What had happen' was.....: Jun 25, 2011

Saturday, June 25, 2011

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

Dr Flannagan must have really struck a nerve! Sheesh!! He was way more kinder and open-minded the Loftus himself. Look at his original review and compare it to Loftus' "rebuttal"

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?

Matt, first, the OTF does not undergird all the articles in the book. How can you come to that conclusion? Please explain this delusion of yours.

Second, the OTF uses the exact same standard that YOU use when rejecting other religions. If there is any inconsistency at all it is how YOU assess truth claims.

Third, the first three chapters show us from anthropological and psychological data how we come to our beliefs, all of us. That is indeed something you must wrestle with since YOU are the one claiming one particular religious faith is true out of all the others.

Fourth, the OTF is an argument I can only make in our day and age. It would have little or no force during the Catholic Middle Ages where everyone was a Catholic

Fifth, without the present anthropological and psychological data that we all accept the OTF would have less force than it does too. Unless I could have come up with this data on my own I could not make this argument, so in that sense I was lucky to be born when and where I was born in order to make it.

Sixth, doubt is the adult attitude given the facts that form the basis of the OTF. One cannot subject this doubt to further testing. It is what makes testing our ideas possible in the first place. It is a filter that strains out the wheat of what's true from the chaff of what's false.

Seventh, we human beings are in the same boat, epistemologically speaking. We are not all that rational. We believe what we prefer to believe and we defend that which we were raised to believe. We seek to confirm what we believe rather than disconfirm it. Even contrary evidence or the lack of evidence is seen as evidence that we are right. See this.

Therefore doubt is the adult attitude. This should be simple and non-controversial. Because we are not all that rational we should all be skeptics, demanding hard cold impartial evidence for that which we believe. That's how you approach all other religions.

Why the double standard?

Now remember how Flannagan ended his review

This review has been fairly negative; however, despite the problems inherent in this book, which are substantive, The Christian Delusion is still worth reading. The book is a comprehensive and representative expression of contemporary skeptical thought from some leading free thinkers in a single volume. Given the pervasiveness in our culture of the line of argument advanced in this book, anyone who wants to understand the position of contemporary free thinkers could not do much better than to read it.

In my opinion, Flannagan was way more charitable although he fundamentally disagreed. The only double standard I see is Loftus'.

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

Debunking Christianity: On Rejecting the Gospel Because of Sin

John Loftus has written another confused defense for his 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.

That's not what Christians believe that is what the Bible says:

¹⁶ For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ¹⁷ For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. ¹⁸ Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. ¹⁹ This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. ²⁰ Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. ²¹ But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.- John 3:16

Don't like it take it up with Jesus.

Do you, Christian, reject the Mormon faith merely because of its requirements? Do you reject the Muslim faith, the Buddhist way of life, Jainism, or the Jehovah's Witnesses because of their proscribed religious and moral duties? Some of them have much more strict requirements than your faith does. A Jainist does not eat meat. A Buddhist attempts to achieve a state of consciousness whereby he does not have any desires. A Jehovah's Witness refuses blood transfusions. A good Muslim woman will wear a burka. A Mormon wears magic underwear.

No, Christians rejects other religions because they conflict with God's revealed word.

If these religions had sufficient evidence for them no one would reject them merely because of what they require of us. But when it comes to sufficient evidence it must include all of the evidence, and part of that evidence is the moral and religious duties it requires of us if we were believers. If we were considering a militant Muslim faith that called upon us to kill people who didn't believe, this would certainly be relevant to whether such a faith is true. And there are certain things Christians think are required of God that are relevant to whether such a faith is true too, currently but not exclusively, misogyny and heterosexuality. Some Christians do not want to take their children to a doctor. Others are snake handlers. Others do not believe in birth control. Still others think the world is going to end soon and so they don't care about the environment or the possibility of war (and they run our country!) Others defend the Jewish nation no matter what and thereby have helped contribute to world instability. And the history of these requirements are relevant as well. The church believed witches and heretics should be killed and the church did not think slavery or misogyny was evil.

I don't see how any of these arguments in the above paragraph bear any weight on what the Bible says. Misogyny, snake handling, shunning medical attention, and all the other complaints have nothing to do with Biblical teachings. Sounds like you he has a problem with the way people who claim to be "Christians" have lived and not with God. God has a problem with such stupidity too.

So if sin is defined as certain actions I reject out of hand, then that is a relevant factor to my rejection of Christianity. I am indeed rejecting the gospel (which is embedded in the Bible as a whole) because I do not agree with its requirements as part of the total case against Christianity.

Sin is not defined as just certain actions. It is a predisposition to miss the mark - the standard of deeds, thoughts, and attitude that God's holiness demands of us! In short, Loftus is saying he rejects Christianity because he does not want to be held accountable to those standards God has set for us. No one does. That is the problem and why the need for a Savior is unavoidable.

There is more.

There are specific religious duties to each religion and then there are moral duties people have to other people. I see no evidence that non-Christians behave any better or worse than Christians when it comes to moral duties to other people, obeying Jesus' second greatest commandment (if anything, religions cause more harm than good). This tells against Christianity because it is the one religion claiming God, the third person of the trinity, resides in the believer (in some sense) empowering them to be good to others.

God is not a person of the Trinity. God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Bible calls each God! But no where does it say God is Jesus or the Holy Spirit is Jesus. Everyone falls short of obeying the second Greatest commandment - Loving your neighbor as yourself - that is sin. And if you never had the Holy Spirit indwelling you then I can understand how one does not understand how the Holy Spirit helps us grow so we can more closely live up to that standard. Of course if you never had it, you've never been saved. You have never been born-again.

When it comes to religious duties like tithing, evangelizing, praying, church attendance, Bible study, and so forth, which makes up Jesus' first greatest commandment, I see no evidence that Christians behave any better or worse than non-Christian religious people when it comes to these duties, once we translate them into comparable acts. This also tells against Christianity because again it is the one religion claiming God, the third person of the trinity, resides in the believer (in some sense) empowering them to obey Jesus' first greatest commandment.

If Loftus thinks that loving God with all you have and are equates just to "religious duties like tithing, evangelizing, praying, church attendance, Bible study, and so forth" it's no surprise how confused he is on what a Christian is. It's more than that. Its obeying God and putting Him first in every aspect of life. It's your lifestyle. I sure would like to know how an atheist has comparable acts.

People who do not believe in any religion look at this lack of evidence and conclude religion is man made. We simply dispense with Jesus' first greatest commandment as irrelevant and unnecessary for our lives.

Sure would like to know what Christians, Loftus has known. My experience has been opposite. I've seen God completely make over people. Turning their hearts to him. Making them better people. He's done it for me. Without the first Commandment (which by the way is the first of the 10 commandments), you cannot even begin to obey the second.

⁴ Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. ⁵ Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. - Deuteronomy 6:4,5

Debunking Christianity: On Rejecting the Gospel Because of Sin

What Will Happen If Gay Marriage Is Legalized?… | The Angry Black Woman

This argument for same-sex always amazes me. The argument makes no sense because no one rational thinks that it has anything to do with teaching children how to have gay sex in schools because how to have heterosexual sex is not taught in schools (nor should it be). It has nothing to do with terrorism. It has nothing to do with a world war. However the logical consequence is ignored! The argument is based on the idea that gay people should have the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couple in traditional marriage to the point that they want their legal social covenant to have the same weight as a man and woman. They want legitimacy. Thirty years ago it would have been an absurd thought to redefine "marriage" as anything different than what it has always been since the beginning. Here is the consequence we must consider. If its okay for two men or two women to get married, why is it not okay for one man and multiple women? What about one woman and multiple men? What about an adult and child (as long as the child wants to)? What about a human and his pet? If "marriage" is fluid and whatever we agree that it is, how can we deny anyone the right to be with the one they love the way they want to be? Egalitarian as we are, how can we deny marriage to include anyone's desires and predilections? Perverts and pedophiles are already making such arguments. It's a slippery slope - one that our descendants will be paying for if we continue down this road to oblivion. Hell in a handbasket.

¹⁸ The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, ¹⁹ since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. ²⁰ For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
²¹ For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. ²² Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools ²³ and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
²⁴ Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. ²⁵ They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
²⁶ Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. ²⁷ In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
²⁸ Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. ²⁹ They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, ³⁰ slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; ³¹ they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. ³² Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.- Romans 1:18-32

America, we deserve what is coming.

What Will Happen If Gay Marriage Is Legalized?… | The Angry Black Woman

Gender, A Helpful Infographic | The Angry Black Woman

This is an interesting infographic. Gender should not be equated to sexual orientation. However gender is not a continuum it is something you are born with and is determined by your chromosomes. Two "X" chromosomes equal female. An "X" and "Y" chromosomes makes you "male". There is no between when everything goes normal. Cases of hermaphrodites and the extremely rare case of having neither genitalia are not different points. Gender is biological. You have no more choice over your gender than you do over what anyone else does. Or who your parents are. Or where and when you are born. You can't change any of these things, why do you think you should have the right to change your gender?

Gender, A Helpful Infographic | The Angry Black Woman

Letters to a Mormon Elder by Dr James White

One of Dr. James White's best known books is available for reading online at the following link. I got this information from a tweet by Brian Auten.

Letters to a Mormon Elder

Verses to Know When Witnessing to Mormons | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

Brian Auten tweeted the following article. It lists subjects and where to find the scriptures when witnessing to Mormons. This is an awesome summary.

Verses to Know When Witnessing to Mormons | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

A Plea from a Man with Two Countries - Voice of Revolution

Dr Michael Brown tweeted a link to the following article. Here is an excerpt and the video:

1967 Borders—A History Lesson from Ron Cantor on Vimeo.

[Link to Video]

Recently Messianic Jew, Ron Cantor, gave an importunate message on the foreign policy of the White House. Cantor holds both Israeli and US citizenship allowing him to both admonish and redirect the aspirations of the State Department. He ‘felt compelled’ to deviate from his normal Bible teaching and provide this necessary history lesson which he hopes will get out to the world.

A Plea from a Man with Two Countries - Voice of Revolution

Dr Michael Brown Discusses How Matthew Uses the Old Testament

Dr Michael Brown tweeted the following!

Dr Michael Brown Discusses How Matthew Uses the Old Testament

Free Will - Comparison; Will A Man Rob God?

This graphic shows considerable ignorance as to what the Bible teaches us about God's character and how God relates to people. Equating a robber robing someone of material wealth that the robber does not deserve or own to God demanding worship is simply stupid. When we are commanded to worship God, it's a matter of God getting from us what He deserves and owed from us. When we worship God we fulfill the purpose for which we were brought into existence. There are as many different ways to worship God as there are people.

I think "Free Will" is confused here with "Free Choice". They are not synonymous. While we can and do choose to obey God or disobey, we cannot choose to submit ourselves to God on our own. We are enslaved to sin. No matter how much you try you are unable to be sinless on your own without the Holy Spirit empowering you and even then its still a struggle. Without God, there is no struggle because we have no reason struggle against our natures.

⁵ Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. ⁶ The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. ⁷ The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. ⁸ Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.- Romans 8:5-8

God doesn't send people to hell because we all go to hell by default. It is a gift of God to submit to His will and repent of our sins. We are unable to do it for ourselves.All you have to do is respond to the offer God is offering us and you will be saved. No one gets saved without making a conscious choice.

⁴⁰ For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
⁴¹ At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” ⁴² They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’?”
⁴³ “Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. ⁴⁴ “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. ⁴⁶ No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. - John 6:40-46

⁸ For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— ⁹ not by works, so that no one can boast. ¹⁰ For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.- Ephesians 2:8-10

irReligion.org » Free Will

Faithful Thinkers: Video: Free Choice and Hell

Here is an interesting video of Norman Geisler from an episode of the John Ankerberg show. In the clip, Dr. Geisler talks about how people end up in hell.

I find myself in sharp disagree. Notice what he says: God tries to save as many people who let God save them. What? The argument put forth here is pretty much the same as what he wrote in his book on the same subject,Chosen But Free. Rather than rehash all the ways this view just doesn't stand up from Scripture as Geisler contends, I want anyone who wants to delve into this to read Chosen But Free and then read Dr. James White's response The Potter's Freedom. In the meantime, check out this video it sums up the other side perfectly!

Faithful Thinkers: Video: Free Choice and Hell

FacePalm of the Day #94 - Debunking Christianity: For the Love of God: Or Hell as a Tool for Secular Morality

It's been a while since TGBaker has posted on Debunking Christianity. Today, I was reminded of why that is a good thing. He again makes some serious errors that make me think that he does not understand what the Bible says.

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.

I sure hope the TGBaker keeps corresponding with Dr. Sennett because God may use the discussions to bring TGBaker into right relationship with God. It would be an answered prayer.

Does God love something because it is good? Or is it good because God loves it? If God does or loves something because it is good, then the good looks to something that is more sovereign than God to which he must conform to be good. If God were to oppose these standards called good then God would not be god since he lacks omni-benevolence. So God's omniscience is limited by the good. If on the other hand what is good is simply what God loves and commands ( the Divine Command Theory), then the good is simply whatever is the whim of God (such as killing all the babies in the Canaanite genocide). If there are no standards apart from God other than what he wants or commands then apart from him there is no good.

The Bible clearly says that God love us. It says that we are evil. Therefore the line of reasoning is flawed from the beginning. There is no standard that is apart from God and there is no good apart from Him. If we do anything "good" it is because of God's grace and God's restraining of our evil.

The former idea that there is a good apart from god means that humanity should follow that standard and obey God only if he is compliant to that standard. The latter view which state that the good is simply God's whim is obeyed only because of the threat of punishment or damnation. This dilemma is called the Euthyphro dilemma and has been left to us by Socrates.

Who said that there is good apart from God. TGBaker presupposes this and offers no proof for it being true. On the other hand, morality is not based on God's whim. God's nature does not change. Basing our morality on God is truly objective because God is perfect and unchanging. God's standard is not a moving target.

Sam Harris has offered us a beginning means whereby to ground well-being in empirical science. I would like to call his tool Hell. Harris asks us to imagine a world with as much suffering, as intense suffering as possible, with as many people suffering and all of that for as long as can be imagined. Let's call this "Hell." It sounds like the Christian tradition and might be a good thing to rescue from them. Harris present the empirically based obvious. we would all agree that any movement from that designated measurement is a movement toward well-being, less suffering and more contentment. Obviously there are comparisons and considerations along the way to the antithesis of our Hell but our path will by that of human improvement. Our goal will be that of a paradise or heaven where well-being like physical health will be maximized.

Here is the problem with Harris' ideas: Hell is not just a plane of existence of maximum and intense suffering! Hell is torment because of total separation from God. We were created to be in relationship with God. That is what the goal of religion is. That is what we search our lives for. People try to fill that void in their lives, often unconsciously. It doesn't matter how much pain is avoided in life because without that fulfillment in God, one can never be whole.

¹⁸ I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. ¹⁹ For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. ²⁰ For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope ²¹ that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.
²² We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. ²³ Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. ²⁴ For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? ²⁵ But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.
²⁶ In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. ²⁷ And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.
²⁸ And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. ²⁹ For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. ³⁰ And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.- Romans 8:18-30

With the removal of god from the mix the Euthypho dilemma becomes manageable. The idea of a transcendent good which God (much less any other being) is removed. An empirically based "landscape" of evidence and information for reasoning humanity to a better course is opened up as a field of promise. The fear of compliance of a tyrant that threatens eternal suffering is dethroned and replaced with a view toward paradise.

Removing God from the mix, make the dilemma unanswerable. Humanity is unable to reason adequately about what is right and wrong. And who can perfectly keep the standard that they know is right let alone what they don't understand? Jesus was clear. Entertaining the thought of sins like lust, coveting, and hatred are just as bad as adultery, stealing, and murder. This is because entertaining the thought may lead to actually performing the act. Be honest. Our hearts are filled with lusts and greed - sometimes beyond our control. Even when we seek to do good, as we understand it, evil is always present. How do you expect to get free? Can you free yourself? Nope. God isn't a tyrant that threatens eternal suffering. God is a liberator from sin and death to which you are enslaved. Hell is not a possible destination - it is a foregone conclusion without Jesus.

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

Saturday, June 25, 2011

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles