The Problem with Intelligent Design
To be found at Leaving Christianity.
Another One Leaves the Fold: "Diary of a Beleaver"
This new Blog contains "The post-faith musings of a former Christian College professor and writer for Christianity Today. One of the most interesting Blog posts so far is this one:
A Critique of a Common Apologetic Strategy by Ex-Apologist
Ex-Apologist offers an excellent analysis of a common apologetic strategy against naturalism seen here! It seems he's expanding on what it means to apply Occam's Razor to the riddle of existence. Start with the simplest explanation and then allow for more complexity as problems arise with that conclusion. I'm trying to develop a scale for extraordinary claims seen here. His analysis helps to complete it.
On Being Ignorant of One's Ignorance and Unaware of Being Unskilled, by John Loftus
[Written by John W. Loftus] As a former Christian, especially soon after I first converted, I thought I knew the answers to the riddle of existence. The answers were all in the Bible. And I thought I could also understand the Bible well enough to know, especially before I had any advanced learning. Initially I was a Bible Thumper. My motto was: God said it. I believe it. That settles it. All of the answers were to be found in the Bible, and I thought I knew them--all of them. So without any education at all I soon had the confidence to speak to college professors I met and not be intimidated at all. And I did. I remember walking away from some conversations thinking to myself how ignorant that professor was. Yep. That's right. At that time I was what psychologists have dubbed "Unskilled and Unaware of it." And it appears to me many Christians who comment here are just as I was. They come here with the answers. Some of them do not even have a college education. And yet they offer nothing but ignorant comments. I can't convince them otherwise. They are like I once was.Looking back on those initial years I could see clearly that I was not able to think through the issues of the Bible, especially hermeneutics, until after gaining a master's degree. I would have told you upon receiving my first master's degree that I was ignorant before then. But I kept on learning and studying. Age had a way of teaching me as well. It seems as though as every decade passed I would say I was more ignorant in the previous one. As every decade passed I see more and more wisdom in Socrates who claimed he was wise because he didn't know. According to him the wiser that a person is, then the less he claims to know. Awareness of our ignorance only comes with more knowledge.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
20) That while scientific tests on petitionary prayers have produced at best negligible results and at worst completely falsified them, God answers these kinds of prayers anyway.
In Admiration of Paul Kurtz
Paul Kurtz has resigned from CFI. His letter of resignation can be read here. His hand picked board of officers wanted to take the organization that he started in a different direction than he wanted it to go. Apparently the board wanted to go in the direction of the new atheists with a more forceful attack against religion, whereas Paul wanted to include all secular-humanists in a vision for the future, many of which are liberals. Apparently this was a deal breaker with no room for an agreeable compromise between them.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
19) That although there is no cogent theodicy that can explain why there is such ubiquitous and massive human and animal suffering if a perfectly good omnipotent God exists, God is perfectly good and omnipotent anyway.
"The Christian Delusion" is Now A Kindle Book
Just click on this link: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails
R Joseph Hoffman's Conclusion with Regard to the Historicity of Jesus
You can read about him here. This is what he wrote:
I have come to the following conclusion: Scholarship devoted to the question of the historicity of Jesus, while not a total waste of time, could be better spent gardening....I admit to being a bit prickly on the subject, having finally concluded that the sources we possess do not establish the conditions for a verdict on the historicity of Jesus. Link.
"The only thing we can and should trust is the sciences"
That's one of my claims in chapter 4 of The Christian Delusion (p. 89). I had previously argued that Christians use the naturalistic scientific method when they debunk the religious faiths they reject (p. 86), and later on in that same chapter I argued that without a better alternative method this is all we have (p. 94). I mean, really, is there any comparison to accepting blindly what we learned on our mama's knees, or through an "inner witness of the Holy Spirit," or the poor evidence of historical evidence, or a the warming of the bosom? Come on. Let's get real.
The Outsider Test for Faith is the Antidote to Confirmation Bias
[Written by John Loftus]
First let's define confirmation bias from Wikipedia, which...
First let's define confirmation bias from Wikipedia, which...
...is a tendency for people to prefer information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses, independently of whether they are true. People tend to test hypotheses in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and neglecting alternatives. This strategy is not necessarily a bias, but combined with other effects it can reinforce existing beliefs. The biases appear in particular for issues that are emotionally significant (including some personal and political topics) and for established beliefs that shape the individual's expectations.
Eric On Believing Despite Not Being Able to Explain the Atonement
I'm producing several posts called: "Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?" In a recent one I wrote: "17) That although there is no rational explanation for why Jesus had to die on the cross to atone for our sins, his death atoned for our sins." From this a discussion ensued between Eric, who is a Christian Ph.D. student, and me. It's interesting to see where discussions lead and I want to highlight this one out of the many other issues that were raised in the comments.
My Interview on American Freethought
Enjoy. Just click on the "download" link to hear it.
We talked about The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails
[First posted on 7/2/10]
We talked about The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
18) That although historical reconstructions of the past are are notoriously difficult because they depend on the poor evidence of history, and even though historians must assess that evidence by assuming a natural explanation for it, and even though historical evidence can never establish how to view that evidence, the Christian faith can be established historically anyway. My argument is that when it comes to miraculous claims, yesterday’s evidence no longer can hold water for me, for in order to see it as evidence, I must already believe in the framework that allows me to see it as evidence. In other words, in order to see yesterday’s evidence as evidence for me, I must already believe the Christian framework that allows me to see yesterday’s evidence as evidence for Christianity.
Theodicky by Thom Stark
Here is an older post written by a Christian theist dealing with the problem of evil in light of the Haitian earthquake. I'm pretty impressed with it. Here are a few snippets to whet your appetites:
Christian Professor Dr. Randal Rauser to Review TCD
After reading 70% of it he writes:
The Christian DelusionA quick look at Dr. Rauser's Curriculum Vitae shows he's not a Bible thumper to say the least. This should be interesting.
Can a Religion Pass The Outsider Test for Faith?
The Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) calls upon believers to test their own geographically inherited faith with the same level of skepticism they use to test the religious faiths they reject. The only kind of religion that might possibly pass this test is one that embraces some kind of nebulous god (although I don't think one exists). I think all of the so-called divinely revealed religions based in the ancient superstitious past fail this test. And yet, it didn't have to be this way had there been more evidence to believe. The evidence just doesn't exist for any of them. Christianity, for instance, could pass the OTF if God provided the needed evidence to believe. But he didn't do so.
My Chapter in TCD is the Inspiration for Someone at Debate.org
I hope The Instigator on this forum does well with it. He begins:
In this debate, I shall argue that the existence of vast amounts of animal suffering is a compelling reason to reject the existence of a theistic, omni-benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient God. This debate is targeted specifically at Christians, and Christian responses to the argument. For those who are interested, the inspiration for this debate comes from the chapter "The Darwinian Problem of Evil" in the recent atheistic anthology The Christian Delusion
The Problem With Using God as an Explanation
Actually there are many problems with using God as an explanation. Let me highlight what I consider one of the most important problems. It's this: it explains too much. It explains everything, and so it explains nothing. What do I mean by this? If every problem can be solved by a single solution then the solution has too much explanatory power. It becomes a simplistic solution.
Debating Bart Ehrman is a Bad Idea?
So writes Jim Elliff on the Christian Communicators Worldwide blog. It is "wrongheaded" to set up debates with Bart Ehrman "or, for that matter, any unbelieving skeptic." Link. Why? Because debates like these will cause some believers to lose their faith. He's got that right. It does. ;-)
"Reading Books is Bad for Evangelical Christians"
Hey, I liked this post very much. I'm mentioned in it!
The Choice is Emphatically NOT Between Christianity and Atheism
I am an atheist. I reject all religious faiths and paranormal claims. In fact I reject faith, period. I should never take a leap of faith beyond what the evidence leads me to conclude. So I do not believe. I am a non-believer. That distinguishes me from people who believe. Believers are all in one category (or type, or classification) of knowers. Non-believers are in a different category of knowers. Believers base what they claim to know on faith. Non-believers base what they claim to know on the actual probabilities.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
17) That although there is no rational explanation for why Jesus had to die on the cross to atone for our sins, his death atoned for our sins.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
16) That while the results of science are assured when it comes to chemistry, physics, meteorology, mechanics, forensic science, medical science, rocket science, computer science, and so forth, when it comes to evolutionary science that shows all present life forms have common ancestors, or when science tells us that dead bodies do not arise from the grave because total cell necrosis is irreversible, the results of science are wrong because the Bible says otherwise.
Quote of the Day by Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society
If science disappeared from human memory, we would soon be living in caves again. If theology disappeared from human memory, no one would notice. Theology is a completely and utterly useless pursuit. It is self-indulgence of the first order. Link.
HT Russ
Interesting Recent Unrelated Posts
Listen to an interview with Bible scholar Dr. Jaco Gericke.
Then check out Dr. Keith Parsons on Robin Collins's fine tuning argument.
And don't miss Dr. Ken Pulliam's posts related to slavery in the South. With regard to slavery the pro-slavery arguments were stronger than the abolitionists. See for yourself what the pro-slavery contingent said.
Then check out Dr. Keith Parsons on Robin Collins's fine tuning argument.
And don't miss Dr. Ken Pulliam's posts related to slavery in the South. With regard to slavery the pro-slavery arguments were stronger than the abolitionists. See for yourself what the pro-slavery contingent said.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
15) That while there is no rational explanation for how a person can be 100% man and 100% God, and although ancient pagan superstitious people believed this can take place (Acts 14:11-12; 28:6), Jesus was incarnate God in the flesh.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
14) That although there were many false virgin birth claims about famous people (like Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great, Plato) mythical heroes (like Mithra, Hercules) and savior gods (like Krishna, Osiris, Dionysus) in the ancient world, Jesus was really born of a virgin.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
13) That Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy even though there is not one passage in the Old Testament that is specifically fulfilled in his life, death, and resurrection that can legitimately be understood as a prophecy and singularly points to Jesus as the Messiah using today's historical-grammatical hermeneutical method.
Was Mark's Gospel a Work of Fiction?
As I've argued before, history is a slender reed to hang a religious faith on. The evidence for an event happening in the past is always going to be less than what we personally experience--always! We know all to well about forgeries, faked evidence, and fraudulent claims to take anything at face value, especially when it comes to the past, and exponentially when it comes to some miraculous story in the ancient superstitious world.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
12) That although people around the world are raised in different cultures to believe in their particular god(s) there is only one God and he will judge all people based upon whether or not they believe Jesus is Lord.
Secular Nation Podcast Featuring David Eller on "You Atheists Just Aren't Natural"
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
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?
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
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
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.Because of the outcry from atheists like PZ Meyers and others, this Blog may also give voice to atheist and nonbeliever issues.
We believe that understanding the role of faith in today’s world isn’t optional or nice to know. It’s need to know.
"Religions that preach retribution for non-belief cannot in fact lay claim to being reasonable"
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?
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
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
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.
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?
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?
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.
Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
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
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)