Secular Nation Podcast Featuring David Eller on "You Atheists Just Aren't Natural"

3 comments
For today’s Podcast Dr. David Eller will read his article, “You Atheists Just Aren’t Natural”. Dr. Eller holds a PhD in anthropology and teaches in Denver Colorado. Dr. Eller has been featured in several freethought magazines including Secular Nation and is also featured in John Loftus’s newly published book “The Christian Delusion.” Listen here.

Some New and Interesting Books

1 comments
A last six of these books I already have. The others look really interesting to me and are on my wish list.

An Open Challenge to William Lane Craig

[Written by John Loftus] Dr. Craig answers one question a week here. I had asked him a question about Lessing's ugly broad ditch, which he answered nearly three years ago here. Immediately afterward I asked him a follow-up question. So far there has been no response. Maybe he'll get to it? At least I hope so. I issue a public challenge for him to answer it:

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

51 comments
11) That God created human beings with rational minds that require evidence before they accept something, and yet this same God does not provide enough evidence but asks them to have faith instead.

Christianity Disproved

6 comments
I like this site Christianity Disproved. There's lots to see and to digest. The problem is that Christianity has been disproved in every generation, especially since the Enlightenment. Christian apologists simply reinvent their faith in every generation to save it from refutation. What we have in subsequent generations is a slightly different form of the inherited branches of Christianity. As generation piles upon generation what we have are different forms of Christianity such that the Christianities of today would have suffered under the Office of the Inquisition they are so far removed. And the Christianities of the future will be just as different as today's forms.

CNN Launches Belief Blog, Controversy Ensues

2 comments
Welcome to CNN’s Belief Blog, where we'll cover the role that faith and belief play in the news - and in our readers’ lives.

We believe that understanding the role of faith in today’s world isn’t optional or nice to know. It’s need to know.
Because of the outcry from atheists like PZ Meyers and others, this Blog may also give voice to atheist and nonbeliever issues.

"Religions that preach retribution for non-belief cannot in fact lay claim to being reasonable"

13 comments
When I threaten you, I automatically remove reason as an allowable means to accepting my claim. I’ve in effect determined your choice. If you were truly free to exercise reason, I would have to accept its outcome no matter what, even if I considered you gravely mistaken. Punishment for arriving at a wrong conclusion turns reason into a thought-crime.

So when believers like Christians or Muslims contend their faiths are based on reason, one may simply object that this can’t be so because their god in fact doesn’t allow it. Using reason to arrive at any other belief than the correct one will earn you an eternity in hell. Thus, reason is in reality an evil to be avoided....Blind, unquestioning, and unexamined belief is what the theist’s retributive god truly desires, not a belief grounded in reason. Link

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

4 comments
10) That an omniscient God could not foresee that his revealed will in the Bible would lead believers to commit such atrocities against others that reasonable people would conclude there is no divine mind behind the Bible. I call this The Problem of Miscommunication.

Theories of Punishment and the Substitutionary Atonement

3 comments
Ken Pulliam broaches this subject by asking,
Why do we punish wrongdoers? What is the purpose of the punishment? It is crucial to understand the theories of punishment in order to properly understand the rationale behind the Penal Substitutionary Theory (PST) of the atonement. Link

Christians Impaled on the Horns of a Moral Dilemna

30 comments
Take for instance chapter eight in The Christian Delusion written by Hector Avalos. He argues that Yahweh is a moral monster, contrary to Paul Copan.

Here then is the dilemma: The Christian thinks there is an objective absolute morality that stems from their perfectly good God, which is both eternal and unchangeable. But the morality we find in the Bible is something quite different than what they claim. Morality has evolved. What we find in the Bible is not something we would expect from a perfectly good God. So Christians must choose, either 1) hold to a philosopher's god divorced from the historical realities of the Bible, or 2) continue to worship a moral monster.

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

6 comments
9) That although a great number of miracles were claimed to have happened in the different superstitious cultures of the ancient world, only the ones in the Bible actually happened as claimed.

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

16 comments
8) That when it comes to verifiable matters of historical fact (like the Exodus, the extent of the reign of David, Luke's reported world-wide census, etc) the Biblical stories are disconfirmed by evidence to the contrary as fairy tales, but when it comes to supernatural claims of miracles that cannot be verified like a virgin birth and resurrection from the grave, the Bible reports true historical facts.

Christian, Become a Preacher, I Dare You

6 comments

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

16 comments
7) That although we see completely different perspectives and evolving theologies in the Bible, including many things that are barbaric and superstitious to the core, it was authored by one divine mind.

Answering Two Objections That Jesus Was a Failed Apocalyptic Prophet

8 comments
Two objections to my chapter 12 in The Christian Delusion have surfaced. You can read a summary of it right here, but keep in mind that dealing with a summary of a chapter is not dealing with the case I present in that chapter. Let me answer these two objections.

How NOT to Argue Against Me: A Critique of Shandon L. Guthrie's Critique

36 comments
You can find several summaries of my new book The Christian Delusion out there. But if you think dealing with a summary of a book is the same thing as dealing with the arguments in it, then think again. One professor did this with my previous book Why I Became an Atheist, and this is how I responded:

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

9 comments
6) That although there are many other similar mythological stories told in Ancient Near Eastern Literature that pre-date what we read in the Bible, the stories in the Bible are about real events and real people.

The Best Case for Atheism

4 comments
I like the concept of this post.

The Library of a Preacher Friend

26 comments
Today I visited a "tent-making" pentecostal preacher/contractor friend and I was surprised to find he had a massive library filling up nearly a whole bedroom sized office space in his home. I browsed the books and did not find one book written by a liberal or a skeptic. I found Bible commentaries from conservative publishers, self-help psychology based Christian books (like how to have a good marriage, or raise good Christian kids), expositor's preaching books, spiritual warfare books, and a handful of apologetic books written by conservatives. He is a conservative and only reads conservative books. So no wonder he's a conservative. He does not have to read what the liberals say, or the skeptics. Others do that for him who tell him why they are wrong. His library assumes that the Bible is true. All he needs to do is understand the Bible and apply it. His reading is based on trust. He trusts conservatives to tell him how to understand, apply, and preach the truth. He does not trust anyone else. Others will deceive him. Sheesh.

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

33 comments
5) That there was a first human pair (Adam & Eve) who so grievously sinned against God when tested that all of the rest of us are being punished for it (including animals), even though no one but the first human pair deserved to be punished. If it's argued that all of us deserve to be punished because we all would have sinned, then the test was a sham. For only if some of us would not have sinned can the test be considered a fair one. But if some of us would not have sinned under the same initial conditions then there are people who are being punished for something they never would have done.

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

78 comments
4) That the highest created being, known as Satan or the Devil, led an angelic rebellion against an omnipotent omniscient omnibenelovent omnipresent God, and expected to win--which makes Satan out to be pure evil and dumber than a box of rocks.

What Best Debunks Religion: Studying Science Or the Humanities?

27 comments
Science steadily but effectively acts as a corrosive to religion. That's why we must insist our students become more scientifically literate. But a recent study done by the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research shows that what produces the most religious skepticism among college students is when they study the social sciences.
In other words, humanities and social sciences, much more than biological and mathematical sciences, challenge you to imagine the world though the eyes of others. And this exercise in imagination undercuts religious dogma far more effectively than any science lesson can.

A Paraphrase of the Kalam Cosmological Argument

98 comments
What do you think of "Ed's paraphrase of the Kalam Cosmological Argument":
(1) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
(2) The universe may have begun to exist, but the verdict is still out on that.
(3) Therefore, no conclusion about whether the universe has a cause can be advanced at this time. ;-) Link.

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

54 comments
3) There must exist a perfectly good, omnipotent God, who created a perfectly good universe out of a desire/need to glorify himself by rewarding in heaven the few human beings who just got lucky to believe by being born at the right time and place, and who will condemn to hell those who do not believe.

The End of Cosmology?

29 comments
In the March '08 issue of Scientific American is an article describing the future of our universe. First click on the scanned in image.

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

29 comments
I'm going to start a series of posts describing what must be the case if Christianity is true. When done I'll put them all together so Christians can see the formidable obstacles there are to their faith at a glance.

1) There must be a God who is a simple being yet made up of three inexplicable persons existing forever outside of time without a beginning, who therefore never learned anything new, never took a risk, never made a decision, never disagreed within the Godhead, and never had a prior moment to freely choose his own nature.

Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?

32 comments
2) There must be a personal non-embodied omnipresent God who created the physical universe ex-nihilo in the first moment of time who will subsequently forever experience a sequence of events in time.

Reviews of "The Christian Delusion" Book

12 comments
Apart from the reviews you can find on Amazon, several atheists are reviewing the book The Christian Delusion. I'll update this post as others write fair and substantive reviews of it, perhaps including some quotes from thoughtful and respectful Christians when I see them.

Isn't God's Creation Wonderful?

11 comments
God could not have made all creatures as vegans/vegetarians, could he? Nope. Not a chance. It was impossible for him. Right?

"John, I'm Scared to Doubt Because I Might Go to Hell"

21 comments
Someone recently wrote this to me. At one time I too was scared to doubt. But I was never scared of Allah's threat of hell. In fact, I never gave it a thought. Why are people scared of the Christian hell when they have never been scared of the Muslim hell? When Muslims leave their faith they are just as scared of Allah's hell as Christians seem to be about Yahweh's hell. If Christians are not scared of Allah's hell then they should not be scared of Yahweh's hell. Both conceptions of hell are culturally inherited beliefs.

Is This What We Should Expect From God?

37 comments
What do you think of the following question emailed to me by Andre:
Is it rationally defensible to believe that God would have created the entire universe, including millions / billions of years of suffering, including human and animal suffering, the extinction of the majority of species and the endless, wasteful suffering we see around us simply in order for a chosen few humans, who have managed to comply with his wishes, may spend eternity in bliss with him?

My Strategy for Debunking Christianity (Once Again)

25 comments
Christians are already atheists (skeptics) of all other religions, so all I need to do is get them to be atheists (skeptics) of their own religion. If I can do this they will be forced to think for themselves and no longer rely on the Bible or Christian theology for the answers to existence. Here's how I debunk Christianity. I've decided to do for Christians what I myself experienced. It is/was liberating to become a freethinker rather than, as Voltaire quipped, "a nonthinker." You see, there is a big difference between historians and apologists. Historians want to know what happened in the past. Apologists assume their faith is true and then do whatever it takes to defend it. Apologists cannot say, "Oh, maybe the evidence isn't there after all." Nope. They feel a huge responsibility to defend the faith for their respective clientele. I can even grant believers that some sort of deity exists. Big deal if she does! As I have argued a hundred times before it makes no difference. Why? Because natural theology is (or should be) dead.

Do I Sound Like a Fundamentalist?

22 comments
Since I appear so cocksure that Christianity is a delusion some people think I'm a fundamentalist on a par with the late Jerry Falwell. Here's a discussion I'm having about this with a Christian philosopher:

God's Wonderful World!

35 comments
Taks a look below!

Hey, Would Someone Please Do Me A Favor on YouTube?

45 comments
Given the ubiquitousness of animal suffering and pain inflicted upon each other and by human beings, would someone please put some of these images to Louis Armstrong's What a Wonderful World? Or how about from Disney's The Circle of Life? I think it would have its effect. There is no excuse for this world if there exists a perfectly good creator.

More On How Can We Know Who is Wrong

41 comments
Here's the discussion continued from How Can We Decide Who is Wrong?
Face it John, chapters 2 & 3 in The Christian Delusion are just as true about atheists as they are about Christians. You see what you want to see and believe what you want to believe. It’s not about science. It’s about your conscious & subconscious choices. When you wrote this:
I really think that given the way you are forced to argue your case above (very lame) that you are blind. The reason we cannot agree is because you are not willing to be consistent nor can you allow yourself to even consider that you are living in a cult group surrounded on every side by many other Moonies...
...you could just as easily be talking about atheists as well as Christians. I say you’re blind, you say I’m blind. I say you’re inconsistent, you say I’m inconsistent. I say your sources are weak, you say my sources are weak. I’m willing to say it’s an intellectual stalemate, but you believe you have intellectual superiority. If the answers were as obvious as either of us thinks they are, this issue would have been settled during the Enlightenment.
My response:

How Can We Decide Who Is Wrong?

572 comments
Here's an email exchange I recently had with a Christian. It's typical of many others. I said:
Although both of us could be wrong, at least one of us is wrong. How do you propose deciding which one of us is right, if one of us is?
His response:
I agree that at least one of us is wrong. Unless one of sees evidence or has an experience to convince us otherwise, neither of us will change our minds. No matter how much you and others want to paint it otherwise, atheism is not a purely scientific conclusion.
My response:
It's the method of science that shows your faith to be wrong. There is no other way but to assume a natural explanation for everything. That method has no need of a god. Historians cannot approach the past any other way, nor can scientists. If we cannot know something by the method of naturalism as applied in science and history then we cannot know something at all.

The Case For "The Case Against The Case For Christ"

186 comments
Bob Price's new book The Case Against The Case For Christ: A New Testament Scholar Refutes the Reverend Lee Strobel, incinerates Lee Strobel's book The Case for Christ, along with the evangelical apologists he interviews, including Craig L. Blomberg, Gregory Boyd, Ben Witherington III, D.A. Carson, William Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, J.P. Moreland, and others. However, I doubt many of the people who read Strobel's book will read Price's book, not the least of which because understanding Price might demand a better understanding of the issues than the cream puff book Strobel wrote for the average person in the pew, but also because Price seems so disgusted with evangelical apologists at this point in his career he can't hide it.

My Interview on "Conversations From the Pale Blue Dot"

9 comments
Luke interviewed me about my book The Christian Delusion. Hope you enjoy it.

Matt McCormick debated Russell DiSilvestro on the Resurrection

5 comments
See what you think. I liked his opening statement.

"You Can't Trust Science!"

15 comments
Christians accept the results of science in a vast number of areas. That is, except for just a few that contradict their holy ancient superstitious book. This video below is a nice summary of the results of science. How does religion stack up with science? Let's see, that book says there was a universal flood (so say many Christians). Science shows that this did not happen. What to do, what to do? How do I decide? Let's see, science says virgins don't have babies. Science shows this could not happen. What to do, what to do? How do I decide? That's easy for me. You?

Ken Pulliam Answers Two Important Questions in Genesis

3 comments

Do Fish Feel Pain?

108 comments
Yes, argues biologist Victoria Braithwaite in her new book, Do Fish Feel Pain? These important findings reinforce my chapter on The Darwinian Problem of Evil for The Christian Delusion. What did animals do to deserve their pain? I argue that it doesn't matter one whit whether humans inflict this pain on them or whether God did. There can be no moral justification for it at all, none. I also consider whether these animals, all of them, will be compensated in heaven for their sufferings, as some Christians have affirmed. All you need to do is imagine what a heaven would be like with fish in it, for example, and you can see the silliness of the whole concept. Besides, merely compensating creatures for their sufferings cannot morally justify their sufferings, otherwise we could justify torturing any sentient being by simply compensating them afterward.

Robert M. Price on Myth and Method

10 comments
Nothing in Hume or Troeltsch or Bultmann, that I can see, bids us reject miracle claims without weighing the evidence. It is just that, given the limitations imposed upon us (until we invent the time machine, that is), we cannot detect “probable miracles” even if they happened! Historical inquiry cannot touch them, even if time travel would show them to have been real!...Faith claims to be able to do an end-run around the data and to obtain certainty about an ostensible miracle via some other way. But what way is that? It is, I think, nothing more than the will to believe.

Hume already allows us to accept a miracle report, provided any naturalistic explanation would sound even more far-fetched than a supernatural one. In appealing to the universal facts of human experience, Hume is being neither deductive nor circular. He is merely appealing to what everyone knows: the frequent reports of the extraordinary we hear from UFO abductees, Loch Ness Monster fans, people who see ghosts or who claim psychic powers, always seem to turn out to be bunk upon examination. From The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, pp. 276-277.

"The Invention of Lying" is a Funny Movie

8 comments
Here's a great clip in which Ricky Gervais tells lies in order to give people hope for a life after death. It's hilarious.

Hector Avalos: "In Praise of Biblical Illiteracy"

19 comments
It was a featured article seen on The Bible and Interpretation.

Bible Contradiction Quiz Show

1 comments
This is some funny stuff and includes a few extra brilliant jabs in the middle. Enjoy.

Christopher Hitchens vs Dinesh D'Souza Debate

2 comments
Check it out:

Has Noah's Ark Been Found?

6 comments
Nope, I don't think so. Even despite this new claim, and even though it was reported by Fox News (Oh my!). Why? Because of what I wrote here, and because of what Ed Babinski wrote here. Any other questions?

NBC's Dateline: "What Were You Thinking?"

24 comments
We human beings are woefully inadequate at rational thinking, as this excellent program shows starring one of my skeptical heroes, Michael Shermer. This report offers overwhelming evidence for my Outsider Test for Faith, since it shows we are gullible social creatures who conform our actions and beliefs to our social grouping. Enjoy.