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

From the description of the book we read:

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

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

Yes, I Am Pretty Certain I'm Right

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

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

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

It's International Blasphemy Rights Day 2010

Yep, that's right.

Bring on your blasphemies right here. I'll start with a gay Jesus, or is it rather a Jesus for gays? Warning: explicit cartoon image below.

Quote of the Day, by Bob

What evidence would I accept for the claim that god exists? That's easy. All he would have to do is show up, once, -or- he could supernaturally change the way my brain works so that I no longer need evidence and am willing to accept as fact, wild claims that are based on ancient religious documents.

What Would Christians Say if Their Faith Passed the Outsider Test (OTF)?

That Christians object to taking the Outsider Test for Faith only confirms it doesn't look good for their faith. For if Christianity passed the OTF with flying colors Christians would be arguing on behalf of it and pressing that case at every step along the way. You KNOW this is what they'd do. You know it. So by objecting to it they tacitly admit their faith doesn't pass the test. But it's worse that this, for their faith MUST pass the OTF. So now they're caught in a huge dilemma--a catch-22--either embrace the test even though doing so will cause them to abandon their faith (by their own admission), or object to the OTF even though their faith MUST pass that test.

Even Arguing Against the Outsider Test for Faith Looks Bad

We abhor someone who is supposed to decide between two parties who also has a conflict of interest. That person could be a trustee of an estate, a judge, or a principal. We want a fair and impartial judgment. We want a fair ruling. So arguing against the Outsider Test for Faith is like arguing against a fair and impartial ruling. It is to argue against what is intuitively obvious to everyone else and consequently makes believers look very bad, because we abhor what they try to argue against. That is, even arguing against the OTF tells an outsider there is something badly wrong with the Christian faith. Good luck with that *cough*

Pew Survey: Atheists Know the Most About Religion!

This comes as no surprise to me at all. We know the most about it because the more we learned the less we could believe.

Respondents to the survey were asked 32 questions with a range of difficulty, including whether they could name the Islamic holy book and the first book of the Bible, or say what century the Mormon religion was founded. Atheists and agnostics scored highest, with an average of 21 correct answers. Link

An Encouraging Email About "The Christian Delusion"

Good day John, I've been spending most of my Sunday morning with a large mug of tea and The Christian Delusion, re-reading my favourite parts : and then it struck me - there really has been nothing worthy to refute any significant part of TCD since its publication! Within a few days after its release there were some blogs and general eye-rolling about how wrong you have it all and so on, and then - crickets chirping.

Now there can be three reasons why this is so:

The Protestant Clergy Sex Abuse Pattern by Valerie Tarico

One of the most striking aspects of the Protestant clergy sex abuse pattern is that most people don’t realize it is a pattern. The Catholic Church has taken a well deserved beating in the courts and in the court of public opinion as former altar boys, orphans and ordinary parishioners have come forward with appalling stories of sex abuse. Yet equally egregious violations by Protestant clergy have failed to generate the same level of outrage. Why?

I Specialize in the Big Picture

All scholars have a specialty, right? What's mine? As I said in my book Why I Became an Atheist, I specialize in the Big Picture. This is true and it's no joke. I gather as much of the relevant material as a mortal can possibly muster and try to make sense of it. Confound it though, all of the Big Picture specialists seem to be gone. I'm a scholar about the Big Picture (i.e., the forest) just as many other specialists are scholars about one of the trees in the forest, or a species of trees. When it comes to the Christian faith, I'm a Big Picture specialist about all things Christian. My specialty is in Countering Christian Apologetics.

DM (a.k.a.) Dennis or Dave Mabus, Here Kitty Kitty

Just another reminder that you've been had.

The Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) Again *Sigh*

A trial is a good example of an outsider looking in. No thumbs should be on the scales of justice. If there is a conflict of interest a judge or a lawyer should recuse themselves. The jury represents people who are uninvolved peers. None of this describes believers who examine their own faith. The OTF demands the impartiality of agnostic, which is worse on one's own religion but better on the religious faiths one rejects.

A Cognitive Dissonance Theory Prediction

Now that 60 Minutes did a program exposing the misinformation about the Muslim center planned to be built near ground zero, cognitive dissonance theory predicts that people who have participated in the rallies against it, or donated to stop it, or spoken out publicly against it will only become MORE entrenched. Stay tuned. Watch it happen. And then see a parallel with the Christian faith. That's how it works when encountering the facts after a commitment has been made. Get. Point. The. Please spread the news about this.

Ground Zero Mosque Debate Answered Decisively

The thing about last night's 60 Minutes segment is that it answered all of the questions we needed to know. After watching it why would any reasonable person be opposed to it?

The Problem of Divine Miscommunication: Does God Love Us All?

A question that is closely related to the Christian debate over salvation, but is rarely discussed, is whether God loves all human beings...at least one Reformed Christian apologist is brave enough and has the intellectual honesty to follow the Calvinist line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. Link.

There's a reason why I say Calvinism is bullshit!

We're Done With DM (a.k.a.) Dennis or Dave Mabus ♪♫•.¸¸♫•*¨*•♫♪

Aratina Cage sent me the HTML text to ban DM even though Google wasn't any help. ♪♫•.¸¸♫•*¨*•♫♪ Happy Birthday to me...♪♫•.¸¸♥♪♫•*¨*•♫♪ Happy Birthday to me...♪♫•.¸¸♫•*¨*•♫♪ Happy Birthday to me...eee... ♪♫•.¸¸♫•*¨*•♫♪ Happy Birthday to me! ♪♫•.¸¸♥♪♫•*¨*•♫♪

Now to read through the comments without having to scroll past DM's long farts just click on a post title. Then if you want to make a comment do so, although there you will still find his farts. To see how this works and read about "Mabus the Nutcase" click here.

To get the HTML click here. Thank you Aratina!!!

Faith is Equivalent to Irrationality

Yep, that's what I've concluded. I was talking to a Catholic today about Stephen Hawking's new book where he says God doesn't exist based on science. So he responded, "That's why they call it faith." Yep, faith doesn't need scientific evidence. It's irrational. I want everyone to think "Irrational" whenever someone says the word "faith" because that's what it is.

VIDEO: The End of God? (in 4 parts)

Thomas Dixon, this program’s host, is Senior Lecturer in History at Queen Mary University of London, and author of Science and Religion: New Historical Perspectives.

Quote of the Day, by Isaac

I have been able to pose the Outsider Test for Faith OTF to a few Christian friends of mine... and this has shown to be very well accepted as a means of seeking and questioning. They agree with the approach, and some have even admitted that they've never given so much as a minute of thought to the outside religions and faiths of the world. The quote "when you understand why you reject the gods of other religions, you'll understand why I reject yours." Powerful quote... because people don't know why they reject the other gods and faiths... so now, the question is brought to their attention... and either they must continue in their blissful ignorance, or begin an honest examination of WHY they believe what they believe.

For me, this is the most honest, non-threatening approach to discussions with a theist.

Help Get Blogger's Attention with Regard to the Christian Nutcase DM

Just go to Blogger's feedback forum and post something like the following note as often as you can in as many related fields as you can and spread the word for others to do likewise (modify as needed):

Quote of the Day by Stephen Hawking: "Philosophy is Dead"

Yep, those are among the first words in his book, The Grand Design. He and Mlodinow continue: "Philosophy has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics. Scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge." I agree. This is never more true than when it comes to the failure of natural philosophy/theology.

The Best Way to Bolster Your Christian Faith is to Read Skeptical Books!

I have a friend named Bill who was a member of a church where I preached and who recently read my books. Afterward he wrote me this: "The deeper I get into the 'meat' of your material, the more solidly grounded I get in my faith in God and His Son, Jesus Christ." Now I've heard that before. So maybe I should just accept what they're saying. Hey, why not? Surely they wouldn't be liars for Jesus, right? So take what they say as recommendations for my books. If you want to become more grounded in your faith then you need to read more of these types of books! If my books do this for some Christians then others should take the Debunking Christianity Challenge.

Or, they're fooling themselves. Fooling themselves? Could it be? Yep. This is exactly what social studies predict.

Why Christianity MUST Pass the OTF

You already know the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) that I've proposed. It asks believers to test their own adopted religious faith from the perspective of an outsider with the same level of skepticism they use to evaluate other religious faiths.

If Christianity is the correct faith it should have been made by God to pass the OTF, especially if people will be cast into hell because it doesn’t. And this will happen according to Christian theology, for there are people who will end up in hell who could not be convinced to believe because of their non-Christian upbringing as outsiders.

Dawkins Responds to the Pope

Video footage of Richard Dawkins giving a speech to a crowd of around 10,000 at the Protest the Pope rally in London:

James McGrath Takes on Mythicism Again

If he continues he'll end up writing a book about it. Link.

My last statement on the topic can be found here.