Finally, My Book Made it on a Top Ten List at Amazon.co.uk
I say "finally" because it hasn't gotten much attention over there. Check it out.
The Evolution of Sin
My claim is that religion and morality both evolve. Since the canonical Bible was written over a period of about 1200 years or so, we can see this evolution in the Bible itself. Professor Gary Anderson tells us of the evolution of ideas about sin in this interview.
How to Undercut Christianity at a Fundamental Level
I am not arguing to please skeptics. They are not my target audience. And devout Christians will think my arguments are weak. But I am making a difference. Maybe people should think about that. Maybe I do know what I'm doing?
Notes From Stephen Law's Debate on the Existence of God
He recently debated Hamza Andreas Tzortzis and he concludes a bit like me:
We may not be able to answer the question “Why is there something rather than nothing?” But we can be rightly confident the answer isn’t “Because a supremely powerful and evil person made it.” So why can’t we be equally confident that the answer isn’t “Because a supremely powerful and good person made it”? Link
Why Do My Arguments Not Convince Devout Believers?
I merely offer up good arguments against their faith. That's all I can do. Devout believers (my target audience) won't seriously consider them until such time as they have some sort of crisis in their lives that cannot be adequately explained by a good God. They'll seriously consider them at that time. My arguments are like seeds of doubt ready to sprout if and when they experience that crisis. Since many believers do experience some kind of crisis in their lives there will be a certain percentage of believers who, having been previously exposed to my arguments, will leave their faith at that time. It's a waiting game.
Celebrating Life Beyond Belief
LIKE revivalists from an alternative universe, 2500 hardcore believers in the absence of religion packed into the Global Atheists Convention in Melbourne last weekend to give a hero's welcome to the high priest of belief in unbelief, Richard Dawkins. Link. Read more about this event From the Australian
Either the Garden of Eden Test Was a Sham or a Myth
In a previous post of mine I argued that the "supposed" test in the Garden of Eden was a sham. Then along comes my friend Dr. Dan Lambert who argued that we atheists have it wrong because "The Garden story is a myth invented to explain why people sin. Simple. End of story." At least Dan understands it for what it is. But if he's correct then how does this save his faith from refutation? Whether it's a sham test or a myth it doesn't matter. Why should any intelligent person base his faith on ancient myths? And there are lots of them in the Bible.
The Open Scrutiny of the Internet Kills Religions
HT (Hat Tip) to Andrew Atkinson for the video below:
Loftus vs Wood Debate: My Opening Statement
Below is my 20 minute opening statement against David Wood at the Virginia Regional Apologetics Conference. The question we debated was this: "Does God Exist?" See what you think.
The Test in the Supposed Garden of Eden Was a Sham
If under the same initial test conditions in the supposed Garden of Eden every human being would fail that test, then either, 1) God created us faulty in some way, or 2) The test was a sham. And since a fair test would mean some of us would not have sinned, then some human beings are being punished in this world for something they never would have done in the first place. This is just one of many problems that keeps me from believing.
I'm Back. I'll Be Headed Out to the Virginia Regional Apologetics Conference on Saturday
From what I understand several atheists are coming to the debate between David Wood and myself. That's encouraging.
I Accept Submissions From Christians
I accept submissions from published Christian philosophers and apologists here at DC. If you want feedback on some argument of yours then click on my Blogger profile and send me an email. Don't send me any links, just send me your text. I've published items from William Lane Craig, Kenneth Howell, Craig Blomberg, John F. Haught, Douglas Groothuis, James F. Sennett, and some others.
My Stepfather John Died Friday
I arrived in Reno, Nevada, to see John (his name) two hours before he died. He looked comfortable until the end. They said he waited until I arrived to hear my voice and that with no blood pressure he shouldn't have survived Thursday night. It was bittersweet. I'm now helping my Mom work through her grief along with some legal and funeral decisions. My brothers both live out here, one in Reno and another in Sacramento, CA, so she'll be in good hands. John's remains are going to be cremated, just like my Dad was, and just as I plan on being. Below is a rough draft of what I plan on saying during the memorial planned at his Presbyterian Church later this week.
I'm Headed For Nevada To Visit My Family
As I wrote before my stepfather is probably on his death bed. I just heard from my Mom that his legs are purple and he has no blood pressure. So I'm flying out early in the morning to be there. Continue to enjoy the discussion here at DC while I'm gone. An anonymous Christian reader of this blog has helped me with expenses, for which I'm very grateful. Any additional financial help is always welcome. Thanks in advance for your kind thoughts.
Christopher Hitchens On the Ten Commandments With Better Ones
I have previously written about the Ten Commandments here. Christopher Hitchens talked about them recently in an eight minute video. Why can't believers see them for what they are? And why didn't an omniscient creator come up with better ones? See what you think:
Conversations From the Pale Blue Dot
Recently Luke at Common Sense Atheism interviewed Hector Avalos, James Sennett and Matt McCormick among others. I'm jealous. It's great stuff. Luke is a great interviewer. Link.
Did Napoleon Ever Exist?
At best history gives us only scant evidence for some of our most firmly held conclusions. Scant evidence then is at best what we can hope to find. But scant evidence is also easy to deny. "In the interest of conservative theology, to reduce to an absurdity the purely negative tendencies of the rationalistic criticism of the Scriptures then in vogue" Jean-Baptiste Pérès (1752 - 1840) wrote a book called Did Napoleon Ever Exist?.
It generated a lot of discussion. That's because there is only scant evidence for historical claims. But come on, do we really want to deny that Napoleon existed? We are then FORCED to accept scant evidence for historical claims or else we may end up denying such things like Napoleon's existence. What Pérès failed to realize is that if he can deny Napoleon ever existed then how much more so can I deny the extraordinary historical claims of the Bible.
Given the scant nature of historical evidence I think that when it comes to ORDINARY claims, disregarding for the moment EXTRAORDINARY ones, the burden of proof is on the person who denies what any ancient document says. I must grant that the textual evidence is prima facie reliable until shown otherwise. You see, that's what we MUST do with scant historical evidence. And I do not think the mythicists have met that burden of proof with regard to Jesus. [When it comes to EXTRAORDINARY claims the burden of proof is reversed].
It generated a lot of discussion. That's because there is only scant evidence for historical claims. But come on, do we really want to deny that Napoleon existed? We are then FORCED to accept scant evidence for historical claims or else we may end up denying such things like Napoleon's existence. What Pérès failed to realize is that if he can deny Napoleon ever existed then how much more so can I deny the extraordinary historical claims of the Bible.
Given the scant nature of historical evidence I think that when it comes to ORDINARY claims, disregarding for the moment EXTRAORDINARY ones, the burden of proof is on the person who denies what any ancient document says. I must grant that the textual evidence is prima facie reliable until shown otherwise. You see, that's what we MUST do with scant historical evidence. And I do not think the mythicists have met that burden of proof with regard to Jesus. [When it comes to EXTRAORDINARY claims the burden of proof is reversed].
Theist Friendly Books
I made it on a list of theist friendly books, see here, although I'm not sure about a couple others.
On the Difference Between Affirming and Denying Something
I don't yet think some Christians understand the difference between affirming a claim and denying one, especially extraordinary ones. Let me take the example of who killed Jon Bene Ramsay, that decade or two long ago tragic murder. There are several scenarios and suspects. But to act with certainty that you know who did it is different, much different, than someone who says I just don't know, or someone who denies your claim. Either position seems much more defensible than to know with certainty who did it. Let's say that there are five suspects (I don't know if there are). If I deny that one of them is the killer then I may have an 80% chance of being right in my denial, you see. I say "may" because it depends on the evidence. But when we talk about an extraordinary claim coming from an ancient set of documents this problem is magnified a hundred fold, for there is no evidence of such things as a talking serpent, an axe head that floated, or a talking ass. The probability that these things did not happen is on my side.
Vinny on "Why I Am Agnostic About the Historical Jesus"
Although I hesitate to do this again, here we go. See what you think. What am I missing?
Proof That Jesus Existed: They Found the Nail Used to Crucify Him!
The four-inch long nail is thought to be one of thousands used in crucifixions across the Roman empire. Archaeologists believe it dates from either the first or second century AD. The nail was found last summer in a decorated box in a fort on the tiny isle of Ilheu de Pontinha, just off the coast of Madeira. Pontinha was thought to have been held by the Knights Templar, the religious order that was part of the Christian forces which occupied Jerusalem during the Crusades in the 12th century. The knights were part of the plot of Dan Brown's best-selling novel, The Da Vinci Code. Bryn Walters, an archaeologist, said the iron nail's remarkable condition suggested it had been handed with extreme care, as if it was a relic.
What Are Your Favorite Skeptical Books?
I've listed ten of my favorites right here. Let me add to this list David Eller's book, Atheism Advanced: Further Thoughts of a Freethinker
, and Jason Long's book, The Religious Condition: Answering And Explaining Christian Reasoning
. As you can see, my favorite skeptical books are not scientifically or philosophically related primarily because of what I think about Natural Theology. There are many others. What others are your favorites?
, and Jason Long's book, The Religious Condition: Answering And Explaining Christian Reasoning. As you can see, my favorite skeptical books are not scientifically or philosophically related primarily because of what I think about Natural Theology. There are many others. What others are your favorites?A Christian Drive By
More and more Christians notice DC and then proceed to make a lot of comments on some of the posts here as if they had the answers to all of the questions posed. It's an interesting phenomena, really. Some of them move on thinking they shot "holes" through all of our arguments. Others get in our cross-fire and stay longer. We've got another one today named bfniii. Let's give him or her a big DC welcome. ;-)
We Must Require Hard Evidence to Believe
Christians, you do realize that there are many believers in different religious sects who are just as convinced of their faith as you are, don't you? You see, brainwashed people do not know that they are brainwashed. The ONLY way to know whether you're one of the brainwashed or not is to subject your own faith to the same level of skepticism that you use to evaluate the other faiths you reject. You must require hard evidence for that which you accept. Hard evidence convinces others. What else is there?
Dr. Hector Avalos on Darwin and Nazi Ideology
I just uploaded a two part essay of Hector's on this subject since he refers to it in chapter fourteen of The Christian Delusion. If you haven't read it yet check it out. BTW: TCD is being printed as we speak and will be available on time. A Kindle version at Amazon will follow, but I can't say when.
Death is the Final Enemy
We are mere mortals. This life is all we have. It's mere delusion to think otherwise. But knowing the truth hurts. What would actually hurt more is to think there is a God who is punishing him with death because of what some curious bastards did in some Garden. What would actually hurt more is to think he'll end up in hell. Since he is a liberal Presbyterian some Christians think he will. I raise my middle finger to people like that and to their concept of God. And I raise it to death itself.
Here's How Christian Evangelist/Apologists Can Impress Me
Christians are claiming their faith is growing around the world, and it is in the Southern Hemisphere and Asia. Big deal. You want to really impress me? Then put a rubberband around my two books Why I Became an Atheist, and The Christian Delusion, and give them to prospects before they decide (or similar books). Also give them any two Christian apologetics books. Have them translated into their languages if needed. Then give these prospects a couple of weeks or more to decide. If they choose to believe THEN I'll be impressed. Until then I remain unimpressed.
AC Grayling: Religion Is In its 'Death Throes' / ABC Lateline
Check it out. Hat Tip: Atheist Media Blog
A Real Christian Apologetics Conference!
David and I previously debated the problem of evil. I responded to Mary Jo Sharp's criticisms later.
Three Interesting Blog Entries
Three blog entries came to my attention this morning. Here is a pretty comprehensive entry on Why I Am an Atheist. Another one criticizes some trends among atheists, although you'll see I don't agree with everything Bud says. A third one concerns atheist morality. Enjoy.
A Question About My Book on the Beginning of the Universe
Dear Mr. Loftus,Glad to know people are reading my book and think it's informative and hopefully helpful. Thanks for your thoughtful question. I wrote the book over a decade. Some of the chapters began as handouts in classes which I later revised for the book and so you can see development in it. The chapter on prayer was originally written for a church study group. As my thinking changed I tried to harmonize everything with my later perspective, but was probably unsuccessful. The fact is that we cannot say time began. There was no cosmic singularity so we don't know what took place before. So while our universe began to exist we cannot say that it did not come from out of a previous black hole explosion or through tunneling from another universe. The point about the Kalam argument is that it does not show our universe had a beginning in time. To repeat. Our universe began to exist but we cannot say time began to exist with our universe. My argument against the Kalam is that it doesn't show time began to exist either.
I have just started your very informative book, “Why I am an Atheist.” I am trying to better understand your arguments. You said on page 83 that the big bang theory shows that “our universe began to exist.” Then, on page 85 you state, “Craig’s second premise is that the universe began to exist. It too has difficulties.” This seems to be a contradiction. Could you help me understand what you mean by these statements? Did our universe begin to exist or not? You seem to be saying that science proves the universe did begin to exist when refuting Thomas Aquinas, but that it did not begin to exist when refuting William Craig.
Cheers.
A List of Former Team Members of Debunking Christianity
[Written by John W. Loftus]Someone recently asked me for a list of former Bloggers. I started DC in January of 2006, four years ago. Some Christians took notice and I was pummeled every single day by some of them, mostly by Calvinists, and in particular presuppositionalists. A Ph.D. student helped me argue with them, so I soon invited him on as a team member. His handle was exbeliever. Since this worked well I began inviting others as team members. Some of them didn’t work out too well, just wanting to post their deconversion story or promote their book and that was it. Others stayed for a few years. While I haven’t listed them all, team members here at one time included (in no particular order) Hector Avalos, Dan Barker, Farrell Till, Ed Babinski, Joe Holman, Jason Long, Valerie Tarico, Ken Pulliam (Former_Fundy) Marlene Winell, exapologist, Harlan Quinn, Harry McCall, DagoodS, Matthew Green, Spencer Lo, Kenneth Daniels, Bart Willruth, Darrin Rasberry, Dennis Diehl, Robert Bumbalough, Bill Curry, Craig Duckett, Paul Harrison, Glenn Kachmar, Troy Walker, Theresa, Glenn Dixon, Zac Taylor, Sharon Mooney, Scott Burgener, Anthony, Shygetz, Touchstone, Evan, WoundedEgo, Brother Crow, nsfl, and a few others who posted once or twice. A few of them already had their own Blogs while a few others moved on to Blog themselves. Others dropped out of Blogging for one reason or another. It became time consuming for me so I took it back in September of 2009. You can do a "Search This Blog" for their names to see what they wrote.
Which of Dinesh D'Souza's Arguments Won Him Our Debate?
Okay, we have beat to death the horse of who won our debate which can be seen here. And I already expressed what I learned from debating him, while Ken Pulliam offered some insightful observations on it. So here is the next question: Which arguments of D'Souza's do you think were so good that won him the debate? Forget for a moment that I didn't answer everything he regurgitated up. What did he say that was a good argument for his faith?
Dinesh D'Souza Comments On Our Debate
Link. The real debate takes place in our books. Read them. Go ahead. Do it.
Dr. Marlene Winell on Recovering From Religious Indoctrination
Dr. Valerie Tarico interviews Marlene in this 24 minute video below. When this blog was a team blog both of these scholars could be found here.
What I Learned From Debating Dinesh D'Souza
After looking at the debate myself I didn't do well. I did okay, but not well.
Mr. Deity and the Really Hard Time
Even though some of their episodes are not so good, this one is a keeper.
We Should Only Accept What Science Tells Us.
That's what I think. Since science tells us prayer doesn't work then it doesn't work. It tells us the universe is 13.7 billion years old. It tells us we evolved. It tells us there was no Israelite Exodus from Egypt. It tells us the Nativity stories in the Gospels could not be true. It tells us virgins do not have babies. It tells us that dead people do not bodily rise from the grave. Christians must denigrate science in order to believe. Science or Faith? Science has a track record. Faith flies planes into buildings. Science all the way, hands down. End of story.
The Video of My Debate With Dinesh D'Souza is Now Online
Click here to watch all 13 parts on YouTube. Cheers.
I'm Going to Be Taking a Much Needed Break
I've decided to take a break from Blogging. It may be for a day or a week or a month, I don't know. What I do know is that I spend too much time here and neglect to do other things, like earn some money. At the very least I'll not be posting as much. I have much more to say so it may be hard to stay away. In any case there is a lot to read in the archives. You should become a Follower or a Subscriber to this Blog if you don't want to miss anything. Keep in mind I'm still available for speaking engagements. An interview of me is going to appear on YouTube on the 26th. And in March I'll be debating the existence of God as announced here. Set the odds on when I'll post again if you want to! ;-) If you're a first time visitor check out the two important books of mine in the sidebar. Cheers.
The Trouble With Natural Theology
[Written by John W. Loftus] I love the way Dr. Jaco Gericke describes the reformed philosophy of Alvin Plantinga as fundamentalism on stilts. The stilts metaphor pictures Plantinga as rising above the mire of Biblical criticism without actually dealing with the basis of his faith.
William Lane Craig repeatedly says he does not intend on debating the reliability of the Bible. Of course not, because he can't. Recently he turned down a debate against Jaco Gericke on whether Yahweh of the Old Testament exists. Yep, that's right. He said it wasn't his specialty. But wait just a minute. He's going around debating whether or not God exists, right? Then that means he believes Yahweh exists. So why can't he defend the existence of his God? It's because he can't do it. It would require him to get down off his stilts and wallow in the mire of biblical criticism which completely undermines his faith.
Which brings me to Bill Craig's specialty, Natural Theology.
William Lane Craig repeatedly says he does not intend on debating the reliability of the Bible. Of course not, because he can't. Recently he turned down a debate against Jaco Gericke on whether Yahweh of the Old Testament exists. Yep, that's right. He said it wasn't his specialty. But wait just a minute. He's going around debating whether or not God exists, right? Then that means he believes Yahweh exists. So why can't he defend the existence of his God? It's because he can't do it. It would require him to get down off his stilts and wallow in the mire of biblical criticism which completely undermines his faith.
Which brings me to Bill Craig's specialty, Natural Theology.
Temples, Temples They All Had Temples
The oldest temple in the world was just discovered in Turkey. Every civilization in the ancient world had some kind of a temple to some different kind of deity. It was the natural evolutionary process where humans came to wonder about why they existed and how to please the god or gods that put them here on earth. It's pure human imagination, all of them, from Egyptian to Mesopotamian to Canaanite to Israelite to Japaneses to Chinese to Mayan to Incan cultures and many others around the world.
The Historic Argument Against Organized Religion
I was raised a Catholic but it surely looks to an outsider like me that it is not a divine institution at all. The failings of the church down through history and now with recent sex scandals are strong indicators of this. And if this is so why should I believe ANYTHING that it teaches as divine truth? Why should I even accept the canon it chose? If any other institution did the horrendous wrongs as the Catholic church has done then Catholics would join me in condemning it. William Lobdell's book, Losing My Religion: How I Lost My Faith Reporting on Religion in America-and Found Unexpected Peace
is a page turner. You see, it's not just the harm that some priests did to children. It's the massive cover-up that is so horrendous. The Catholic church even knowingly sent molesters to parishes in Alaska where nearly every boy was molested. That is, the church facilitated these molesters.
is a page turner. You see, it's not just the harm that some priests did to children. It's the massive cover-up that is so horrendous. The Catholic church even knowingly sent molesters to parishes in Alaska where nearly every boy was molested. That is, the church facilitated these molesters.Steven Pinker: A Brief History of Violence
There is actually less violence in modern society and Pinker tells us why.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)