Surely this can make us all laugh, right?
Time For Some Fun
Fun Bible Questions, by my friend Matt Hensley:
So, I thought I would help John with his blog and add a little humor today. I mean let’s face it: It’s been WAYYYY to serious around here lately. So I put together a list of fun questions to ask about the Bible. Feel free to cut loose and answer them in a fun way. After all, even super serious all knowing Atheists like us need to cut loose a little, right? Here we go:
"Christianity is Not Great": My New Proposed Book is Taking Shape
Yes, we're pretty excited. Check it out. It'll be a humdinger. ;-)
Poll on The Tea Party and Religion
It must be Poll day here at DC!
...they are much more likely than registered voters as a whole to say that their religion is the most important factor in determining their opinions on these social issues. And they draw disproportionate support from the ranks of white evangelical Protestants. LinkNotice the distinction between white and minority evangelicals? There is one, most definitely.
"Religion May Become Extinct in Nine Nations, Study Says"
A study using census data from nine countries shows that religion there is set for extinction, say researchers. The study found a steady rise in those claiming no religious affiliation. LinkThe countries? Australia, Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Switzerland.
"America Becoming Less Christian, Survey Finds"
America is a less Christian nation than it was 20 years ago, and Christianity is not losing out to other religions, but primarily to a rejection of religion altogether, a survey published Monday found. LinkIn searching for this poll I'm having a bit of trouble. Perhaps it's this one done by the Pew Forum called U.S. Religious Landscape Survey. See what you think. One conclusion is that it's more socially acceptable than ever to admit having no religion.
A Few Observations About Evangelicalism
I know beyond a shadow of doubt that evangelical (or conservative) Christianity is wrong, false, and that only deluded people think otherwise. I have to be. For I'm risking their particular hellfire, so to speak. Almost everyone agrees with me too. Global religious diversity shows us this. Even among people claiming to be Christians most of them are not evangelicals. Evangelicalism is a small slice of the religious pie, and even they have disputes between themselves over who are true Christians, so for them it's even a smaller slice of the pie. These are all well-known facts from which we can make a few observations.
One of the Most Asinine Christian Claims I've Heard
It's claimed that people like Dawkins, or Hitchens, or Harris don't know enough to reject Christianity. How much should a person know about a religion or the various branches of it in order to reject it? Really. I'd like to know. These very Christians do not know much about other branches of their own religion, so how can they reject them? And they do not know much about the various other religions around the world or the branches within them, so how can they reject them? Most Christians do not know enough about their own religion! All a person has to do to reject their own inherited religion is to subject it to the same level of skepticism they use when rejecting all other religions. This represents The Outsider Test for Faith I argue for. Just think what Christians are saying. They're saying that in order to reject any given religion a person must know a lot about it. How much, I ask? Should we spend our lives getting doctorates in them one by one? How reasonable is that? How long would it take to learn enough about all religions in order to reject them all? Wouldn't Jesus himself be opposed to granting salvation only to people who knew a lot about the religions of the world? Wouldn't he be opposed to the idea that human beings must gain the proper amount of knowledge that Christians require in order to find the correct one, if there is one? Didn't Jesus come for the lowly, the outcasts, and the babes? Such inconsistency knows no bounds. No wonder my claim is that Christians demand that we prove their faith is impossible before they will see it as improbable.
Upcoming Events: I'll Be Speaking in Louisiana, Ohio, and New York
I spoke at the University of Louisiana-Lafayette last week. This Thursday, March 24th, I'll be speaking for the CFI of Northeast Ohio, then on Friday the 25th for the CFI of Amherst, New York, then I'll be speaking at the CFI group at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, OH on the 26th. I hope to see some of you at one of these events.
CFI Memo: "E Pluribus Unum" Rather Than "In God We Trust"
As you may have heard, religious conservatives in the U.S. House of Representatives have introduced a divisive and disrespectful resolution "reaffirming" In God We Trust as the national motto....This obvious ploy to divide the nation along religious lines is utterly shameful. It excludes the millions of American non-believers, as well as the millions of Americans of minority religions that do not believe in a monotheistic god. The resolution also distracts Congress's attention from the many pressing national issues confronting it.
Congress only adopted "In God We Trust" as the national motto in 1956, when American leaders sought to distinguish the United States from the communist Soviet Union. By invoking belief in a monotheistic divinity, however, Congress divided the American populace along religious lines by reinforcing the outsider status of the nation's many nonbelievers, as well as members of minority religions that do not recognize a monotheistic god (including, for example, Buddhists and Hindus). Polls show that 16% of Americans have no religious identity, while over 40 million Americans do not identify with the motto's monotheistic God.
A far better motto for the nation is the Latin motto adopted in 1782 as part of the national seal: "E Pluribus Unum," or "Out of many, one." America's original motto accurately describes the nation as a unity comprising people from many religious perspectives. Link
"A" Week is This Week
Tell others you’re an atheist and proud of it this week. Start some discussions with people about your atheism.
A Week is not about being disrespectful to religion or people who have religious views, it’s about quietly showing that there are more people than may be realised who are ‘Good without God’ and who don’t need religion to influence their lives. Link
Why Are You An Atheist?
Jerry Coyne asked a good starter question so let me repeat it here:
Why are you an atheist? Does it have anything to do with a lack of evidence for god, or are there other factors involved?
Link
Quote of the Day, by The Maverick Jester
It was one of my children that pushed me toward atheism. He did something that I didn't approve. In the bible, we learn that if one of god's children disappoints him and refuses to beg for forgiveness, he sends them to an eternity of torture. Until that incident with my son, I didn't understand how insane the concept of hell was. Never would I want my son to suffer. He could spit on me or hate me and I would still seek his good. There is nothing that he could do that would make me want him to be tortured forever-or even a minute. Once I began to question god about hell, I began to question him about everything. I didn't want to ask questions. I wanted to believe. But once the ball started rolling, I couldn't stop it. Link
Labels: "Quote of the Day"
And the Winner is...James McGrath
There is a clear winner for my T-Shirt slogan contest with the most votes, and it's James F. McGrath. His slogan: "Atheists: Disbelieving in gods without getting struck by lightning for more than 2000 years." He said he would like to blog his way through the book by Earl Doherty that I'll send him. I look forward to that. There were many other great slogans. The ones I liked the best are below, and I may use a few of them on my shirts:
Labels: "slogans"
Why I Am Not a Christian
You can read essays with this title on the Secular Web from Richard Carrier, Graham Oppy, Keith Parsons, Ken Daniels, and myself. Enjoy.
Labels: Graham Oppy, Keith Parsons, Ken Daniels, Richard Carrier
Quote of the Day, by Russ
Simply being able to imagine something is no reason to think that it's possible for it to exist. All gods so far are imaginary. You are forced to agree with me that all gods are imaginary with you taking exception only for your particular incarnation of a Christian god. But, your god is no more real than Rama or Vishnu or Thor. Until it can be shown that a god, any god, can do something there is no reason to think it's even possible for one to exist. Until we can see a god acting on its own rather than being credited with things achieved by other means, we are fully justified in treating them like we treat trolls and flying dragons: they are the stuff of myth. Link
Let's Talk Turkey About the Evidence for Christianity
Tell me if I'm missing something. It's time to sum up the evidence for Christianity and see what it is.
Labels: "Let's Talk Turkey"
About.com Reader's Choice Awards Are Now Posted
The Christian Delusion
was chosen as the Best Atheist Book of 2010. To see other choices in other categories click on the image in the sidebar to the right, or the one below:
Quote of the Day
When people quote the bible at me, they may as well be telling me they're crazy. It probably has the same effect as people quoting the Quo'ran, Book of Mormon, or Dianetics at me-- or even the Big Book of Greek Myths-- or casting a spell upon me. I think it's crazy that people believe in magic books in the 21st century. -- articulett
Labels: "Quote of the Day"
Another Mark of a Deluded Person
[Written by John Loftus] Previously I wrote on the Ten Marks of a Deluded Person. Here's another one. Many Christians treat skeptics like me as if we are enemies to be debated rather then fellow human beings interested in the truth. That is surely one of the marks of a brainwashed or deluded person too. Dr. Randal Rauser in his book, You're Not As Crazy As I Think
, would seem to agree. Rauser: "The single most effective way to protect a core set of ideological claims from critical introspection is by positing a simplistic binary opposition between two sides while placing the views we seek to protect on the correct or true side and all views hostile to the core ideology on the incorrect side." (p. 58) "For too long we have objectified the dissenting voice at the other end of the battlefield as nothing more than a target of conquest." (p. 12) However, "The real person of truth is one who expresses a genuine willingness to listen to the other as as equal conversation partner." (p. 8) As a corrective to this Rauser endorses a resolution "...to engage with the other--the liberal, the Dawinist, the animal rights activist, and the atheist--as an equal partner in dialogue and so to treat each one as a person we can learn from and need to listen to." (p. 11)
Labels: "marks of a deluded person"
God and The Outsider Test for Faith (OTF)
Christian, if your faith does not meet the skeptical standard of the OTF then people who are born into different cultures cannot be rationally convinced to believe by virtue of being raised in their respective cultures as outsiders. Don’t tell me people in the Southern Hemisphere are converting. That’s not the point. The point is that God had to make Christianity pass the OTF, and if that’s so, why kick against the goads? Why not apply its standard against what you were raised to believe? Examine your own faith with the same level of skepticism you use when examining the other religious faiths you reject.
Labels: "Outsider Test Links"
A Shirt Slogan Contest For a Free Copy of Earl Doherty's Book
Some generous person sent me Earl's book Jesus: Neither God Nor Man - The Case for a Mythical Jesus.
Since I already had a copy of it I'm going to send this $40 book via Media Mail to the person within the US who comes up with the best shirt slogan (front side only). A friend of mine will design it just as he did for my Outsider Test for Faith shirt, which can be seen and bought right here. I'll be the final judge of the winner but I'll take into consideration any slogan that receives a high number of "Like" clicks next to it, so be sure to vote even if you don't suggest a slogan yourself. I'm looking for one that people will actually buy and wear.
Labels: "contest"
The Delusional Mind At Work
[Written by John Loftus] Let's take a look at what a Christian named fonsoc wrote:
One of us is wrong. You can prove me wrong when you can prove the non-existence of God and let me know where the very first cell came from at the base of Darwin's tree. I have never heard on credible answer to that question yet. You will know that I am right or wrong after you die. We will all die someday - and there is no argument against that. I am not just guessing, I am sure that there is life on the other side of death because of my personal relationship with God. I don't have to wait until I die to see that. He has given me that assurance in the here and now. Link.
Labels: "mind of the believer"
Why Evolution is True, by Jerry Coyne
Every day, hundreds of observations and experiments pour into the hopper of the scientific literature. Many of them don't have much to do with evolution - they're observations about the details of physiology, biochemistry, development, and so on - but many of them do. And every fact that has something to do with evolution confirms its truth. Every fossil that we find, every DNA molecule that we sequence, every organ system that we dissect, supports the idea that species evolved from common ancestors. Despite innumerable possible observations that could prove evolution untrue, we don't have a single one. We don't find mammals in Precambrian rocks, humans in the same layers as dinosaurs, or any other fossils out of evolutionary order. DNA sequencing supports the evolutionary relationships of species originally deduced from the fossil record. And, as natural selection predicts, we find no species with adaptations that only benefit a different species. We do find dead genes and vestigial organs, incomprehensible under the idea of special creation. Despite a million chances to be wrong, evolution always comes up right. That is as close as we can get to a scientific truth. - Jerry Coyne, Why Evolution Is TrueFor more see the DC Evolution Smackdown.
I'll Be Speaking on "The Christian Delusion" in Lafayette, Louisiana
This event is organized by the University of Louisiana-Lafayette Philosophy Club. It'll take place Thursday, March 17, from 5-8 PM in room 522n of Griffin Hall. See campus map. I'll not be as active here as I prepare and while I'm gone.
I No More Worship Science As I Do My Wife
The deluded mind of a believer says I worship science. What utter buffoonery! I no more do so than I worship my wife, although I trust her implicitly. I do not pray to her in hopes that by waving her magic wand she will grant my requests, nor do I light votive candles to her, nor do I build expensive cathedrals in her name and evangelize people to join me once a week to sing her praises, nor do I accept everything she says without evidence since sometimes she's wrong, nor do I read with devotion what she has written, nor will I pray to her when she dies, nor do I have any hope of being with her in heaven, nor will people be sent by her to hell if they think otherwise. No wonder skeptics think believers are brainwashed. No wonder many skeptics are adopting the Courtier's Reply in responding to believers. If believers actually think this then there is nothing left to do but laugh! ;-) And I'm serious! Point. Get. The.
Devastating Tsunami Hits Japan. You Want Evidence There Isn't a Good Omnipotent God? Here it is.
Here it is. Try explaining this rather than explaining it away.
I'll Be Teaching an Online Class for CFI on "What is Atheism?"
Yep, this will take place in April with Dr. John Shook, see announcement below:
People Don’t Know When They’re Lying to Themselves
I've said these kinds of things before but I need to say them again and again and again, this time in reference to two notorious people in the headlines. The lesson of Muammar Gaddafi and Charlie Sheen is that they're lying to themselves and don't know it. They've convinced themselves they are right. But then, this is what we as human do, most all of us. It takes a special kind of skepticism to stop ourselves from doing this. And this applies equally when it comes to our religious debates. My claim is that Christians are delusional. They simply believe despite the overwhelming evidence against their faith. They are in denial just like Gaddafi and Sheen. We can see it plainly in others. What we cannot do is see the same thing in ourselves. So I'm against faith-based reasoning, which is best defined as "belief in search of data." Gaddafi and Sheen have a belief in themselves so they have found the relevant data and convinced themselves they are in the right. You cannot convince them otherwise. That makes skepticism, an adult attitude, a virtue. So I won't believe anything for which there isn't good solid evidence for it. And I won't believe anything for which there are no reasonable answers to basic questions. What's not to understand about this?
Labels: "Cognitive Bias", "Prefer to be True"
Jesse Bering on Klüver-Bucy Syndrome and Nymphomania
This article is a very significant one by the author of two books I recommend, The God Instinct, and The Belief Instinct. He tells us: "Although Klüver-Bucy Syndrome is relatively rare, it's one of the most notorious neurological causes of a complete breakdown in one's ability to control sexual urges." Read both pages linked below and see what you think. Here is his conclusion:
Labels: "Prefer to be True"
The Danger of Belief is Thinking You Believe What God Does
[Written by John W. Loftus] A study done by Nicholas Epley from the University of Chicago tells us all believers think God agrees with what they do about a host of non-related issues. Let me just quote from Discover Magazine’s “Creating God in One’s Own Image” (Nov. 30, 2009):
This is a recipe for disaster since believers will claim they have a divine mandate for anything they think is the case.
Epley asked different groups of volunteers to rate their own beliefs about important issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, affirmative action, the death penalty, the Iraq War, and the legalization of marijuana. The volunteers also had to speculate about God’s take on these issues, as well as the stances of an “average American”, Bill Gates (a celebrity with relatively unknown beliefs) and George Bush (a celebrity whose positions are well-known).If this study shows us anything at all it should make believers less certain of what they pontificate about. In fact, this study falsifies faith itself, for there is no independent way to determine what God thinks, if he exists at all. Believers simply create their own religion, their own Gospel, and their own God in their own image.
For many religious people, the popular question “What would Jesus do?” is essentially the same as “What would I do?” Through a combination of surveys, psychological manipulation and brain-scanning, he has found that when religious Americans try to infer the will of God, they mainly draw on their own personal beliefs.
Epley surveyed commuters at a Boston train station, university undergraduates, and 1,000 adults from a nationally representative database. In every case, he found that people’s own attitudes and beliefs matched those they suggested for God more precisely than those they suggested for the other humans.
This is a recipe for disaster since believers will claim they have a divine mandate for anything they think is the case.
On the Failure of God's Strategy
So many things to say about this and so little space. But think on this. Christians describe the world as a stage for a cosmic war. So what should God do with any skeptic who's aim is to dethrone him? He could continue allowing us to do what we do waiting for the time to sock it to us in hell. But our eternal fate would be equivalent to being blindsided with a divine sucker punch after the ending fight bell had rang. And waiting until that time seems unreasonable since we're leading others "astray" into eternal damnation, which isn't something I would want people to experience if I were God. I would think he would kill or silence the leading atheists late at night in mysterious ways when no one is looking. Or, he could give them their own undeniable personal miracle so they would believe. Or, God could personally visit them and explain enough of his mysterious ways for them to believe. Then too, God could simply snap his fingers and take away their critical thinking skills so that they would believe. Christians say it's all in his plan. Balderdash! Sounds inept to me. It's like God is a Jekyll and Hyde all rolled up into one. Don't quote the Bible to me. I know what it says. I'm questioning what it says. I do not believe it. Offer a reasonable answer. Tell me why his strategy is effective rather than a failure.
Labels: "God's Strategy"
Harry McCall on the Lies of God
Does God lie? He most certainly does according to the Bible. If so, how can we trust anything in it? Maybe God's plan is to send skeptics to heaven and gullible believers to hell? ;-) Ya just can't know.
Quote of the Day, by Jon Jeremy
There is a fairly simple diagnostic test for delusion: before starting any debate, just ask: "What kind of evidence would cause you to change your mind?" If the answer is 'none' then you've caught one of the deluded. Go on with the debate by all means, but treat it as a spectator sport rather than an attempt to convince your opponent.
Proof That Islam is the Truth!
Yep, let's see other believers at the next Islamic worship service. Enjoy and convert now! So many believers, so sure of themselves, it all sounds the same. Because it is!
On Appreciating the Arguments of Ludwig Feuerbach
Feuerbach was a skeptical pioneer who influenced Karl Marx. The first edition of his influential skeptical book, The Essence of Christianity
, was criticized widely by the public at large as "baseless." So in the Preface to the Second Edition two years later, he explains why so many people thought his work was bad, just like many Christians think my work is bad. While I'm not comparing myself to him, what he said in response was brilliant:
If Nothing Else Look at the Trend, From Conservative to Moderate to Liberal to Agnostic to Atheist
[Written by John W. Loftus] In Ed Babinski's book, Leaving The Fold: Testimonies Of Former Fundamentalists,
published seven years ago, there are testimonies from former fundamentalists who became moderates, liberals, and even "ultra liberals," like Dewey Beegle, Harvey Cox, Conrad Hyers, Robert Price (who now describes himself as a "Christian atheist"), and seven others. We could add other names like Howard Van Till, Valerie Tarico, John Hick, Marcus Borg, John A. T. Robertson, James Wall, Andrew Furlong, and James Sennett. In another section there are testimonies of former fundamentalists who became agnostics, like Ed himself, Charles Templeton, Farrell Till, and five others. We could add other names like Robert Ingersoll, William Dever, Bart Ehrman, and William Lobdell. In still another section of his book there are former fundamentalists who became atheists, like Dan Barker, Jim Lippard, Harry McCall, Frank Zindler, and four others. We could add other names like Hector Avalos, Michael Shermer, Ken Daniels, Ken Pulliam, Jason Long, Joe Holman, Paul Tobin, myself and many many others. I can't remember all the names of the important people who left fundamentalist Christianity because there are simply too many of them to remember! If you read Ex.Christian.net, deconversion stories are posted there almost every day.
Dr. Richard Carrier On the Dark Ages
Richard reminded me he wrote on this subject a few years back. Enjoy. Below is the money quote:
The Debunking Christianity Challenges
Here are three Debunking Christianity Challenges:
1) The 2015 Debunking Christianity Challenge.
2) The Debunking Christianity Challenge, Part 2
3) The Debunking Christianity Challenge, Part 3
1) The 2015 Debunking Christianity Challenge.
2) The Debunking Christianity Challenge, Part 2
3) The Debunking Christianity Challenge, Part 3
Dr. Matt McCormick On the Goodness of God
In A Simple Paradox Concerning God’s Goodness he writes:
Has God committed morally wrong actions? If God is the almighty creator of the universe, then there are countless instances where there was an event that God was either directly or indirectly causally responsible for that we would ordinarily identify as morally wrong. Consider the class of actions or omissions that we would identify as morally wrong if a moral agent had been present and had committed them or allowed them to happen. A person drowns by herself near a dock on a lake where a life vest sits on the dock. If a person had been standing next to the life vest and saw her drowning in the lake, but refrained from tossing the life vest to her, we would think of that failure to act as morally abhorrent. There are countless other events like these where it does not appear that God did what we would ordinarily have identified as the morally obligatory act. Therefore, it would appear that God has committed (or by omission allowed to happen) countless morally wrong events.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)