Busted. Victor Reppert has Nailed Us. We Became Atheists for the Sex
OK fellow secularists, the game’s up. Victor Reppert has nailed us. http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2016/06/surprise-surprise.html Secularist organizations seem to be having a lot of trouble with sexual harassment. You have to ask “What did you think was going to happen?” One of the key selling points of secularism is that you don’t have to follow those benighted old … Busted. Victor Reppert has Nailed Us. We Became Atheists for the Sex
Jerry Coyne Criticizes A.C. Grayling’s Handling of God Arguments, But Coyne Gets It Wrong Himself
Jerry Coyne is a Harvard-educated, brilliant professor of biology who is an expert on biological evolution. His book, Why Evolution Is True, is a “must-read” for anyone interested in, well, why evolution is true. He also likes to write about topics outside of his area of expertise, including the philosophy of religion. As I’ve explained before, non-experts … Jerry Coyne Criticizes A.C. Grayling’s Handling of God Arguments, But Coyne Gets It Wrong Himself
25 Lines of Evidence Against Theism
Refutation of Anna Marie Perez Previous | Index | Next First Paragraph Here is Perez’s first paragraph: Atheism is a religion. Atheists act like Dracula confronting a cross when faced with the fact that their beliefs rely solely on faith. They hate the word faith, even though it’s all they’ve got. They try to make the … 25 Lines of Evidence Against Theism
A Nasty Christian Apologist Defends the Indefensible
There are many nice Christian apologists out there. To cite just four of several examples, (1) Glenn Miller; (2) Randal Rauser; (3) Trent Horn; and (4) Sean McDowell have both been extremely gracious as dialogue partner (1 & 2) or host (3&4). But there are also some nasty ones who apparently didn’t get the memo about 1 Peter … A Nasty Christian Apologist Defends the Indefensible
Hate the Sin, Love the Sinner
Sigh. I miss Jerry Falwell. Of all the fundamentalist loudmouths and rabble-rousers, he was the one I most loved to hate. He was absolutely dependable. Whatever the topic or context he was reliably sanctimonious, unctuous, bigoted, and utterly detestable. Other soldiers in the army of the night were just as obnoxious, like Jimmy Swaggart (“I … Hate the Sin, Love the Sinner
Even Trolls can be Useful for Rational Discussion
Secular Outpost prides itself on hosting serious discussions about serious issues. Many other sites, atheist or religious, are more devoted to dogmatic debunking and ridicule. Over the years, I have enjoyed and benefitted from many discussions with intelligent and informed believers who share my conviction that reasonable people of good faith can differ widely in … Even Trolls can be Useful for Rational Discussion
Debate: The External Evidence for Jesus – Part 1
Joe Hinman’s first argument for the existence of Jesus is based on references to Jesus in the Talmud: We know Jesus was in the Talmud and that is a fact admitted by Rabbis. Some references use his name (Yeshua) some use code words such as “such a one” or “Panthera”. The reason codes are used, … Debate: The External Evidence for Jesus – Part 1
The Debate about Jesus has Begun
The debate between me and Joe Hinman about the existence of Jesus has begun. We are focusing on just the external (non-biblical) evidence. Joe has published his positive case for the claim that: …the external (not in Bible) evidence is strong enough to warrant belief in Jesus’ historicity. Here is a link to Joe’s initial … The Debate about Jesus has Begun
What is Christianity? Part 16
In his book Naming the Elephant (hereafter: NTE), the Christian apologist James Sire raises various objections against his previous analysis of the concept of a “worldview” that he had presented in his earlier book The Universe Next Door (hereafter: TUND). I have reviewed three of Sire’s objections to his earlier cognitivist analysis of the concept of … What is Christianity? Part 16
Dunning-Kruger Effect in Action: How NOT to Defend a ‘Best’ Explanation
I’m not going to name names, but I recently read something that could have not said more loudly, “I have no clue about inductive logic, Bayes’ Theorem, or inference to the best explanation. I definitely should NOT be defending my position publicly because I have no clue what I am talking about, but I’m going … Dunning-Kruger Effect in Action: How NOT to Defend a ‘Best’ Explanation