I spent over a decade studying systematic theologies, apologetics, and hard core Bible study. I even learned a good deal of Greek so I could translate the N.T. for myself. I spent many, many, hours in prayer to no avail. Finally after years of vigorous study, and unanswered prayer and an outsider test of faith, I became an agnostic.See his new Blog.
It is so liberating not having to defend Christianity anymore. Not only do you have to accept the ridiculous story of Noah and his ark, but you also have to defend eternal conscious torment, and of course you have to defend against all of the cults: Mormonism, J.W.'s, Muslims, Catholics. No wonder I had a nervous breakdown.
September 09, 2010
Quote of the Day, by exreformed
September 08, 2010
Thanks to My Buds and Buddesses, I Love Ya Men and Women

Losing My Religion by Gina
John Loftus has a chapter in his book called the “Outsider Test for Faith,” where you basically look at religion from a skeptic’s point of view. My ability to easily accept, and then abandon my religion with such ease, I believe, partly stems from this concept of the outsider test (and the theory of the accidents of birth)....I realized that once I began asking “outsider” questions, I was no longer capable of believing in what my peers believed. Link.
Quote of the Day, by Terry Prachett and Neil Gaiman
God does not play dice with the universe; He plays an ineffable game of his own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of any of the other players (i.e., everybody), to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch-dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.
September 07, 2010
I'm Speaking at the Texas Freethought Convention, October 8-10th
It's a month away so I'm announcing it just in case you'll want to make plans on coming. Looks like quite the line-up and some fun to boot. Check it out. It's always nice to meet the people who visit here, so come on out if you can!
Quote of the Day, From Nontheistdavid on Amazon
If God's existence is so self evident as the christian proclaims, then why on earth have oceans of ink been spilled trying to prove this being? Link.Let me put a finer point on this: If the God of evangelical Christianity exists then why isn't it more obvious to others that he does? Do evangelicals who travel the country and the world even bother thinking about this as they see non-evangelicals everywhere? [Edit: That's non-evangelicals. Everyone who is not an evangelical is a non-evangelical for the logically impaired].
September 06, 2010
Original Sin: Can't Live With It, Can't Live Without It
Dr. Richard Schoenig has a new essay at the Secular Web called Original Sin: Can't Live With It, Can't Live Without It. Schoenig has two Ph.D's, one in Chemistry and the other in Philosophy. In 2007 he participated in a little known debate against Jim Laws on God's existence.
Dr. Avalos on the NYC Mosque
Dr. Avalos addresses the hypocritical arguments of Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin against the mosque. Read Dr. Avalos' column here
September 05, 2010
Outsider Test Merchandize Now Available
To the left is a design that Dan DeMura made for me and is now one of the items you can buy. It would be a great conversation starter if you bought one of the shirts! If you have some interesting slogans you would like to see on some select merchandise let me know. And yes, when you buy an item not only do you help advertise and fund this site, but you also proclaim your undying loyal allegiance for this site til you die (okay, okay, that was a bit over the top I'll admit).
Just click here.
September 04, 2010
Quote of the Day, By Stephen Hawking
Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. Link,
Richard Carrier Responds to The Infidel Delusion ebook
To read what he said just click here.
Labels:
"The Infidel Delusion"
Dr. Keith Parsons Calls It Quits Regarding the Philosophy of Religion
He wrote:
Over the past ten years I have published, in one venue or another, about twenty things on the philosophy of religion. I have a book on the subject, God and Burden of Proof, and another criticizing Christian apologetics, Why I am not a Christian. During my academic career I have debated William Lane Craig twice and creationists twice. I have written one master’s thesis and one doctoral dissertation in the philosophy of religion, and I have taught courses on the subject numerous times. But no more. I’ve had it.
I now regard “the case for theism” as a fraud and I can no longer take it seriously enough to present it to a class as a respectable philosophical position—no more than I could present intelligent design as a legitimate biological theory. BTW, in saying that I now consider the case for theism to be a fraud, I do not mean to charge that the people making that case are frauds who aim to fool us with claims they know to be empty. No, theistic philosophers and apologists are almost painfully earnest and honest; I don’t think there is a Bernie Madoff in the bunch. I just cannot take their arguments seriously any more, and if you cannot take something seriously, you should not try to devote serious academic attention to it. I’ve turned the philosophy of religion courses over to a colleague. Link
September 03, 2010
I Now Have an Online Shop
To the left is one of the items you can buy. I plan on creating others. If you have some interesting slogans you would like to see on some select merchandise let me know. This is gonna be good. And yes, when you buy an item you proclaim your undying loyal allegiance for this site til you die (okay, okay, that was a bit over the top I'll admit). But you will help advertise this site for me, and I'll receive some needed money when you do.
Just click here.
7 Frustrating Creationist Policies in Public Schools
Ignorance is thriving. See for yourselves. Link
My Response to Dr. Craig Blomberg
I engage Christian scholars all the time and have even allowed a few of them to post something substantive here at DC, including Craig. So after having said he has read my stuff extensively and after both admitting neither one of us will likely change our minds, Craig asked me this:
John, I guess my question for you is, from your perspective, how should people who hold views like you and I, respectively, proceed in conversation, if at all? The consistent pluralist would say that we should each tolerate each other's perspectives. But you and I are apologists, and you are an evangelist ("de-evangelist?") as well. You aren't content to let Christians believe what they want; you positively want to "deconvert" them and show them how and why their views are delusional. I don't engage in much overt evangelism but I certainly want people who haven't thought about the classic reasons for Christian faith to at least give them serious thought. We can't both be right. We could both be wrong. But the more interesting question for me is how, as two persons who both want to be guided by reason but believe that reason has led us in quite opposite directions, proceed from here? Link
September 02, 2010
Paul Tobin Responds to The Infidel Delusion (Part 3)
This is part three of Paul's response to the ebook The Infidel Delusion, which is an amateur attempt to deal with our book The Christian Delusion
. The first two parts can be read beginning here.
September 01, 2010
Why Should I Rent a Comedy When The Bible is a Joke?
Yep, take a look:
August 31, 2010
Patheos Articles on the Future of Humanism
Founded in 2008, Patheos.com is the premier online destination to engage in the global dialogue about religion and spirituality and to explore and experience the world's beliefs. Patheos is the website of choice for the millions of people looking for credible and balanced information or resources about religion. Patheos brings together the public, academia, and the faith leaders in a single environment, and is the place where people turn on a regular basis for insight into questions, issues, and discussions. Patheos is unlike any other online religious and spiritual site and is designed to serve as a resource for those looking to learn more about different belief systems, as well as participate in productive, moderated discussions on some of today's most talked about and debated topics.Now they have a link to some key people discussing the future of Humanism.
Uncle Noah And His Magic Boat,
Guest post by Matt Hensley:
I am fascinated at the things people are willing to believe. Not the crazy, end of the world sign holding type person, or the I was abducted and anally molested by space aliens type person, but by your average, walking down the street living in the suburbs perfectly ordinary in every way individual. Ask an average person if they believe in Bigfoot. Or the Loch Ness Monster. Most people don’t. They have a hard time believing that these things exist, because of the lack of evidence. People are pretty sure that if a colony of giant hairy men and women (other than hippies or bears) were living in the forests of northern California, we would have found them by now. If a giant fish monster were really living in a lake, someone would have caught one. People like proof. We like explanations that make sense. We prefer to know that things are real before we believe them, because they add stability to our lives. We don’t like the thought of unknown elements, possibly dangerous, running amok in our world, because we like stability and normalcy. But ask that same person, your banker or lawyer, for example, if they believe in god and the bible, the answer is usually yes.
What's the Difference Between a Cult and a "Legitimate Religion"?
In this interesting letter to the editor Jeffrey Kline is found bewailing cultist mind control. Does he not see the equivalent mind control of an enculturated "legitimate religion." Didn't every single religion start out as a cult in the first place? Then what causes one religion to eventually become a "legitimate religion"? Time? Numbers? What is a "legitimate religion" anyway?
New Lutheran Denomination Planned Because of Gay Ordinations
That's right. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America voted to ordain homosexual pastors so the conservatives are splitting off into a new denomination. That's how it usually goes too. There is a discernible liberal trend among church denominations, publishing houses, and seminaries that has taken place since the enlightenment. You would think this is strong evidence against conservative type Christianities, but no, conservatives maintain despite this evidence that God predicted there would be a falling away from the faith (I Tim. 4:1). Okay, but remember this, the conservatives who turned liberals knew about that prediction and became liberals anyway! How do you explain that? Read this story for more
Quote of the Day, by John W. Loftus
Christians are not bothered in the least that they are risking Allah’s hell by not being Muslims. We all risk the hell of other religions. All I do is risk one more hell than what others do. Once I risk one hell they all look like nothing but empty threats.
August 30, 2010
Quote of the Day, By Michael
When explaining why atheism is not a religion Michael explains it like this:
Let "a" be the proposition, "A deity exists." Then "~a" denotes its negation "No deities exist." If theism is S = {a}, atheism is the empty set {}, NOT the set T = {~a}.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)