I Recommend Dr. James Lindsay's Blog "God Doesn't; We Do"
Look on his front page right here, especially the post titled "William Lane Craig talking bizarro."
Can religion be destroyed?
This is something I have posted in one form or another before, but I thought it would be interesting to see what you think about it here at DC. Before I set out, this is not a post to be confused with "should religion be destroyed" as that is an entirely different question.
Dr. Paul Draper on "What is Philosophy of Religion?"
Earlier I linked to what philosophers of religion think of Philosophy of Religion (PoR). The essay Jeff Lowder has linked to is by Paul Draper, who offers four suggestions on how to best approach the discipline in hopes of reforming it. I want to examine these suggestions in a little detail here.
How A Doctorate in Bible or Christianity Can Stop Scholastic Objectivity
So you decided to go for the big one . . . that earned doctorate in Christian studies; you know the one that is suppose to prove to the world you really know the real objective truth behind the Christian tradition. You strongly believe that that a doctorate demands respect in the religion field, especially in Christianity. Though you know that many churches have signs stating that the minister is Rev. Dr. Egghead, but your earned PhD will vindicate you as a master of objective truth.
My Thought on the Blood Atonement of Jesus
If Jesus had been slain (shed his blood) by King Herod as an infant, there
would have been totally no need for the New Testament with all its theological
Bull Shit; the Hebrew God’s need of blood sacrifice would have been eternally but quietly
satisfied and all humanity could have forgotten this finished Judeo-Christian
religion forever! The fact the crucifixion must be continually re-enacted and preached on really proves this whole theological story never happened
and is condemned by its own core theology as a hypocritical lie.
When considering the continuing value of the Bible, it is
best summed up a by Jesus himself: “It is finished!”
Jerry Coyne: Let’s stop teaching philosophy of religion in secular colleges
I'm pleased he links to me. He's now expanded the debate by going after Divinity Schools in secular universities, which I also applaud. Let's have done with them too.
What we don’t need are entire Divinity Schools or Schools of Theology in secular universities. This privileges an entire discipline based on a human endeavor that itself rests on dubious and unsubstantiated claims. Further, they concentrate largely (but not exclusively) on active Abrahamic religions. There are few, if any, courses on atheism in divinity schools, but they should be at least as prominent as courses in religious apologetics. That is distasteful in a country that officially favors no religion in particular. If we are to have such schools, let us then have Ethical Schools, or Schools of Moral Thinking, or The School of Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy. But all of these can simply be subsumed in departments of philosophy or history. LINK.
I'm Very Pleased My Call To End the Philosophy of Religion Made The Richard Dawkins Foundation Site
LINK. In a similar vein Matt DeStefano, a Ph.D. student, weighs in on this issue over at the "Secular Outpost" with a fair and balanced review, which I responded to. And Keith Parsons offered a major statement in agreement with me, saying "If proclaiming the 'death of PoR' only means the death of a certain way of doing it, then I would certainly applaud this...I think that we have had enough of theistic apologetics. It's over." But then he advocates "a post-Christian POR." LINK. However, the death of Christian apologetics posing as the POR means the death of the POR itself as a discipline. For when faith and apologetics are removed from the secular universities the secular professors would be undermining the discipline by arguing against faith and apologetics, at least if Peter Boghossian and Hector Avalos's proposals are accepted, and I think they should be. There would eventually be no arguments to take seriously enough to have classes on them. Answer me this Keith, which Christian theistic arguments merit discussing in a secular university? That would be the question and secular professors would have to decide, but in deciding they would be saying these arguments are worth discussing, which legitimizes them somewhat, I think. You could no longer teach this discipline because you just couldn't stomach it. Which secular POR professors would continue to bother at that point is the question. Other classes in the university should take over at that point, or soon afterward.
In the end, with secular professors alone arguing against religionist POR they would undermine the discipline by arguing against it and convincing students of this. So eventually students wouldn't bother nor would secular professors. This program, if kept up long enough, would render the POR useless and irrelevant to people who are atheists living in an atheist society. The discipline would eventually run out of material and die. At least we're getting somewhere. Progress is still progress.
In the end, with secular professors alone arguing against religionist POR they would undermine the discipline by arguing against it and convincing students of this. So eventually students wouldn't bother nor would secular professors. This program, if kept up long enough, would render the POR useless and irrelevant to people who are atheists living in an atheist society. The discipline would eventually run out of material and die. At least we're getting somewhere. Progress is still progress.
Sam Harris on "Why Don't I Criticize Israel?"
LINK. I wonder how many Christians will agree with what he says?
Edward Babinski On the Conversions of C.S. Lewis, Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel
Ed Babinski agrees with me that very few Christians, if any, have converted after being intellectually committed atheists who fully accepted evolution and its implications, and none as far as I can tell, have converted to being card-carrying inerrantist evangelicals. I consider Ed to be the expert in conversion/deconversion testimonies, having written a fantastic chapter on The Uniqueness of the Christian Experience, and having edited a book of deconversion stories titled, Leaving the Fold: Testimonies of Former Fundamentalists. Here's what Ed wrote:
Is This Christianity? A Bizarre Experience I Had Yesterday
Yesterday I was sitting on my gay friend's porch, drinking talking and laughing. Along comes a guy who asked if he could join us. We said okay and invited him to have a beer. He said he didn't drink. His shirt was a billboard for Christianity, you know the kind. So I asked him if he didn't drink because it was against his church teachings and he said yes. Okay, I said. When it got around to why he wanted to join us, he said he'd like to suck, er, have oral sex. When asked which one of us he would prefer he pointed to me. My friend was offended but laughed because he was off the hook. I merely told the guy I was not interested. Then I asked him if homosexuality was condemned by his church teachings and he said it was, but that he disagreed with them. Well, he left and we laughed. Nonetheless, is this Christianity? He agrees with his church when it comes to drinking but disagrees with it about homosexuality. And I'm equally sure his church would not approve of his wanton promiscuity. These are a few of the people who answer they believe in God and are Christians in those polls we've seen. This once again illustrates that Christianity is a pick and choose religion with a wide diversity among its adherents. Funny. We're still laughing.
Children Exposed to Religion Have Difficulty Distinguishing Fact From Fiction
Researchers took 66 children between the ages of five and six and asked them questions about stories — some of which were drawn from fairy tales, others from the Old Testament — in order to determine whether the children believed the characters in them were real or fictional.
“Children with exposure to religion — via church attendance, parochial schooling, or both — judged [characters in religious stories] to be real,” the authors wrote. “By contrast, children with no such exposure judged them to be pretend,” just as they had the characters in fairy tales. But children with exposure to religion judged many characters in fantastical, but not explicitly religious stories, to also be real — the equivalent of being incapable of differentiating between Mark Twain’s character Tom Sawyer and an account of George Washington’s life. LINK.
More Liars for Jesus, This Time About Church Attendance
Two in five Americans say they regularly attend religious services. Upward of 90 percent of all Americans believe in God, pollsters report, and more than 70 percent have absolutely no doubt that God exists. There is only one conclusion to draw from these numbers: Americans are significantly more religious than the citizens of other industrialized nations.The fact is that Americans are leaving religion behind.
Except they are not.
Beyond the polls, social scientists have conducted more rigorous analyses of religious behavior. Rather than ask people how often they attend church, the better studies measure what people actually do. The results are surprising. Americans are hardly more religious than people living in other industrialized countries. Yet they consistently—and more or less uniquely—want others to believe they are more religious than they really are.
Even as pundits theorized about why Americans were so much more religious than Europeans, quiet voices on the ground asked how, if so many Americans were attending services, the pews of so many churches could be deserted. LINK.
An Ad For My Book in the Free Inquiry Magazine
I was told that a full page advertisement for my book Why I Became an Atheist appeared in the current issue of the Free Inquiry magazine. It's pretty cool, see what you think:
So As An Atheist I'm Not Crazy After All? Cool! My 5 Star Review of Randal Rauser's Book, "You're Not As Crazy As I Think: Dialogue in a World of Loud Voices and Hardened Opinions"
Since Randal Rauser is reviewing my book, Why I Became an Atheist,
I thought readers should see how I reviewed one of his books on Amazon three and a half years ago. It's a fair, generous review, don't you think? This is the case even though I stand in opposition to his faith and even though it's very brief. So once again, as a reminder to him and anyone else who wants a place at the adult table, if you want to properly review an argumentative book, this is how to do it. Cheers.
I thought readers should see how I reviewed one of his books on Amazon three and a half years ago. It's a fair, generous review, don't you think? This is the case even though I stand in opposition to his faith and even though it's very brief. So once again, as a reminder to him and anyone else who wants a place at the adult table, if you want to properly review an argumentative book, this is how to do it. Cheers."9 Sinister Things the Christian Right Does in the Name of God," by Valerie Tarico
Here's the money quote for my readers:
I realize that many Christians are not Bible believers, but rather people who glean through the Christian tradition to claim what seems timeless and wise. I also realize that most Bible believers aren’t trying to do harm—in fact the opposite. I know because I’ve been there. But, when you treat the words of our Iron Age ancestors as if they flowed straight from the mouth of God, you end up putting your life energy, whether you see it that way or not, into bringing back the Iron Age.
The Iron Age was a time of incredible brutality—tribalism, warfare, destitution, disease, murder, misogyny, sexual slavery and superstition of biblical proportions. Most of us would rather not go back, thank you very much. Christians who want a better future are welcome to join in the inquiry and teamwork it will take to get there, and many do. For the rest of you: please forgive the fact that your Iron Age fantasies trigger some of us to experience wry Iron Age fantasies of our own. LINK.
How To Properly Review a Book: A Guide for Bloggers
[Written by John W. Loftus on 4/27/2010] Let me offer some advice on how to properly review an argumentative type book on your blogs and/or on Amazon. It's annoying that so many people don't know how to do it right.
I have read several reviews of my book now. Most all of them aren't written very well at all. Two of them proceeded to argue with it chapter by chapter. A couple others went hodgepodge through it, pointing out things they liked and didn't like. Several others nitpick at it without dealing with the over-all thrust of the cumulative case I present in it. But good reviews will first summarize the book, tell what the author is attempting to do, tell who would benefit the most from reading the book, compare it with other books on the same topic, and offer a generalized statement about how effective the book is in attaining those stated goals. Are there any comparable books? If so, was this one better or worse than the others? As a reviewer you might even want to mention why you read the book in the first place. Then at that point you can write about some specifics in the book as examples that support your generalized statement. This is High School stuff here.
I have read several reviews of my book now. Most all of them aren't written very well at all. Two of them proceeded to argue with it chapter by chapter. A couple others went hodgepodge through it, pointing out things they liked and didn't like. Several others nitpick at it without dealing with the over-all thrust of the cumulative case I present in it. But good reviews will first summarize the book, tell what the author is attempting to do, tell who would benefit the most from reading the book, compare it with other books on the same topic, and offer a generalized statement about how effective the book is in attaining those stated goals. Are there any comparable books? If so, was this one better or worse than the others? As a reviewer you might even want to mention why you read the book in the first place. Then at that point you can write about some specifics in the book as examples that support your generalized statement. This is High School stuff here.
Who Are Atheist Fundamentalists?
If I am an atheist fundamentalist because I criticize Christian fundamentalists, then are liberal Christians fundamentalists when they do the same thing?
Instantly Turn Any Object into God with a Simple Formula
Now you can
choose your own God. Simply pick any
ancient object; then substitute this object everywhere in the Bible you find either
the words Lord or God. Next, support your
substitution apologetically and, voila! You’ll have a deified God Object no atheist
can debunk. Try it . . . it works! Here’s the formula you’ll need to create your own personal God Object:
Skeptic Ink Network's New Book, "13 Reasons to Doubt"
This is a very good book, edited by Edward Clint, Jonathan Pearce and Beth Ann Erickson, 13 Reasons To Doubt: Essays from the Writers of Skeptic Ink.
My chapter is called "Science is Predicated on the Non-Magical Natural World Order."
My chapter is called "Science is Predicated on the Non-Magical Natural World Order."The Tales About Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Paul Show They Had Psychotic Disorders
Evan D. Murray, M.D.; Miles G. Cunningham, M.D., Ph.D.; and Bruce H. Price, M.D. in the The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences "analyzed the religious figures Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and St. Paul from a behavioral, neurologic, and neuropsychiatric perspective to determine whether new insights can be achieved about the nature of their revelations. Analysis reveals that these individuals had experiences that resemble those now defined as psychotic symptoms, suggesting that their experiences may have been manifestations of primary or mood disorder-associated psychotic disorders." LINK.
Putting Godly Fear Into a Child: Taken From a Christian School Discipline Manual
 |
| Click on pictures to enlarge |
"He who withholds his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him diligently." Proverbs 13: 24
"Do not hold back discipline from the child, Although you strike him with the rod, he will not die." Proverbs 23: 13 (This You Tube video will prove God is a liar!)
"Do not hold back discipline from the child, Although you strike him with the rod, he will not die." Proverbs 23: 13 (This You Tube video will prove God is a liar!)
Yep, Jesus Feeds the Birds!
Jesus reportedly said: "Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?" (Matthew 6:26)
Quote of the Day, By D Rizdek
Whether Christianity was particular in its mistreatment of women, it never overcame the culture and showed where the culture was wrong...in this or any other regard. The same goes for all religions. Their gods never seemed to be able to break out of the culture. If slavery was the "thing," the gods and holy men told 'em how to do slaves. If dominating women was the thing, god and the holy men told 'em how to do women. If the culture hated homosexuality, then their god hated it too. If they were ignorant about science, their God didn't know science either. If the culture superstitiously thought blood had some special magical powers, then god used blood to mark doorways and wash away sins. If the culture thought diseases and mental illness was due to sin's curse or demons, then their god acted like that was true too. Why do their gods never tell them anything they don't already know?
Dr. Daphne Hampson Says Christianity is a Harmful Myth Which Could Not Possibly Be True
Dr. Hampson knows what she's talking about. At the least one cannot say she is ignorant given her credentials. She abandoned the "harmful myth" of Christianity in 1981. In her book After Christianity (1997), she argued that "Christianity cannot be true, for it requires a particular revelation which we can no longer think possible. Moreover its situatedness in past history makes Christianity necessarily sexist." In a 1997 interview we read that, "She came to see that the notions of incarnation - God made flesh in the person of Christ - and resurrection - Christ rising from the dead after the crucifixion - could not possibly be true. How could we believe, she asks, this side of the Enlightenment, that God could create such a unique break in the natural order of things as the resurrection?" Furthermore, she tells us, "I began to see that the very raison d'etre of the Christian myth was to support men as superior over women, that it served to legitimise how men see themselves in the world." LINK. I just discovered her today. There are probably many others I have not heard about yet. Higher education, the right kind of education, can and does lead to the rejection of Christianity.
I'll Be Speaking at the Pennsylvania State Atheist and Humanist Conference
I’ll be speaking on my book The Outsider Test for Faith at the Pennsylvania State Atheist and Humanist Conference, Labor Day weekend, August 29-31. In my talk I'll be dealing with some of the ridiculous responses to the outsider test. This should be fun. My talk is set for Saturday morning.
The list of speakers doesn't include just the usual lineup of suspects. If you would like to meet me and chat then come on out. Registration is $130, which is a great price for all that you get, including some great entertainment. My books will be on sale and I'll be signing them. Unfortunately my latest book, Christianity Is Not Great: How Faith Fails, won't be out yet.
I’m looking forward to this very much!
The list of speakers doesn't include just the usual lineup of suspects. If you would like to meet me and chat then come on out. Registration is $130, which is a great price for all that you get, including some great entertainment. My books will be on sale and I'll be signing them. Unfortunately my latest book, Christianity Is Not Great: How Faith Fails, won't be out yet.
I’m looking forward to this very much!Christian Apologist Norman Geisler Still Does Not Understand Atheism
Norman L. Geisler and Daniel J. McCoy's most recent book is titled, The Atheist's Fatal Flaw: Exposing Conflicting Beliefs.
If you search inside the book for "Loftus" you'll see them interacting with my work. The central thesis of their book is found in the Introduction (pp. 9-10):
If you search inside the book for "Loftus" you'll see them interacting with my work. The central thesis of their book is found in the Introduction (pp. 9-10):"Council votes to display "In God We Trust" in chambers"
 |
| Picture from the national organization for "In God We Trust" |
So what can one can expect once believers get control? (Consider just three of the comments.)
“The city council finally seems to be heading in the right direction. But why doesn't it wholly embrace The Word and start running the deviants out of the county? Otherwise, this is just lip service.”
Could the First Pope (Peter) Swim? How The Gospels Use Lies to Teach Faith and Trust
The
Gospels accounts of John and Matthew present two different Apostle Peters with both being supported by two different miracle accounts when dealing with swimming.
Freedom of Mind
Because
today is the 4th of July, I thought I would share a few things about
freedom of thought. It is impossible for
a person to be truly free, unless they are in full ownership of their mind and
thoughts. A person may be physically
free, but if their mind is enslaved, then they are chained. Religion – especially fundamentalist religion
takes away that freedomQuote of the Day, By Jeffery Jay Lowder (With Rebuttal)
[T]he philosophy of religion is not “dead,” but it is in serious condition, if not on life support. This can be shown by counting the number of philosophy departments at secular colleges and universities which have faculty lines for philosophy of religion. (They are very rare.) Why is this? I think that one contributing factor to this state of affairs is the blatant partisanship which is very much the norm in the philosophy of religion. Many philosophers of religion, including both atheists and theists, function as natural theologians (if theists) or natural atheologians (if atheists). In other words, they act as if their job description says, “If you’re a theist, defend theism; if you’re an atheist, defend atheism.” It’s rare for philosophers of religion to engage in genuine inquiry and to spend equal amounts of time defending theism and defending atheism. But, if a philosopher of religion is going to act like a philosopher, not an apologist, they should be engaging in inquiry. LINK.Below is my response, which I guarantee will be worth a click of your time. ;-)
Exposing Kalam's Hidden Premises
Apologists like William Lane Craig often use intentionally ambiguous language to hide problematic aspects of their arguments. This video unpacks some of the hidden assumptions behind the Kalam argument to make clear what it's proponents are actually arguing for (and how much more difficult it would be for them if they were honest about it.) Watching full screen is recommended.
A Few More Reviews of Richard Carrier's New Book
A few more reviews of Richard Carrier's book, On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt,
can be found on Amazon, where you can get the best deal on buying it.
can be found on Amazon, where you can get the best deal on buying it.Reviews of Carrier's New Book "On The Historicity of Jesus" and His Responses
Richard's book has been reviewed by a few people already. The reviews have come from Nicholas Covington, Chris Hallquist, Raphael Lataster, and Loren Rosson. Carrier has responded to them here. It's an interesting discussion. I have a free review copy coming but don't have it yet. I hope it arrives before most of what has been said has been said. ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)