When it comes to believing in miracles, Christians have a double burden of proof.
On the one hand, they must show that a particular “event” was not very likely. Hume goes so far as to say that a miracle is a “violation of a natural law.” But the point is that the more unlikely an event is by the standards of natural law, the more its occurrence can be understood as a miracle. Who, for instance, would claim that a blooming flower is a miracle, or a thunderstorm, or even the birth of a baby?
I've asked this question before, and I'll ask it again. Only very rarely do I ever find Christian apologetics websites linking to skeptical ones. There are very very few that do, and among those that do, DC is usually found linked there with a small number of others. Compare what Christians do with what we do here at DC. At DC we not only link to several of the best Christian apologetical sites, I even link to some popular Christian apologetical books from time to time, like the new
Apologetics Study Bible. Why is there this disparity? I think we can link to and provide people with the best that Christianity has to offer and still beat their best arguments. If they truly thought as we did they should have no problem doing likewise. Maybe they're just worried
something like this could happen.
First posted on 10/06/07
Dr. Robert Oerter, Associate Professor of physics at George Mason University and author of
The Theory of Almost Everything: The Standard Model, the Unsung Triumph of Modern Physics, has a website called
Early Christian Religion. He tells me "It's not really a debunking Christianity site; more of 'let's learn what actual Biblical scholars are saying about early Christianity and the Bible.'"
Brian has a post written by me called "Calvinism Explains Everything...and Nothing!" And says in it "John's website:
Debunking Christianity is awesome!" There's lots of other good stuff there.
Check it out for yourselves.
Probably the most comprehensive treatment of the Christian virgin birth claim is this recent book by Robert J. Miller, a Fellow of the Jesus Seminar.
Check it out and then give up such a claim as the liberals have already done.
I really like Luke's website
Common Sense Atheism where he recently called my attention to the
videos of this conference that took place in September. I think everyone interested in the issues that separate us should subscribe to his site. It's my favorite one, both informative and keeping me up to date on what is happening on the web.
Christians claim that skeptics have come and gone but their faith has withstood all attacks so far and survived.
Balderdash! Here's the truth. The Christianity that survived is a reinvented one in each generation as the result of skeptical attacks, sometimes coming from within. Just think of the modernist rift due to the enlightenment which divided all denominations to some degree. This division can be attributed to the skeptical attacks of Hume, Kant, Darwin, Nietzsche, Paine, Ingersoll, and many others. The liberal church is a testament to the effectiveness of the skeptical arguments. Even within conservative denominations there are liberal ideas that would have been condemned by the
Office of the Inquisition, like
Open Theism, a metaphorical and/or annihilation view of Hell, women in leadership, Preterism, the emergent church, acceptance of a gay orientation, the mythical (or literary) view of Genesis 1-2, and so forth and so on. The Christianity practiced and believed by any denomination today is not something the early church would recognize. And the future church will be almost as different. Let's have done then with this cockamamie notion that the church has survived our attacks. No it hasn't. In each generation the former Christianity dies, so to speak, and a new one is invented due to skeptical arguments.
Yep, that's what I'll do if there is a judgment before God. My friend Kevin Harris, who produces William Lane Craig's podcasts, tells me that: "Going to hell is insane! But that's what sin is! Self-induced insanity!"
Link. But if this is true I plan on pleading insanity. I could not believe differently than I do. Consequently, I did not know what I was doing was wrong, nor did I know there would be such severe consequences for my actions. Now what fair judge (much less a perfectly good one) would ever sentence me to hell, any hell, based on these considerations?
None! Q.E.D.
In yet another attempt to defend his beliefs my friend Kevin Harris wrote: "Christian theology teaches that Adam perfectly represented you and me. We all would do the same thing even in the fantastic beauty and circumstances of Eden."
Link. But if we would all do exactly what Adam & Eve did by sinning, then we were imperfectly made, or it was entrapment, hence the buck stops with the Creator.
Only if some of us would not have sinned as they did can Christians claim otherwise. Q.E.D
Robert M. Price, Darrell Bock, John Dominic Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson and James D. G. Dunn are the contributors. Click here:
The Historical Jesus: Five Views
There are details to be worked out before I can say the debate will definitely take place. I just heard from the sponsor today.
I'll post an interesting question and my answer from time to time. Here's one from Eric:
I think it would be fascinating to read about your time studying under William Lane Craig: what your relationship was like, what you thought of him as a teacher, what the most important things you learned from him were, what some of your most memorable interactions with him were, etc.
Welcome to The Promethean's exclusive Q&A with Victor J. Stenger, author of the New York Times bestseller
God: The Failed Hypothesis. Even believers can appreciate Stenger's fervent discussion of an emerging atheist movement, as he explains in his newest book,
The New Atheism: Taking a Stand for Science and Reason.
You should check this out, especially his latest review of the movie
The Invention of Lying.
I've been invited to submit some definitions for God which will turn into a book, but having seen the other ones it seems they covered it well enough already. ;-) Any other suggestions?
This November, join the American Humanist Association for a special screening of
Creator of God: A Brain Surgeon's Quest.
Some of you have asked me where some of the former DC Members have gone. They are Blogging on their own.
Check Lee's Blog out. Look around and comment, it's a good Blog!
I'm going to stop it. I've learned what I wanted to learn. Here are the results after a bit more than a day:
I met neurosurgeon Vivekanand Palavali recently who has made a documentary movie about his quest to find out who God is. See the trailer below. This is gonna be good!
Former blog member here at DC has his own Blog, like I recommended that they all start on their own. Joe's latest post starts off like this:
I want to introduce you to my friend Terri. She is a person of simplicity, and yet her depth of character has you looking down and not seeing bottom. Being a complicated person is not what I am talking about. Any chick – any dude, for that matter – can be complicated, conflicted, unpredictable, with “issues.” That’s not what I’m talking about at all. I’m talking about a person who is enough of an individual to have a personality you can nail down. You can predict them, and yet they can teach and surprise you in unforeseen ways. Such a friend is Terri.
Link.
Look around and see what you think.
Eric asked some interesting questions in the com-box of a post of mine. Read my response below.
I was emailed the following question and I responded to it. See what you think:
I had told him I was puzzled that he still believes. Here is what he said and my response:
Read this announcement below. Come join us.
With his permission here it is, below:
There are a few unnamed Christian wannabe apologists out there who viciously attacked me when I first came online before starting this Blog. I was repeatedly told I was stupid, ignorant, and even brain-dead in so many ways it took me by surprise. I was lied about and verbally maligned with everything I said. The treatment I received from them was absolutely appalling. In fact, they still do that to me. But all I just wanted to do originally was to reasonably discuss the issues that separate us. I did not set out to debunk Christianity. I merely wanted to find a place to discuss the issues in a respectful atmosphere. Had they done this I'm almost certain I would not have started this Blog and I would not have become so passionate about debunking the very faith they use to justify their treatment of me. If you want to motivate me call me stupid. I told them that doing so was like pouring gas on the fires of my passion but they laughed some more. Even now they still laugh. I dare say that they would've lit the fires that burned me at the stake in a previous generation. So I got to thinking about the people who died so that I have the freedom to speak out, and I dedicated my life to making sure I did not trample on their blood by not doing so. I also realized that since I had the means to effectively argue against the Christian faith I could not simply walk away from what I've learned without also sharing it with others who can benefit from it. So there is no turning back.
DC DOES make a difference!
Link.
To read what I wrote about her book
click here. As announced earlier, if you think this is a helpful review then a positive vote would be appreciated.
He's read my book along with several others and writes:
Redated post from 3/5/09.
He's funny and intelligent. Recently he called for
An Atheist and Agnostic Academic Association Affiliated with the Society of Biblical Literature. He also
wrote about my work as well. Why wouldn't I like such a guy? ;-) Thanks Jim!
That's my claim. I watched
his interview on the Oprah show Monday, and while I think he'll continue to struggle with his past, I thought he was a complete jerk before watching it. He describes his life and I honestly felt for him deeply. He said that he's tired of failing and I believe him.
There's a movie about his life that looks interesting. But here's my point. Once we understand someone and what made that person who he is, we can love him. If I only understood everything about a person and every experience he has ever had that made him who he is, then I could love him completely. An omniscient God supposedly has that understanding of all of us. Hence an omniscient God can never be angry with us. Q.E.D.
[Edited for Pulliam's newest post today where he comments on the discussion in my book]. Dr. Ken Pulliam is providing this on his blog (read his posts from the bottom up).
Link.
Whether it is or not you should be the judge. As you would guess I am flattered to no end and feel undeserving of anyone saying such a thing.
Link.