear debating the most is a former student of mine." Keep in mind that Dr. Craig was on a High School debate team and has been debating these topics for probably just as long as I've been thinking about them. And he had only been teaching a few years before this to actually know of any student who might want to debate him. But that’s what he said. Again, he said "the person I fear debating the most is a former student of mine."
He cannot deny saying this, and I don't think he will.
Does he really fear me? I don’t know. But just maybe he does after all. He could change his mind though. I think a lot of people would be interested in this match-up.
In any case, the stated reason why he won't debate former students is that he "fears" doing so. Yep. That's what he told me when the cameras were off before the thought crossed his mind that I would want to debate him and would use his words against him. Again, he fears debating former students. That's his only word as to why he won't do it. One more time. He fears debating me.
If that word gets out he may have to man up, as it were, and show his followers that he isn't afraid.
Q.E.D
I learned from DC member Darrin at the Carrier/Craig debate that Craig said he would not debate his former students. That's what he said.
I am now classed with a group of people, i.e., the people comprised of his former students. And Dr. Craig says he will not debate anyone in that class of people. Okay, I guess. But given the fact that I'm probably the only member of this class of people who wants to debate him he might as well have said: "I will not debate John W. Loftus."
I've heard him say this before about former students, so it’s not really like he’s singling me out, or is it?
While I was a student of his he said something I thought was odd at the time. This was back in 1985 at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He said "the person I fear debating the most is a former student of mine." Keep in mind that Dr. Craig was on a High School debate team and has been debating these topics for probably just as long as I've been thinking about them. And he had only been teaching a few years before this to actually know of any student who might want to debate him. But that’s what he said. Again, he said "the person I fear debating the most is a former student of mine."
He cannot deny saying this, and I don't think he will.
Does he really fear me? I don’t know. But just maybe he does after all. He could change his mind though. I think a lot of people would be interested in this match-up.
In any case, the stated reason why he won't debate former students is that he "fears" doing so. Yep. That's what he told me when the cameras were off before the thought crossed his mind that I would want to debate him and would use his words against him. Again, he fears debating former students. That's his only word as to why he won't do it. One more time. He fears debating me.
If that word gets out he may have to man up, as it were, and show his followers that he isn't afraid.
Q.E.D
Christopher Hitchens in the "Den of Lambs"
I love Christopher Hitchen's tenacity and passion along with his literary examples. See him mix it up with Christians at the recent Christian book expo...
At about 33 minutes it gets interesting. Go get'em Hitch! I found the standard answers by the Christian panelists to be pathetic, really pathetic.
To read more about the Elisabeth Fritzl case that Hitchens mentioned, follow the link.
At about 33 minutes it gets interesting. Go get'em Hitch! I found the standard answers by the Christian panelists to be pathetic, really pathetic.
To read more about the Elisabeth Fritzl case that Hitchens mentioned, follow the link.
Another Review of My Book: "Comprehensiveness" Sets it Apart From Other Atheist Works
Link
John W. Loftus’ Why I Became an Atheist: a Former Preacher Rejects Christianity doesn't really blaze new ground, but it does cover a lot of it.To read other reviews click here.
In fact, this comprehensiveness is a key distinctive that separates it from the work of the "New Atheist" trio, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris.
Uniquely, Loftus provides a taste of all these critiques in his over 400-page, densely-packed tome. In other words, if one were look for a recent survey text for atheistic argumentation, this book would more than suffice.
William Lane Craig "Won by a Landslide" Against Hitchens
That's what Roger Sharp said on Facebook after watching the debate in person. [Full disclosure, Sharp is a Christian]. This is exactly what I had predicted. Christian professor Doug Geivett weighed in on the debate where he said: Craig "was thoroughly prepared for every aspect of the debate and never faltered in his response to objections by Hitchens," and that Hitchens's arguments "were largely unfocused, sometimes disconnected, and often irrelevant." Over at Common Sense Atheism (which is a great source for Craig debates) is an atheist review of the debate where we read: "Frankly Craig spanked Hitchens like a foolish child." For more info visit here.
I would really like to try my hand at debating the master debater. Anyone else like to see that? If the debate was on Christianity vs. Atheism, what would you think my chances are? See the new poll on the sidebar. You can choose more than one answer.
I would really like to try my hand at debating the master debater. Anyone else like to see that? If the debate was on Christianity vs. Atheism, what would you think my chances are? See the new poll on the sidebar. You can choose more than one answer.
Darrin Rasberry Interview: A "Searching Agnostic"
[Written by John W. Loftus] DC Blogger Darrin wrote the foreword to Ray Comfort’s latest book, You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence but You Can’t Make Him Think. It's an interesting interview. Enjoy.
April 05, 2009
Another Pastor Leaves the Fold
Former Evangelical Pastor, Bruce Gerencser, announced he no longer affirms Christianity, seen here. It appears that Christianity not only fails the outsider test for faith, it also fails the insider test for faith. Even Christians on the inside cannot continue to believe it!
Is the Bible Ever Wrong? Peter Enns vs. Stephen Chapman
Link. For more on the topic by Evangelicals see Peter Enns, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament, and Kenton L. Sparks, God's Word in Human Words: An Evangelical Appropriation of Critical Biblical Scholarship.
April 04, 2009
Who is Open Minded, the Believer or the Scientifically Minded Skeptic?
The video might take a bit to load...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)