The Mind/Brain Problem

Okay, Okay, I've been participating in a guilty pleasure by visiting Victor Reppert's Blog lately. Vic argued

I am suggesting on principled grounds that a careful reflection on the nature of mind and matter will invariably reveal that there is a logical gap between them that in principle cannot be bridged without fudging categories.

My responses so far:

Quote of the Day, by Desertbarry

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

Chris Hallquist on Alvin Plantinga and the Problem of Evil

Link. Here's the money quote:

...the fact that it is logically possible that something is false does not mean a compelling case for it has not been made, or that the contrary view is remotely plausible. And it’s especially difficult to see how Plantinga did anything to touch versions of the problem of evil based on specific evils like the Holocaust. For reasons I’ve explained...when the problem of evil is put that way, I think it’s a very powerful argument, even though I’m “familiar with Plantinga’s free will defense” and can’t see that I’ve been “misled.”

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

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

What Positive Evidence is There for God's Existence?

In every era of history there were gaps in our understanding. We knew how women got pregnant through sex but we didn't know the internal bodily process, so guess what? God did it. We knew rain fell from the sky but we didn't know the process so guess what? God did it.

But look what's going on here, okay? Science closes the gaps. When it does it creates deeper problems and with them come the recognition of new gaps. The whole discussion about wormholes and cosmic singularities has been brought to us by the same science that closed a thousand previous gaps. Believers have been wrong to find God in the gaps of the past just as they are wrong to find him in today's gaps. To argue like they do is an informal fallacy called the Argument From Ignorance based in negative evidence, that is, we cannot explain something so therefore our particular god did it. This is not considered positive evidence for a god just as the negative evidence showing that an object is not a door tells us nothing positively about what that object is. The ONLY science that supports a god faith is therefore based in a logical fallacy. Christian, if you think otherwise then provide me some positive evidence that your God exists or acknowledge that you got nothing.

All you got is the centuries old claim that science can't explain this or that, and when it does you move the goal posts.

Why Should Anyone Believe?

I maintain there is no way to conclude Jesus bodily arose from the grave even if he did. I can even grant you for the sake of your argument the existence of Yahweh and that he does miracles, but this changes very little. For the evidence shows us that an overwhelming large percentage of the Jews in Jesus' day did not believe even though they knew their Scriptures and even though they were there. So why should I believe? Why should anyone?

The 25 Most Influential Living Atheists

Hey, did they miss anyone? Link. There are so many others to choose from but I doubt anyone can say the people on the list don't deserve to be there.

Dr. Hector Avalos Interviewed by Robert Price for CFI's Point of Inquiry

Enjoy

Christian, if You Are Deluded Then What Would You Expect?

If you are deluded then the evidence to the contrary, even if it is overwhelming, will not convince you otherwise. Just think of the Mormons. Perhaps you can explain to me why Mormons still believe even though it's been shown through DNA evidence that Native Americans are not descendants of Semitic peoples: Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church. Come on now. Think about this. Like the Mormons you were raised to believe and you now defend what you were raised to believe in a Christian culture despite the evidence just like they do because they were raised in a Mormon culture. Or, at least consider this a real possibility.

Dr. Hector Avalos on "What’s Not so Secular about Introductions to the Bible?"

This is a slightly edited version of his paper delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Ideological Criticism Section, on November 20, 2010. Link

Quote of the Day, by Albert Nolan

Albert Nolan in his book Jesus Before Christianity:

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

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

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

A History of God

See video below:

Major Religions of the World Ranked by Number of Adherents

1 Christianity: 2.1 billion
2 Islam: 1.5 billion
3 Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion
4 Hinduism: 900 million
5 Chinese religion: 394 million
6 Buddhism: 376 million
7 Primal-indigenous: 300 million
8 African Traditional: 100 million
9 Sikhism: 23 million
10 Juche: 19 million
11 Spiritism: 15 million
12 Judaism: 14 million
13 Baha'i: 7 million
14 Jainism: 4.2 million
15 Shinto: 4 million
16 Cao Dai: 4 million
17 Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
18 Tenrikyo: 2 million
19 Neo-Paganism: 1 million
20 Unitarian: 800 thousand
21 Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
22 Scientology: 500 thousand

Scientists Discover a Promiscuity Gene

Yep, that's right.

In what is being called a first of its kind study, researchers...have discovered that about half of all people have a gene that makes them more vulnerable to promiscuity and cheating.

While it isn't a forgone conclusion that people with this gene will cheat on their mates, the presence of that gene makes such a temptation harder to overcome. Imagine that, some people (half of us) have a harder time overcoming such a temptation and yet God supposedly judges us all equally. That doesn't seem fair now does it? I wonder if the incarnate Jesus gave himself that gene since he was "tempted in every way, just as we are.” (Hebrews 4:15) ;-)

Is This Faith? ;-)

See Below:

"American Looks Ripe for a Religious Revival"

So reads the headline of an interview with church growth expert Kent Hunter in my local paper. What Kent actually says is that America is "sort of like a field that’s ready for seeds.” This is hardly like a field ripe for harvest as the attention getting heading indicates. Christians say this kind of thing all of the time, I know. They say it with faith in God's providence in hopes he'll do something. But Kent is not to be taken lightly. He is a widely recognized church growth specialist who lives in my area and heads up Church Doctor Ministries. He is sought after around the world for advice and the author of several church growth books. My suggestion is to heed his warning and get involved now before it's too late. Come out of the closet...Donate to skeptical causes...then brace yourselves for the long haul just in case he ends up being right.

What Led You Initially to Deconvert, Some Surprizes

This multiple choice poll is closed and here are the results below. There were a couple of surprises.

"If I Am Wrong...I Want to Know"

Now there's a statement I endorse. What's more likely, that a believer or a skeptic wrote it?

I Had Lunch With My Former Youth Pastor, John Lloyd

Maybe you have never heard of John but he is an incredibly talented amazing man who helped me in my walk with God just after I had become a Christian in 1973. He was my youth pastor at the Adam's Apple, in Fort Wayne, Indiana. It was a hip place for young former hippies like me to find God our own way through Christian rock music and a down to earth kind of teaching from someone who was one of us before his conversion. The Adam's Apple was one of several pentecostal ministries started up all over America that cared enough to reach our generation. Nancy Honeytree (the first lady of contemporary Christian music) led us in singing every Monday evening, and we had the best musical bands come in every Friday during the summer at the very beginning of the Christian rock music era. Artists like Larry Norman, Chuck Girard, Love Song, 2nd Chapter of Acts, Keith Green, and Petra sang there, and it included Mike Warnke too, who has been disgraced since that time as a fraud.

My Goal is to Drive a Wedge Between the Brain of the Believer and The Bible

I just wanted to throw this out there in a post all its own. I aim to show there is nothing divinely inspired inside the pages of the canonized set of texts that were written by some ancient agency detecting barbaric superstitious people. If I succeed then what could the believer still believe? In any case, this is my niche. I'm arguing a negative case against Christianity because I know it best. Along with it I'm offering a good rational tool in the Outsider Test for Faith to examine all religions by the same standard.

I'm Speaking for CFI Canada's "Extraordinary Claims Examined" Panel

This will take place on January 21st at the University of Toronto - MacLeod Auditorium - 1 King's College Circle, Room 2158. Here's the link. Then I'll be in California on February 8th-9th. Link. Hope to see some of you at one place or the other.

Quote of the Day, By Articulett

She wrote:

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

A Response to Rev. Phillip Brown’s Objections to the OTF

Okay, Okay, some people think that if I don't respond directly to their specific objections that I can't. Such stupidity... So because Rev. Brown has linked to his objections to the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) as if they're more important than other ones, here goes:

What if I Personally Witnessed a Miracle?

Jayman asked me,

So if I've witnessed/experienced a miracle do I have to take the OTF?...I'm not interested in arguing that I have experienced a miracle. I am interested in whether you believe a person should take the OTF if they have experienced a miracle. Does such a person get a "free pass" so to speak?...For the sake of my question assume no natural explanation can be found and no materialistic explanation seems plausible even in principle.

I have said that it would take a personal miracle for me to believe. I didn't say what kind of miracle nor did I comment on the other things that would have to accompany that miracle. Let me do so now.

On the So-Called Failure of the Outsider Test for Faith

I will offer a brief response to Thrasymachus who claims that the Outsider Test is a failure.

Revised Poll: What Issues Initially Led You to Deconvert (Multiple Choice)

So sorry for the screw up before. This poll has been revised. What think ye?

Where David Marshall Goes Wrong, Part 4, the Final Part

This is the Final Part of my response to David Marshall's criticisms of the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF). Part 1 can be read here, with a link to Part 2 and so on.

Where David Marshall Goes Wrong, Part 3

This is Part 3 of my response to David Marshall's criticisms of the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF). Part 1 can be read here, with a link to Part 2.

Where David Marshall Goes Wrong, Part 2

This is Part 2 in response to David's criticisms of the Outsider Test for Faith. Part 1 can be found here.

Where David Marshall Goes Wrong, Part 1

In this post I will examine in detail David Marshall's criticisms of the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF). I do think he outlines things very well. I like it when someone tells us how he will proceed and then follows that outline. But it's no substitute for substance.

David Marshall

In my next post I'll examine in detail David Marshall's criticisms of the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF). I have seen him in action a few times on Amazon and here at DC and he’s like Paul Newman in the movie Cool Hand Luke who gets beat down time after time by George Kennedy only to keep getting back up to get beat down again. George just got tired of beating on him and walked away. I suspect David will not be satisfied with my response and won’t admit defeat just like Paul Newman and I’ll just tire of beating on him and walk away too. Here's the clip below:

Quote of the Day, By brdeadite99

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

*Sigh* On Answering An Objection to the Outsider Test for Faith

From a part of my Introduction to The End of Christianity:

When Christians ask if I have taken the outsider test for my own “belief system,” I simply say “yes I have, that’s why I’m a non-believer.”

My Top 25 Substantive Posts in 2010

I've made a list of what I consider the Top 20 Substantive Posts of Mine in 2009. So now I introduce you to what I consider my top 25 substantive posts in 2010:

William Lane Craig Accused of Heresy, Oh My!

Yep, there's a buzz about him from other Christians over a statement he made about original sin: "...that doctrine is not universally affirmed by Christians and is not essential to the Christian faith."

This will not be the undoing of Craig. He's an Arminian. Link. I just wish Christians could come to an agreement about their inerrant Bible. ;-) Who is a Christian anyway? In a prior generation he would have been burned at the stake.