
July 20, 2015
The Bad Jesus Podcast

July 19, 2015
"The Evolution Wars Are Here to Stay and Heads Will Continue to Roll."
Jim Stump, a professor at Bethel College in Indiana, resigned over the issue of evolution. As reported by Karl W. Gilberson (who is quoted in the headline),
Nonetheless, evolutionary science and the acceptance of gays and of gay marriages will be the wave of the future. Evangelicals will learn to embrace those views while still claiming to be evangelicals. It will become the new evangelical orthodoxy in the future, as I have predicted. Then amnesia will set in, and future evangelicals will claim that true evangelicals always stood for these things! Their amnesia will provide quite the laugh to the rest of us, because we have already seen it with regard to other views of theirs, such as believing in an eternal conscious torment in hell and an exclusivistic salvation, and standing against both higher biblical criticism and women in leadership roles.
"the Bethel Board of Trustees on June 9 of this year approved a new policy specifying that college faculty must affirm the same position on Adam and Eve as the Missionary Church, namely that Adam “was created by an immediate act of God and not by a process of evolution.” The new policy further specifies that Bethel faculty should advocate this as the “official, meritorious, and theologically responsible position of the College, without disparagement" LINK.This reminds me once again of John Schneider's comment on my post titled, "Honest Evangelical Scholarship is a Ruse. There is No Such Thing!" Schneider said, "I agree with John W. Loftus to that extent. There is no such thing. Like Islam, evangelical Christianity cannot survive intellectual honesty and freedom." LINK. This is taking place along with the debate evangelicals are presently having over homosexuality. Must be fun being an evangelical these days. Not!
Nonetheless, evolutionary science and the acceptance of gays and of gay marriages will be the wave of the future. Evangelicals will learn to embrace those views while still claiming to be evangelicals. It will become the new evangelical orthodoxy in the future, as I have predicted. Then amnesia will set in, and future evangelicals will claim that true evangelicals always stood for these things! Their amnesia will provide quite the laugh to the rest of us, because we have already seen it with regard to other views of theirs, such as believing in an eternal conscious torment in hell and an exclusivistic salvation, and standing against both higher biblical criticism and women in leadership roles.
July 18, 2015
John Loftus Takes On Christian Apologists Norman Geisler, Frank Turek, William Lane Craig, Paul Copan, Gary Habermas, Dave Hunt, Ben Witherington III, Victor Reppert, Gregory Ganssel, Craig Evans, Stewart Goetz, Daniel Wallace, Plus Others for the Win, and Guess Who Won?
I did! Here's the story.
A former Christian named ToonForever described why he no longer believes:
A former Christian named ToonForever described why he no longer believes:
I decided that in order to avoid prejudicing myself toward my doubts, something I always accused T of doing when she left the faith, I would find a well-recommended apologetics book and give God the first and best chance of answering my questions and calming my fears.
For the Pro side of the argument, I downloaded to my Kindle Norman Geisler’s [and Frank Turek's] I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist.
I already knew what book I would choose for the Con side of the conversation. I wanted to read the book that made me the most afraid, because that would be the greatest challenge. If I could get through that with my faith intact, I could set aside my doubts and at least approach the meditation question with the confidence that would come from overcoming what to me was the sternest challenge I could find. So I downloaded Loftus’ Why I Became an Atheist (Revised & Expanded).
I got a blank steno pad and started reading Geisler.
July 15, 2015
Chapter Titles for My Next Proposed Anthology
Below you can see the chapter titles and subjects I have. The anthology centers around science and Christianity. I've lined up 15 chapters. Some important topics have already been covered in my previous anthologies, so I don't need to duplicate them. What is missing? Who should write it?
[Edit on December 17,2015. This is the finalized list below. Unfortunately I was not able to write a chapter myself due to unforeseen circumstances. I did however, write a challenging Introduction. Hell yeah!]
[Edit on December 17,2015. This is the finalized list below. Unfortunately I was not able to write a chapter myself due to unforeseen circumstances. I did however, write a challenging Introduction. Hell yeah!]
Jim West and White Privilege in the Society of Biblical Literature
![]() |
"Doctor" Jim West |
Jim West, who is known to many readers here, is causing a heated discussion among some members of the Society of Biblical Literature, the largest professional organization of biblical scholars in the world.
The latest uproar was precipitated by a blog post where West complains about academia today. In particular, West claims that:
West does not supply any data for this or his other claims, and a simple visit to the Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature shows that it is overwhelmingly composed of Euroamerican biblical scholars. I am one of the very few Mexican Americans in the Society of Biblical Literature.
But more importantly, West fails to see how it is he who has benefited from privileges that minorities might not receive.
July 13, 2015
As Christianity Dies, Church and Clergy Should be Replaced with Rent-A-Friend
Christianity is losing members and churches are closing
their doors forever, so I propose that parish clergy be replaced with what I
coined as Rent-A-Friend or simply a
striped down version of Pastoral Care without the dogmatic supernatural mythology.
Divine Hate - He Who Does Not Believe Will Be Condemned
This is an Ad for a book I've recommended. Click on the link below to buy it on Amazon.
July 12, 2015
We Are All Atheists! Some Of Us Are More Consistent Than Others
Christian, you are already an atheist, a narrow atheist, who rejects all of the same religions I do for the same reasons I do, except for yours. I simply reject them all, as a wide atheist, for the same reasons you reject all of them but yours.
Follow-ups:
Why is it so difficult for you to show me and billions of others your faith is correct?
Why is it people who were raised in a particular faith end up defending it as the true one later in life?
Why is it you never seriously considered Hinduism or Judaism or Buddhism or Islam or Polytheism?
What best explains why religions are geographically located into specific regions on the earth?
Do you realize that Muslims have the same exact excuses you use to excuse your God's inaction? Allah is hidden. Infidels don't believe because Allah predestined this, or because they are rebellious, or because devil's have deceived them.
Follow-ups:
Why is it so difficult for you to show me and billions of others your faith is correct?
Why is it people who were raised in a particular faith end up defending it as the true one later in life?
Why is it you never seriously considered Hinduism or Judaism or Buddhism or Islam or Polytheism?
What best explains why religions are geographically located into specific regions on the earth?
Do you realize that Muslims have the same exact excuses you use to excuse your God's inaction? Allah is hidden. Infidels don't believe because Allah predestined this, or because they are rebellious, or because devil's have deceived them.
Blair Mullins (On Facebook): Imagine if belief in the cause of dinosaur extinction worked the way religion does.
-Scientists who were born and raised in the south believe asteroids killed them off.
-Scientists born in the north believe it was a gigantic volcano eruption.
-Scientists born in Asia believe it was a plague.
-Scientists born in Europe believe it was an ice age that wiped them out.
We would all immediately recognize the absurdness of this… But for some reason change the topic from dinosaur extinction to religion and somehow people deem it reasonable… Go figure!
July 10, 2015
Dr. Brandon Withrow Abandons His Faith and His Faculty Position
Brandon G. Withrow was an assistant professor of the history of Christianity and religious studies at Winebrenner Theological Seminary. He recently wrote a coming out essay, titled Losing Faith in Religious Higher Education, for the Chronicle of Higher Education. I find what he wrote very insightful.
Like many of the unaffiliated in America, my problems with religion included biblical, social, personal, and scientific issues, the fine details of which are beyond this short article.
July 08, 2015
Dr. John Schneider Comments On Evangelical Scholarship
I have made the argument, in a post I keep updating, that Honest Evangelical Scholarship is a Ruse. There is No Such Thing! John Schneider, former professor emeritus of theology at Calvin College, said of it on Facebook: "I agree with John W. Loftus to that extent. There is no such thing. Like Islam, evangelical Christianity cannot survive intellectual honesty and freedom." Schneider, just like several other professors in various evangelical colleges before him, was forced to quit teaching at Calvin College due to his honest admission that the Adam and Eve story is myth. See also this story, this one, and this one. The Adam and Eve controversy is presently wreaking havoc within evangelical colleges like Bryan College, which lost nearly 25% of its faculty.
Karl Gilberson, in his newly released book Saving the Original Sinner: How Christians Have Used the Bible's First Man to Oppress, Inspire, and Make Sense of the World, makes the case against Adam and Eve and shows why evangelicalism isn't the direction of the future.
You can look inside the book on Amazon where Gilberson highlights Schneider's story in the Introduction. Evangelical scholarship is indeed a ruse. There is no such thing! It is pseudo-scholarship. Period.
Karl Gilberson, in his newly released book Saving the Original Sinner: How Christians Have Used the Bible's First Man to Oppress, Inspire, and Make Sense of the World, makes the case against Adam and Eve and shows why evangelicalism isn't the direction of the future.
July 07, 2015
Jewish Professor Uri Yosef's Counter-Christian Essays
Previously I highly recommended Michael Alter's encyclopedic book on the resurrection. I noted Alter didn't discuss the Suffering Servant in his book, so he sent me a link to someone who did, Professor Uri Yosef.
Professor Uri Yosef was born, raised, and educated in Israel, and completed his higher education (Ph.D. and M.B.A.) in the US. A researcher, scholar, and former tenured professor, Uri speaks at various Jewish venues about the efforts to counter Christian missionary groups. Uri's background in languages includes: Hebrew (native tongue), English, German, and Yiddish on a fluent level.Scroll down this page to the Suffering Servant link and see for yourselves:
July 06, 2015
My Forthcoming Book Is Now Available For Pre-Order On Amazon
My book is provocatively titled How to Defend the Christian Faith: Advice from an Atheist.
You love it, don't you? Go ahead, say you do! It's introduced by my publisher (not me) as follows:
The first book on Christian apologetics written by a leading atheist figure that teaches Christians the best and worst arguments for defending their faith against attack.To see a few blurbs (so far) and the Contents click here.
The Christian faith has been vigorously defended with a variety of philosophical, historical, and theological arguments, but many of the arguments that worked in an earlier age no longer resonate in today’s educated West. Where has apologetics gone wrong? What is the best response to the growing challenge presented by scientific discovery and naturalistic thought? Unlike every work on Christian apologetics that has come before, How to Defend the Christian Faith is the first one written by an atheist for Christians. As a former Christian defender who is now a leading atheist thinker, John Loftus answers these questions and more. He shows readers why Christian apologists have failed to reach the intelligent nonbeliever and offers practical advice for Christians, whether they want to better defend their faith against atheist arguments, or actively convert more individuals to Christianity.
July 05, 2015
Marriage in 2040
I and my wife, Cindy Avalos, look forward to 2040 |
July 01, 2015
Dr. Hector Avalos On Giving Christianity Credit for Charity
A Catholic Christian named kenneth asked a question:
What would the documentary "a day without a christian" be like? Or "a day without religion". Certainly the bombings and violence in the middle east would come to a halt. But who would feed the world's poor, care for the sick, educate the children, and care for the orphans? People would like to say "the state", but the state does an overall aweful job at accomplishing these goals. The lionshare of the world's charitable contributions are made by christians. The Roman Catholic Church feeds more hungry, cares for more sick, educates more children, and cares for more orphans than any other institution on the planet. The secular world simply doesn't carry it's own weight. Where are the great infidel soup kitchens? Why aren't the debunkers caring for the sick in africa? Simply put, the violence may come to end but far more lives would be lost the moment the religious left the planet.The following is Dr. Avalos's most excellent and unique reply.
June 29, 2015
A Response to Professor Paul Allen: The Supposed Myth of Religious Violence and Religionism in Secular Academia
![]() |
Prof. Paul Allen of Concordia University |
Religionists are those who see religion as beneficial or necessary for human existence and, therefore, something that should be preserved and protected. I recently visited Montreal, Canada, where the divide between secularists and religionists in academia is very much alive, at least in some institutions.
Some of these religionists are theologians or professors trained in theology who occupy positions in secular universities. When some of them feel religion is threatened, they respond more as part of an ecclesial-academic complex than as secular analysts of religion. One example is Professor Paul Allen, an associate professor in the Department of Theological Studies at Concordia University in Montreal. His response to religious violence offers an excellent case study of how Christian and religionist apologetics represents itself as scholarship.
Dr. J. R. Daniel Kirk at Fuller Theological Seminary Forced to Resign Over Integrity and Homosexuality
Today Dr. Kirk wrote:
As a New Testament scholar, I see my job as always listening first and foremost to the text in its historical context, and allowing its theology to be the first voice to which we respond. In the end, I will affirm creeds or confessions, if I do, because I believe they contain the right things to say at a given moment in time in which they were written, in light of what scriptures says. In this, I thought I was just being a normal biblical scholar. And Protestant. And Evangelical.This is typical of a conservative creedal requiring institution, which leads me to say once again that Honest Evangelical Scholarship is a Ruse. There is No Such Thing!
However, a couple of my senior Bible colleagues found this disturbing. It was not enough to affirm that some confessions were correct. One had to start with the confessions and use them as hermeneutical guides in the strong sense. One had to like the idea that we define Christianity by what we believe.
Integrity is crucial for both of us. I define integrity as being true to the historical critical scholarship and bringing that into theological dialogue with the church. They define integrity as being true to the “Grand Tradition of the Church” and allowing that to guide what we see in and say about history.
So when I say, “The Synoptic Gospels show Jesus as an idealized human figure,” I have not said enough. If I cannot say, “And it also shows the divine Jesus, as we learn in the creeds,” I have articulated a theology that “is on a trajectory” away from our shared statement of faith. My senior colleagues and I give different answers to the question, How do we relate the Bible to the theology of the church? And this is one major reason why next year will be my last at Fuller. LINK.
Conservative Witch Hunt Buttressed by Lies at Northwest Nazarene University Claims a Scalp
Dr. Tom Oord, tenured professor of theology, was recently from fired from Northwest Nazarene University. NNU President David Alexander lied by saying "he was being terminated for economic reasons having to do with enrollment declines in the graduate division where Oord taught some of his classes." However, this last year NNU was "enjoying record enrollment and had been issuing press releases celebrating the overall financial health of the institution." Karl Giberson tells us the real reason he was fired:
Oord was the university’s leading scholar, with 20 books on his CV; by most measures he was also the denomination’s leading scholar and one of a tiny number of Nazarene theologians whose reputations reached beyond evangelicalism. Oord had won multiple teaching awards and was wildly popular with students and respected by his colleagues. He had brought over a million dollars of grant money to the university—a remarkable accomplishment for a professor at a small, unsung liberal arts college. Oord, however, was controversial. He strongly supported evolution and had long been a target of creationists in the denomination. He embraced “open theism,” the view that God does not know the future but responds in love—rather than coercive control—to events as they occur, rather than foreordaining everything. Fundamentalist critics called him a heretic and had been vying for his termination for years.This is typical of a conservative creedal requiring institution, which leads me to say once again that Honest Evangelical Scholarship is a Ruse. There is No Such Thing!
Quote of the Day, By Kel
"The sooner we realise that 'I don't know' is an acceptable answer in the face of a lack of definitive information, the better." True dat!
June 26, 2015
Homosexual Marriages Declared by Supreme Court to Be Legal in Every State of the Nation, Spelling the Death of Evangelicalism
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on Friday that it is legal for all Americans, no matter their gender or sexual orientation, to marry the people they love.Robert Price in his essay, Changing Morals and the Fate of Evangelicalism, predicted that the issue of sexuality, all by itself, could be the death of evangelicalism. If so, with this Supreme Court decision the death of evangelicalism has arrived. It's been long overdue
The decision is a historic victory for gay rights activists who have fought for years in the lower courts. Thirty-seven states and the District of Columbia already recognize marriage equality. The remaining 13 states ban these unions, even as public support has reached record levels nationwide.
The justices found that under the 14th Amendment, states must issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and recognize same-sex unions that were legally performed in other states. LINK.
Bart Ehrman Agrees to Debate Robert Price On Whether Jesus Existed
Ehrman will debate this issue to raise funds for his pet charities. It looks like $13,000 is required for the debate to take place. You can donate to make it happen right here, where you'll see a video from the two participants describing their views, along with an itemized list of the money required. Although agreeing to this debate, Ehrman says:
The question is not really a matter of dispute among experts, even though mythicists as a rule would like it to be and sometimes even insist it is. But the reality is this: if you were to look at the program of the annual meeting of (the many thousands of English-speaking) professors of Biblical Studies, the Society of Biblical Literature meeting (this year in Atlanta), you will not find a session (out of thousands) devoted to arguing both sides of this issue. That’s because there is no debate. LINK.There are some signs this is not as rock solid of a consensus as Ehrman makes it out to be. For Richard Carrier has defended Jesus mythicism in a book published by Sheffield Phoenix Press, the most prestigious Christian scholarly publisher around, On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt. His massive book is a magisterial treasure trove of research and information. There is a minor difficulty in using Bayesian math to establish something in the past, which seems quite fashionable right now in some circles. For my part I don't have a stake in who wins this debate, so long as both sides agree that the Jesus depicted in the Gospels never existed.
June 25, 2015
Did a Historical Gospel Jesus Exist? Two Christian Apologist, Kenneth and honeymonster, Say He Did But on What Evidence?
![]() |
Kenneth |
![]() |
honeymonster |
In a number of my posts I have stood firm that the
New Testament, Jesus (Christ), never existed.
I’ve already addressed the evident in several posts: A. We Know From Hard
Evidence Dinosaurs Existed 66 Million Years Ago Yet We Have No Objective
Evidence Jesus Existed Just 2 Thousands Years Ago Here and B. Even if the Entire
Testimony of Josephus on Jesus is Authentic, It’s
Apologetically Worthless Here and C. As based on the 4th ed of The Oxford Classical Dictionary which
has no entry for either Jesus or any of his Apostles (especially for Peter who Catholics
contend was their first Pope) as historical: For the Fourth Time Jesus Fails to Qualify as a Historical Entry In The Oxford Classical
Dictionary Here
The Power and Effectiveness of Good Ridicule
Since believing scholars are really good at defending the indefensible with their pseudo-scholarship, honest uncommitted seekers who read our debates might go away thinking each side has some good points, or that they're a wash. That being said, can anyone imagine a Christian scholar ever abandoning the Christian faith? Can you imagine that happening to William Lane Craig, Paul Copan, J.P. Moreland, Chad Meister, Norman Geisler, Douglas Groothuis, Craig Bloomberg, Michael Licona, David Wood, Mary Jo Sharp, Daniel Wallace, Ben Witherington, Matthew Flannagan, Steven B. Cowan, William Dembski, Scott Sullivan, Ravi Zacharias, Gary Habermas, Josh McDowell, H. Wayne House, Dennis W. Jowers, Gregory Ganssle, Alvin Plantinga, Nicholas Wolterstorff, Stewart Goetz, Richard Swinburne, R. Douglas Gevett, N.T. Wright, Craig Evans, Francis Beckwith, Dinesh D'Souza, Craig Hazen, Peter Kreeft, David Marshall, Vic Reppert, Thomas Howe, Richard Howe, Craig Blaising, Randal Rauser, Greg Koukl, David Beck, David K. Clark, James Sennett, Thomas Talbott, Paul K. Moser, Abdu Murray, Timothy Keller and many others? I honestly can't. They will all die in their faith no matter what we throw at them. They are impervious to reason, so politely discussing/debating them will not change their minds, ever. We argue with them mainly to reach honest uncommitted seekers, and that's it. They are the goal, the prize.
The power and effectiveness of good ridicule is that it by-passes this perceived stalemate between us. Christian scholars are the last ones to give up their faith because they're the most indoctrinated. They have the most to lose if they abandon it. So we need not gain their approval before we turn to ridicule. We need not reason with them because they cannot be reasoned with. We know they're delusional. So ridicule helps honest uncommitted seekers to understand what non-believers really think. Taking Christian pseudo-scholarly arguments seriously (while needed) does not convey how abysmal we think their arguments really are. To be sure, I don't ridicule Christian scholars very often. But I do seek to justify the use of ridicule for those who do it well. [See tag "Ridicule" for more].
The power and effectiveness of good ridicule is that it by-passes this perceived stalemate between us. Christian scholars are the last ones to give up their faith because they're the most indoctrinated. They have the most to lose if they abandon it. So we need not gain their approval before we turn to ridicule. We need not reason with them because they cannot be reasoned with. We know they're delusional. So ridicule helps honest uncommitted seekers to understand what non-believers really think. Taking Christian pseudo-scholarly arguments seriously (while needed) does not convey how abysmal we think their arguments really are. To be sure, I don't ridicule Christian scholars very often. But I do seek to justify the use of ridicule for those who do it well. [See tag "Ridicule" for more].
Saudi TV Series Deploys New Weapon Against ISIS: Satire
People hate ridicule. But if you want to get their attention like nothing else then ridicule them. There's just something about it, and Saudi TV is using it against ISIS (or IS), LINK. Michael Rubin, formerly a U.S. State Department official, agrees with this approach: "Islamists cannot handle free thinking in the best of times, but ridicule is their kryptonite, for it shows that the would-be caliphs have no clothes...Hence it should be an essential part of any strategy." [See tag "Ridicule" for more].
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)