The Battlefield of the Mind: Trump Edition
see: Trump’s religious liberty commission might be the end of religious freedom for all ... Read Article
How to Ruin a Friendship
Canada and the USA were the best of friends and now Canada is terrified of Trump's tariffs putting our economy into recession or worse so he can annex us. ... Read Article
Skeptics: 6 & Christian Apologists: 0
This is the current score on the important issue of the Swoon Theory. The Swoon Theory is the skeptical view that Jesus survived crucifixion and later met with some of his disciples, and that as a result, the disciples sincerely but mistakenly inferred from this experience that God raised Jesus from the dead. FOUR CASES SHOWN TO FAIL IN MY UPCOMING BOOK In my upcoming book, Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus, Volume 1: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory, I show that four different cases against the Swoon Theory, presented by six different well-known Christian apologists, all fail to refute the Swoon Theory. Here is a list of those four cases: The case in The Son Rises by William Craig, published in 1981 The case in The Resurrection Factor by Josh McDowell, published in 1981 The case in the Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, published in 1994 The case in The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, publish ... Read Article
New Nina Livesey Interview!
As I work away revising my three Paul essays, largely influenced by Prof Livesey's work, here is a recent interview of her by Prof M David Litwa. My biggest takeaway? I look a lot like Litwa, lol. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZCr0AhG_AU ... Read Article
Raymond Brown on the Trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin
LOWERED EXPECTATIONS ABOUT THE PASSION NARRATIVES As I mentioned in my previous post "Raymond Brown on the Trial of Jesus before Pilate", Brown expresses significant doubt about the historical reliability and historical accuracy of the Passion Narratives in the Gospels. From the opening pages of his massive two-volume commentary on the Passion Narratives, The Death of the Messiah, the eminent New Testament scholar Raymond Brown lowers expectations of historical reliability and historical accuracy from these important parts of the Gospels. On the first page of the introduction, Brown makes this strong statement: Yet Jesus did not write an account of his passion; nor did anyone who had been present write an eyewitness account.[1] In one sentence, Brown rejects both the idea that any of the authors of the Gospels were eyewitnesses to the events they write about in the Passion Narratives and also the idea that any of the Gospel authors made use of a written account by an eyewitness to those even ... Read Article
THE QUEST FOR THE HISTORICAL PAUL: Jacob Berman, The Wholly Otherwise
My 3 essays on the historical Paul are under review and should be out soon. In the meantime, here are some thoughts on Jacob Berman's podcast on a three-fold Paul from yesterday: Last Time: Review-  The Letters of Paul in their Roman Literary Context: Reassessing Apostolic Authorship by Nina E. Livesey My review of Livesey’s book has generally received positive feedback, although one issue has been such claims as Mark may have influenced Paul instead of the other way around.  I will just say if we push the dates of the letters of Paul into the second century, it becomes exceedingly difficult to determine priority in apparent literary dependence. Ok, let’s look at Berman’s podcast on Paul from yesterday with some dot jot notes and a few of Jacob's slides: “How Many Paul's, All or None? Was I Right The Letters Are Post 70 AD?: Paul the Imposter Exposed!” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcGrr-6v0F8 Dot-jot highlights notes and a few of Jacob's slides from the podcast: ... Read Article
Raymond Brown on the Trial of Jesus before Pilate
LOWERED EXPECTATIONS ABOUT THE PASSION NARRATIVES From the opening pages of his massive two-volume commentary on the Passion Narratives, The Death of the Messiah (hereafter: DOM), the eminent New Testament scholar Raymond Brown lowers expectations of historical reliability and historical accuracy from these important parts of the Gospels. On the first page of the introduction, Brown makes this strong statement: Yet Jesus did not write an account of his passion; nor did anyone who had been present write an eyewitness account.[1] In one sentence, Brown rejects both the idea that any of the authors of the Gospels were eyewitnesses to the events they write about in the Passion Narratives and also the idea that any of the Gospel authors made use of a written account by an eyewitness to those events. Brown also notes that we have no direct access to the early Christian traditions made use of by the authors of the Gospels in writing their Passion Narratives: That intervening preGospel traditio ... Read Article
Dr. Robert M. Price Needs Your Help!
Bob is in need of a new car and would greatly appreciate your help. Here is his Go Fund Me: https://www.gofundme.com/f/x9httb-help-bob-get-back-on-the-road?attribution_id=sl:2ab9d1e8-99a0-4846-bd4c-bdd38a6e5274&lang=en_US&utm_campaign=man_sharesheet_dash&utm_content=amp13_c-amp14_t2-amp15_t1&utm_medium=customer&utm_source=copy_link&v=amp14_t2 ... Read Article
Better Know a Savior: Resurrection/Ascension
(1) We know from Paul's Philippian Christ hymn and Corinthian Creed that Paul thought God raised Jesus from the dead and because of his service unto death exalted Jesus to the highest possible position (Lord), a name and status Jesus didn't previously have. Paul elsewhere declares Jesus the firstborn of many brothers and he was the apocalyptic "first-fruits" of the general resurrection of souls at the end of the age. Paul claims Jesus was thus "translated" after death, and was seen by a number of people including Peter, the 12, James, the 500, and lastly Paul himself. Certainly, nothing supernatural is implied here. Bereavement hallucinations are common (my friend's mother had them when her husband died), as are mass hallucinations (e.g., the Fatima Sky Miracle), and Paul may certainly have been under cognitive dissonance stress persecuting a movement he had relatives in (e.g., Junia) that his teacher Gamaliel also said to treat with kindness an understanding. We see such things in ancient accoun ... Read Article
Why Do Some Christians Support Israel Regardless of What Israel Does or Doesn’t Do?
It should be terrifying for people that many USA politicians are Christian and use that superstition to inform their political policies. Here is Senator Ted Cruz admitting the basis for his support of Israel is first and foremost that the bible tells him to bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4YgM2dswgdw Consider the reasoning here: "My magic book tells me to love a people and curse its enemies, a book written by the people I'm supposed to love." ... Read Article
Is Christianity the Rational Choice?
Well, a lot of bright people are superstitious... uh ,,,, Christian. This includes this guy, the smartest person: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1athoNwR7Q0 Here's the thing. Having a ridiculously high intelligence quotient (IQ) doesn't imply you will be proficient at big picture existential questions like the meaning of life or the existence of God for the same reason it doesn't mean you will be a brilliant geometer or guitar player. Similarly, the world's best guitar player could be useless on the flute or drums. A creationist may have a highly sophisticated argument as to why "a" god is a useful explanation, but this brings nothing to the table of what such a god is like: *Jesus, Thor; The Flying Spaghetti Monster; The Great Pumpkin." ... Read Article
Trans Youth Surgery: Gender Affirming Care or Reckless Mutilation Before the Age of Consent?
In George Orwell's 1984, doublespeak is not explicitly named but is embodied in the concept of "doublethink," a key mechanism of the Party's control. Doublethink is the act of simultaneously holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind and accepting both as true, while also suppressing awareness of their contradiction. It enables the Party to manipulate truth, rewrite history, and enforce ideological conformity. For example, the Party's slogans—"War is Peace," "Freedom is Slavery," "Ignorance is Strength"—are paradoxes that require doublethink to accept. Citizens must believe these contradictions without questioning them, erasing any critical thought. This mental discipline ensures loyalty to the Party, as individuals cannot challenge its lies or propaganda. The term "doublespeak" later emerged in literary analysis and popular culture, inspired by 1984 and combining "doublethink" with "Newspeak" (the Party's language designed to limit thought). Doublespeak refers to deliberately ambiguous or eva ... Read Article
Craig vs. Spinoza: INDEX of Posts
WHERE WE ARE Although Spinoza’s primary objection against miracles fails, Spinoza’s second objection against miracles appears to be a powerful and devastating objection against belief in miracles. Spinoza points out that humans cannot distinguish between true miracles (that are brought about by God) and fake miracles (that are brought about by some other supernatural being, such as an angel or a demon). In the 3rd edition of his book Reasonable Faith (hereafter: RF3), the Christian philosopher William Craig raises three objections against Spinoza’s second objection.  FOUR POSTS ON CRAIG'S CASE I have written four blog posts that critically examine Craig's case against Spinoza's second objection against belief in miracles. In these articles, I show that Craig's case fails: https://secularfrontier.infidels.org/2025/05/craig-vs-spinoza-a-big-problem-for-belief-in-miracles/ https://secularfrontier.infidels.org/2025/05/craig-vs-spinoza-craigs-object ... Read Article
Craig vs. Spinoza: the Atheists Don’t Believe in Angels Objection
WHERE WE ARE Although Spinoza's primary objection against miracles fails (see my post "Craig vs. Spinoza: A Big Problem for Belief in Miracles"), Spinoza's second objection against miracles appears to be a powerful and devastating objection against belief in miracles. Spinoza points out that humans cannot distinguish between true miracles (that are brought about by God) and fake miracles (that are brought about by some other supernatural being, such as an angel or a demon). In the 3rd edition of his book Reasonable Faith (hereafter: RF3), the Christian philosopher William Craig raises three objections against Spinoza's second objection. So far, I have shown that two of those objections fail: Craig's First Objection Fails (see my post "Craig vs. Spinoza: Craig’s Objections to Spinoza’s Second Objection against Miracles") Craig's Second Objection Fails (see my post "Craig vs. Spinoza: Craig’s Doctrinal-Context Objection") CRAIG'S THIRD OBJECTION Here is Craig's third objection to Spin ... Read Article
Craig vs. Spinoza: Craig’s Doctrinal-Context Objection
WHERE WE ARE In the third edition of Reasonable Faith (hereafter: RF3), William Craig presents three objections against Spinoza's second objection against miracles, as we saw in my previous post on this subject. Craig's first objection, lets call it the Insignificant Impact Objection, is an attempt to downplay the significance of Spinoza's second objection against miracles. Craig portrays Spinoza's objection as only impacting an argument for the existence of God. But Craig is mistaken on this point. Spinoza's second objection, if successful, rules out the possibility of identifying any event as being a miracle. This strong conclusion, if correct, demolishes any arguments for any Christian belief whatsoever by Christian apologists that are based on an alleged miracle. If we cannot determine whether an event is a miracle, then no argument based on an alleged miracle can be a strong or solid argument. Furthermore, because the occurrence of miracles is the basis for claims by Christian apologists about ... Read Article
1 2 3 4 5 6 15