An Ideological Turing Test for Atheists and Christians

Leah had contacted me about this while she was working on it, but I didn't find time to post about it. Luckily Hemant Mehta did. Check it out and vote.

Personified Myth or Mythologized Person?

Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord's brother. I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie. (Galatians 1:18-20)

What writings of the New Testament are actually from Paul?  I know of no serious scholars that deny that Paul wrote Galatians.  In fact you will read in any search or book that is of any reputable scholar that Galatians is authentic. Paul claims in these verses to have met  James, the brother of the Lord.

I'm Serious About the Poll at Right

When faced with the probability that all I'll ever be is an atheist author/blogger making a few hundred bucks every six months along with some money every month from Amazon referral fees, I'm at a crossroads in my life. Do I continue with hope (not faith) that I can make a living at this, in addition to my carpet cleaning business in a small town where a significant minority of people won't hire my services because they know I'm an atheist? Or get a different job, or a second job, severely limiting my effectiveness as an atheist author and blogger. I have made some sacrifices willingly with no expectation of reward. It's what I wanted to do. Now what? Don't pat me on the back. Be honest.

Results of the poll:

Haven’t I Already Done Enough?

No, we need you more than ever 52 (15%)

What you do still helps 69 (20%)

First finish up a few things 5 (1%)

Take a needed break, relax 114 (33%)

Yes, move on with your life 65 (18%)

We can get along fine without you 38 (11%)

I Struggle Doing What I Do.

I struggle with the loss of purpose today, having already written and edited three books that people on both sides have recommended as the best of their kind. What's left to say I wonder, if they don't help change the religious landscape? Taken together with other recent books and those that are forthcoming, there is no where left for the deluded to hide, that is, if they really want to know the truth. I am gradually feeling the need to make some needed money to live my life out with a few more extras. You can help stave off what I see as the inevitable by donating to keep me writing and blogging. To anyone who thinks I'm getting rich off my books I challenge you to write one and see how far a few hundred dollars goes every six months. If what I do has helped you in some small way and you have the means to give back, click here, or keep track of your donations by clicking on the ChipIn link in the sidebar. Please. I am really embarrassed to have to ask. Thanks goes out to several people who have done so in the past. It means a lot to me.

Sex, Sex, and More Sex

Pardon the objectification of a woman here, which is a picture you could find in a Sport's Illustrated Swimsuit issue or a Victoria's Secret catalog, but I do it to make a point, and to get my point noticed. I just watched part of an episode of Love Bites on NBC and what I saw was heavily sexual in nature. NBC is coming out with a weekly show having to do with Playboy. Listen, I'm no prude, but a few decades ago the American Family Association would be blowing their top at these programs, and effectively boycotting their commercial sponsors. Yet sex continues to sell. Robert Price argues in the Afterward of The End of Christianity, which can be read on Amazon, that sex will be the undoing of Evangelicalism. These kind of programs will have more to do with the undoing of Evangelicalism than probably any book debunking it. Mark my words.

The Implications of Evolution are Enormous

I've previously quoted from Jerry Coyne where he tells us evolution is a fact. Here are a few of the implications: The God-hypothesis for the creation of human beings is unnecessary at best; the Adam & Eve story is a myth; human beings are not special nor even the highest creation; when we die we cease to exist just like every other species does. There are many others. Religion itself becomes an unnecessary hypothesis.

The First Review of "The End of Christianity"

Nicholas Ryan Covington is the first to review my new anthology, The End of Christianity. He mentions The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails and says, "I doubt that any rational person could remain a Christian after being informed of the arguments in these two books." So let me put it to you: Are people who believe despite overwhelming evidence and arguments being irrational?

A Very Brief Who's Who List of Recommended Skeptical Scholars

When it comes to science I highly recommend the work of people like Victor Stenger, Michael Shermer, Jerry Coyne, PZ Myers, Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, Phil Plait, Neil deGrasee Tyson, Taner Edis, and others. They know science so I defer to them. They make what I do possible, for without them it would be hard to make my case against Christianity.

The Casey Anthony Trial: Were the Jurors Stupid or What?

The death of Caylee Anthony is still a mystery they say, since Casey Anthony was acquitted today. She was only convicted of providing false information to police. Really? I find it impossible that Casey Anthony would provide false information to police about her missing daughter Caylee, if she wasn't at least an accomplice to her murder. Impossible! That Casey got off is a testament to what we know about people. Were the jurors stupid? Probably not. What went wrong then? Only one juror had a criminal record, that of drinking and driving. Good people, decent people, upstanding people in any community just cannot fathom that a mother would kill her own daughter, and that's it. Place a few felons on that jury and they would've spotted a criminal mind in action, because it's really true to say "it takes one to know one." The problem is that felons cannot serve as jurors in thirty one states and in federal courts. No, these jurors probably weren't stupid people. They were blinded by their own prejudices, a recurring theme here when it comes to Christianity. ;-)

Lying, Salvation and the Word of God: Proselytizing and the Fabrication Scriptures in Judaism and Christianity

This post theme is dedicated to District Supt. Harvey Burnett who once told me: “Write what you will you INTERNET misinformed anti-christ advocate! Love to see it and love EVEN more to put the garbage where it belongs...BACK IN HELL!” (His reply to a post 4/19/08)

Only Paul Copan and Matthew Flannagan Can Set the Record Straight

[Written by John W. Loftus] I get comments and emails from skeptics who think Christian apologists do not really believe what they defend. They think the case is so bad that apologists must be lying for ulterior motives, that they are liars for Jesus. Here is a case in point for two apologists, Paul Copan, President of the Evangelical Philosophical Society, and Matthew Flannagan. I'm not accusing these two apologists of lying for Jesus. But it sure makes it appear that way when they won't or can't answer some simple questions both Hector Avalos and I have posed to them.

More Straw Man Arguments, This Time by David Marshall

Christianity can only be defended by blind ignorance involving so many informal fallacies it can make one's head spin. Case in point today is David Marshall, a nice guy and budding scholar who has written a few books. I guess he was feeling left out since I have been highlighting these things with other Christian scholars. Now it's time to turn my attention to him. ;-)

Two Questions From the Grave, by Antony Flew and Carl Sagan

Read and respond to two similar stories, one by Antony Flew, and the other by Carl Sagan. They both have to do with the OTF:

More Hand Waving From Matthew Flannagan on the OTF

[Written by John W. Loftus] Dr. (they hand out PhD's to anyone these days) Matthew Flannagan said: "As to the OTF you'll see I have pointed out that argument is incoherent." Really? No, Really? That's a very large claim of his, akin to the claim to have refuted it. I don't think in these debates of ours I would ever claim to have refuted an argument. Remember, the larger the claim is then the harder it is to defend. Does he know this? A refutation of an argument is a very difficult thing to produce. My response:

Underhanded Biblical Interpretation: Deuteronomy 25:11-12 in Context

How Dr. Copan Explains Away Biblical Violence

Debunking Christianity Ranks Third Place Among the SBL's Bibliobloggers

Yep, not bad for an atheist site. Link. They don't like us there so they started a new ranking system where only registered Bibliobloggers can vote on the top blogs, and guess what, we're never on that list. ;-) I even suspect that the present urge to revamp the SBL ranking system is to somehow try to exclude DC, or reduce our ranking. Link. Christians and their double standards, Sheesh.

Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence

This is known as the ECREE principle mentioned by Carl Sagan and others. I think it's expressed better as "extraordinary claims require an extraordinary amount of evidence," or better yet, "extraordinary claims require an extraordinary amount of ordinary evidence," or even better yet, "extraordinary claims require an extraordinary amount of ordinary evidence, especially when we should expect that evidence to be there," but the point is the same. It's no surprise that Victor Reppert objects to it in these words:

Victor Reppert Now Claims He's a "Graduate of the OTF"

Reppert has been thinking and responding to the OTF longer than any other informed believer I know of, so if you are a believer and you object to the OTF then learn from him. When first confronted with the OTF Reppert criticized it as embracing too radical of a skepticism. Then over the years as I explained it to him further he now says he's a graduate of the OTF and wants a diploma. Cute. As far as I can tell most believers criticize the OTF when they first hear of it. Then they go through the same stages Reppert has gone though, by subsequently embracing it in the face of my arguments, basically wanting their diplomas too. Should I start printing them off and signing them just because they say so? First, here is what Reppert recently admitted:

What Is Faith?

Faith is pure wishful thinking, nothing more and nothing less. It offers a person a leap beyond what the probabilities actually lead us to think. For if something can be known to be the case we wouldn't need faith. Faith therefore is not a virtue when it comes to knowing the truth about anything. Skepticism is.

Vic Reppert's "Argument From Reason" is Against a Strawman

Yep, he does not deal with what scientifically minded skeptics actually think.

An Open Question to Victor Reppert About the OTF

I just cannot seem to disabuse him of his inconsistent position. He said:

What is the Outsider’s Perspective?

Almost all of the objections to the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) are red herrings placed in the road to sidetrack us from getting at the truth. They do not understand the perspective of an outsider, or they grossly misrepresent it in favor of faith. Since I like beating my head against the wall, let me try again.

Flannagan Versus Westbrook: Understanding the Problem

Why Dr. Flannagan is still Wrong

The End of Christianity is Here!

Amazon is now shipping my anthology The End of Christianity. I hope the effort was worth it. Let me know as you get your copy. It'll surely be hotly contested on Amazon and elsewhere. The reaction should prove to be intense. Stay tuned.

The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science, by Chris Mooney

Head-on attempts to persuade can sometimes trigger a backfire effect, where people not only fail to change their minds when confronted with the facts—they may hold their wrong views more tenaciously than ever. Link.

Dr. Flannagan Denigrates Science, Why Am I Not Surprised?

[Written by John W. Loftus] This is getting ridiculous and predictable. So let me get this straight, okay? In order to believe, Flannagan must denigrate science. Get it.? What utter rubbish. This alone should cause believers to question why they believe what they do based on their upbringing in a Christian culture. Science is the only antidote to how easily we can believe and defend what we were taught on our Mama's knees.

Why Dr. Flannagan Fails History, Dr. Hector Avalos Responds

Dr. Flannagan's use of sources shows some careless scholarship.

Dr. Matt Flannagan, of the MandM blog, has directed a few criticism at my chapters (“Yahweh is A Moral Monster” and “Atheism was not the Cause of the Holocaust”) in The Christian Delusion. Those criticisms rest not only on a basic misunderstanding and misreading of my arguments, but also on a very selective and uncritical reading of the sources Flannagan cites for support.

Believers Really Ought Not to Argue Against the OTF

Because by doing so only makes my arguments stronger, and they were already strong enough. One continuing objection is to turn the OTF against non-believers, that we ought to subject our non-beliefs to the skepticism of an outsider. I've addressed this ad nausea. But let's see with a thought experiment why this does not work. Let's say there are no non-believers at all, none. Everyone on earth believes in a religion of some kind. Let's say no skeptic ever proposed the OTF either. Christian, how would YOU propose to assess religions fairly without any double standards? This is how you do it now. Surely at least one believer would come up with the thought that since he already uses the OTF in examining other religions then why not use it to examine his own faith? This reveals that if there is any inconsistency at all in the OTF it is how believers themselves assess truth claims. As I've said, it should only take a moment’s thought to realize that if there is a God who wants people born into different religious cultures to believe, who are outsiders, then that religious faith SHOULD pass the OTF.

What Jesus Christ Had to Say About the Outsider Test for Faith!

This is my chosen title for a guest sermon I'll be preaching for the "One True Church of Jesus Christ That Has Ever Existed in History." The preacher is away on vacation. This church meets in a little building on "Faith" Street in a town called Saint Paul, Missouri, the "Show Me" state (never-mind the oxymoron). They have a membership of 10 people, all related to each other in some way. Here are my chosen texts. How should I develop my sermon?

Quote of the Day, by Articulett

I agree wholeheartedly with his assessment of the OTF:

Debating Critics On The Outsider Test for Faith (OTF)

[Written by John W. Loftus] I have had several debates in defense of the OTF. This post will serve as the key resource for these links.

First look at The Outsider Test for Faith, along with a link embedded within that post.

In no particular order here are several debates I've had about the OTF with several people:

Chris Gadsden who obfuscates on The OTF

Cameron Bertuzzi of "Capturing Christianity" .

EricRC, a Ph.D. student in philosophy, On the Fundamental Objection to the OTF.

Dr. Matthew Flannagan.

Dr. Randal Rauser.

Dr. Steve Lovell.

Dr. Thomas Talbott.

Dr. Victor Reppert.

David Marshall.

Thrasymachus.

Rev. Phillip Brown.

Steve Hays and Jason Engwer.

Paul Manata.

Is it over yet?

The Ledge, a Pro-Atheist Movie to be Released July 8th

Here's a clip with the standard Christian responses to reasoned arguments:

Dr. Flannagan Just Does Not Get it, The OTF Again and Again and Again...

[Written by John W. Loftus] Christian philosopher Matthew Flannagan wrote a review of The Christian Delusion for Philosophia Christi, the journal of the Evangelical Philosophical Society. He offers nothing but canards against the OTF. Was he not paying attention?

On Rejecting the Gospel Because of Sin

That's the Christian claim, that non-Christians reject the gospel because we prefer to sin (or do wrong). Let's try to put this canard to rest.

For the Love of God: Or Hell as a Tool for Secular Morality

Written by TGBaker:

I developed this ditty from a Facebook spat with a friend of mine who is a Christian Philosopher, Dr. James F. Sennett. I had never really thought about this area before. But I think it produces another problem with the omni-attributes of a proposed god.

Good without gods

This video is from QualiaSoup:

"The End of Christianity," My Biggest Problem, and My Promise to You

I have received some copies of The End of Christianity already. Prometheus Books is in the process of distributing them. It has the look and feel of The Christian Delusion, my previous book. From the planning stage to the final production TEC took a year and nine months of hard work. It is much easier to grab already published material and place it in a book than in getting new essays from scholars. The chapters in both books are new essays. They both took a lot of work.

And they are both great books, as the recommendations tell us coming from both Christians and skeptics who agree. There are several chapters worth the price of the books themselves. Which ones might only depend on your own particular interests. Even though I read and re-read them several times, editing and going back and forth with the authors, Richard Carrier, the copy-editor and production staff, I am reading it again in hard copy format wondering if the decisions made were good ones, and trying to locate any typos we may have missed. I just re-read Jaco Gericke's chapter titled: "Can God Exist if Yahweh Doesn't?" That chapter alone is worth the price of the book. It's awesome. I can only guess how Christians will try to gerrymander around it, since he closed all the loopholes they might want to use in escaping his conclusion, that God doesn't exist because Christians no longer believe in Yahweh, a tribal god among others in the Israelite religion.

Here's Your Chance to Vote on the OTF

Someone is using the OTF in a debate. You can vote on whether he did a good job with it. Check it out. Use it in your own debates.

Keith Parsons on Ethical Naturalism

He is a moral realist defending moral norms, something that Richard Carrier defends in the last chapter of The End of Christianity. See this post, and then see the postscript.

The Psychological Pull of the Christian Story

There is just something about the Christian story that makes me want to believe it. I know of no other story like this one. In fact, when I watch music videos of the Christian story I feel its psychological pull on me, and I'm a former believer who has rejected that story. So how much more does the story have a great amount of psychological pull on the hearts of others, especially believers, whose faith is confirmed whenever they ponder it. Case in point are the three videos below:

The Outsider Test: Pretend You're Hearing the Gospel for the First Time

This is just one of many ways to take the OTF:

Is Thomas Talbott a "True Skeptic"?

On pages 11-15 of his critique of the OTF Christian philosopher Thomas Talbott discusses “The Presumption of Skepticism.” According to him there are three “different kinds of skepticism.” There is “the skepticism of disbelief,” which sometimes requires “a kind of dogmatic certainty.” This is my kind of skepticism he opines, and he implicitly suggests I come across as a “closed-minded dogmatist.” The second kind of skepticism is that of “suspended belief,” which is his kind of skepticism that is “incompatible with dogmatic certainty and sometimes arises when one has the humility to recognize the limits of one’s own knowledge.” Since this is so he says of himself, “I am a true skeptic.” *cough* The third kind of skepticism is “merely the opposite of being overly gullible,” which is a “healthy skepticism” that everyone should have.

The Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) is Not Hard to Understand

When believers criticize the other faiths they reject, they use reason and science to do so. They assume these other religions have the burden of proof. They assume human not divine authors to their holy book(s). They assume a human not a divine origin to their faiths.

Believers do this when rejecting other faiths. So dispensing all of the red herrings about morality and a non-material universe, the OTF simply asks believers to do unto their own faith what they do unto other faiths. All it asks of them is to be consistent.

The OTF asks why believers operate on a double standard. If that's how they reject other faiths then they should apply that same standard to their own. Let reason and science rather than faith be their guide. Assume your own faith has the burden of proof. Assume human rather than divine authors to your holy book(s) and see what you get. If there is a divine author behind the texts it should be known even with that initial skeptical assumption.

So the OTF uses the exact same standard that believers use when rejecting other religions. If there is any inconsistency at all it is not with the OTF. It is how believers assess truth claims. For it should only take a moment’s thought to realize that if there is a God who wants people born into different religious cultures to believe, who are outsiders, then that religious faith SHOULD pass the OTF.

If Christians want to reject the OTF then either they must admit they have a double standard for examining religious faiths, one for their own faith and a different one for others, or their faith was not made to pass the OTF in the first place. In either case all of their arguments against the OTF are based on red herrings, special pleading, begging the question, the denigrating science, and an ignorance that I can only attribute to delusional blindness.

To read more on the OTF click here.

Thomas Talbott Replies

I have found most of the criticisms of the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) are asking it to be something that it is not. The rest are based in a lack of understanding, probably because of the need to believe and defend what cannot be defended. The OTF is expressed to believers that they should examine their own faith with the same level of skepticism they use when examining the other religious faiths they reject. This has annoyed believers, since what it asks is that there should be no double standards when evaluating religious faiths, one for your own culturally inherited religious faith and a different one for the other religious faiths you reject.

The Idea of an Outsider, a Further Critique of Thomas Talbott, Part 1

On pages 15-20 of the paper written by Christian philosopher Thomas Talbott, “The Outsider Test for Faith: How Serious a Challenge Is It?,” he critiques the idea of an outsider. Let me begin with pages 15-16.

First let me say that whenever it comes to defending any argument critics will offer objections that the author may not have initially considered. This comes as no surprise since authors cannot usually anticipate everything. Even if they can anticipate additional objections they cannot say everything they know in an initial article or chapter. It’s an ongoing dialogue of learning as we go, in making the best case in light of new objections, in responding to these additional objections, and in refining or revising the argument in light of them. That’s why many articles in the journals end up being made into whole books. It looks as if that will happen with my OTF someday too.

The End of Christianity Takes Place This Week!

Well, the book has been printed and is being shipped out anyway. Order it now. While you're at it tell your "peeps" and/or get the other books below. This is a good time to do it since if you buy two or more the shipping is free. *ahem*

William Lane Craig: "This is a Delightful Brainteaser"

Craig agrees with and "wholeheartedly endorses the bizarre...conclusion that the universe had a beginning and yet there was no time at which the universe did not exist.” What is this delightful brainteaser?

The Idea of an Outsider, a Further Critique of Thomas Talbott, Part 2

On pages 15-20 of Christian philosopher Thomas Talbott’s “The Outsider Test for Faith: How Serious a Challenge Is It?,” he critiques the idea of an outsider.

Not to Beat a Dead Horse But Victor Reppert Does Not Know What it Means to Poison the Well Either

I think he's feeling the heat. For a person to commit the fallacy of "poisoning the well" no argument is made except that which is against the person. I made an argument against him dismissing a book I had recommended. Now people can judge for themselves whether they can trust his judgment on other matters, but for me and my household I don't. Link. It's about probabilities. If a man does not know what an ad hominen fallacy is and if he does not know what it means to "poison the well" can we trust his Argument From Reason if he does not know basic college level logic?

Quote of the Day

All religions have the same faith-based foundation. When faith is a foundation anything can be believed. --John W. Loftus