Tweet Tweet, I tawt I taw a puddy tat!

0 comments
I may regret this but I just joined Twitter. I'm new so be patient, and I don't know what to say exactly, but here goes into the 21st century. @loftusjohnw

Here are my first four tweets:

If Jesus is the answer to life's most important questions then how does one go about getting a good paying job? Bible citation please.

One cannot extract a religion from a religious culture, and some religious cultures are barbaric, contrary to the liberal propaganda machine.

The irrationality of faith: "Trust in the LORD...and lean not unto thine own understanding." (Proverbs 3:5-6).

Humanity is much better off if we could just subtract the religion, greed, militarism, racism, sexism, homophobia, speciesism, and so on. [Commentary: Let's start with the religion, my focus. It probably contributes somewhat to other harmful attitudes and actions, especially with regard to militarism, racism, sexism, homophobia, and speciesism.

Quote of the Day, By Matthew Cobb About Earth's New Address

0 comments
Looking the immense scale of the universe portrayed in the video [below], and the fact that not only is our solar system on the non-descript edge of our galaxy, but our galaxy is in a dull suburb of Laniakea, it is hard to feel that there’s anything special about where we are. And even less that any supernatural being should have been particularly interested in us. I am even tempted to feel that there really must be life elsewhere out there, even if I know that, for the moment, we only have evidence that life appeared once, in our boring fractal surbubia, nearly 4 billion years ago.

A Review Of My Book WIBA On Amazon Says, Skip the First Two Chapters!

0 comments
The best book I've read yet that compares and contrasts the arguments for and against a Christian God. Loftus takes an even handed approach in presenting both sides. Believers and non-believers alike should read this book to see if they can learn to strengthen their own arguments for or against. This is a very well researched book. I recommend readers skip the first two chapters and read them last or not at all. They really detracted from the meat of the book in my opinion. I picked the book up several times and put it aside after losing interest trying to get through the first two chapters. After the first two chapters, the book really takes off! LINK
Well alrighty then. In case others might feel the same, okay, have at it. ;-)

Quote of the Day, By Dr. Keith Parsons

0 comments
The qualities that make religion matter so much to people are the same ones that make it so dangerous. LINK.

ISIS Beheads Another American After a Mother's Plea for Mercy; Is It Their Religion Or Their Culture?

0 comments
In my lifetime have never heard of the kind of brutality coming from ISIS by anyone other than sociopaths and serial killers like John Wayne Gacy, Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy. The difference is that these serial killers did their nefarious deeds in secret for fear of being caught and punished, whereas ISIS as a whole group of people is proud of what they're doing and video tapes their barbaric deeds for the whole world to see. ISIS began as an acronym for the Islamic State of Syria which represents a Sunni jihadist group in the Middle East. Through Amir al-Mu'minin Caliph Ibrahim, the group was renamed simply the Islamic State. From Wikipedia:
A caliphate is an Islamic state led by a supreme religious and political leader known as a caliph – i.e. "successor" – to Muhammad...under Islamic law (sharia). ISIS claims religious authority over all Muslims across the world and aspires to bring much of the Muslim-inhabited regions of the world under its political control, beginning with Iraq, Syria and other territory in the Levant region, which includes Jordan, Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Cyprus and part of southern Turkey.
So let me get this straight, okay? ISIS wants to establish an Islamic theocracy under sharia law ruled by a caliph and this isn't a religion? Every important aspect of ISIS is religious in nature. Remove the religion and it guts everything important they hope to achieve. Without the religion there would be no ISIS. With no theocracy, no sharia law and no caliph there would be no ISIS. Their religion provides the rationale, the agenda, the justification, and the motivation to do what they are doing. It doesn't matter whether other Muslims around the world reject their religion by saying it doesn't represent true Islam. It still is a religion, a hybrid if you will of Islam, in the same way as other types of Christianities are still representative of Christianity in general. Just call it the religion of ISIS then, if you still disagree. It is a religion. To see this just ask yourself what would happen if we extracted their religion from them, every aspect of it. Would they still seek to set up an Islamic theocracy based on sharia law under an Islamic caliph? No, they wouldn't.

Given western oppression they might want to reestablish some territorial boundaries we carved up for them in the past, granted. And given human nature they might still use force to do so. But the end result would not be an Islamic theocracy based on sharia law under an Islamic caliph. They might only want to establish a dictator over these territories, not an Islamic theocracy based on sharia law under an Islamic caliph. The rationale, the agenda, the justification, and the motivation to do what they desire to do would be much different, and precisely because these things would be different they would have to come up with reasons for what they desire to achieve. The means to achieve their goals would be different. The end result itself would be different. For instance, I doubt very much they could justify such wanton brutality perpetrated on innocent non-combatants, or be so certain that what the world community thinks is irrelevant so as to broadcast this butchery like they do.

Cultures create religions. Religions create cultures. Religions change in response to cultures. Cultures change in response to religions. Religion itself is a culture. Culture itself is a religion (most of them up until recently anyway). The religious culture of ISIS is doing what we see. It is utterly barbaric to the core. But they see nothing wrong with what they're doing precisely because it's their religion that justifies what they're doing.

Quotes of the Day, by the Prolific Victor Stenger

0 comments
I didn't research to find where these quotes can be found. Nonetheless here are several of them as posted by roedygreen:

Vic Stenger On the Principles of New Atheism

0 comments


Vic wrote the book titled, The New Atheism: Taking a Stand for Science and Reason.He has a website that has a great many gems on it to be found here. I found this poster there. I'm supposing someone created it for him based on his book. Again, he will be missed greatly.

Victor Stenger, Physicist and Prolific Atheist Author, is Dead at 79

0 comments
Hemant Mehta wrote a fitting tribute to Stenger which included a statement from me. He will be greatly missed but he changed the world for the better. LINK.

On Ending the Philosophy of Religion; That's What I'm Talking About!

0 comments
Johnnie Terry of Sierra College, CA, tells me he's using Jerry Coyne's book, Why Evolution Is Truefor his critical thinking classes this semester! He says:
As the Philosophy 4: Critical Thinking class satisfies the college level reading requirement, I'm having the students read both "Why Evolution is True" and "Monkey Girl." Coyne's book provides excellent support for scientific reasoning, verificationism and falsificationism.
That's what I'm talking about when it comes to ending the philosophy of religion subdiscipline in secular universities!

Jesus Behaving Badly: The Fig Tree Incident

0 comments
It’s hard to act mature all of the time… even for the Son of God.  The gospels contain a number of incidents in which Jesus gets annoyed or angry.  Today, we are going to look at two versions of a story about how Jesus gets pissed off and kills a fig tree.  I don’t want to be too hard on Jesus, because he was hungry and I know how cranky I get, when I’m starving, but nonetheless, shouldn’t we expect better behavior from someone who is supposed to be God in human form?

Has Any Atheist Deconversion Happened Quite Like This?

0 comments
John Lloyd was my Youth Pastor when I first became a Christian. A couple of years ago I had lunch with him, which I wrote about here. Today I found a video of him doing a talk at the church he had founded, where he described his conversion and early ministry (starting at about 9:04), of which I was involved. My question to you is this: Has any atheist deconversion happened quite like this? I think not. It was purely experiential while he was on prescription medicine. And yet John Lloyd knows that he knows that he knows that his faith is true. It's a shame, really!


This Weekend is the PA State Atheist/Humanist Conference

0 comments
I'll be speaking at this fine conference on Saturday morning about my book The Outsider Test for Faith: How to Know Which Religion Is True.As I'm finalizing my talk I've been re-reading my book again, and although I do say so myself, this book is dynamite! ;-) If you don't already have it, get it and read it. I'm very honored and grateful to be a speaker for this conference, especially given the other speakers who will be there. If you can come out, do so. Here is a link telling you all the details. Hope to see ya there!

Finally! Christianity is Not Great Went to Print!!

0 comments
As the editor, this anthology consumed a great deal of my time in the past few months. It went to print this past week and is scheduled for an October 21st release date! I sure hope Christians have the courage to read it and think through the issues we raise. I hope both budding and accomplished Christian apologists do likewise, since, if we're wrong I want to know. I sure hope atheists, agnostics, deists and people of different religious faiths like it and favorably recommend it on their blogs, podcasts and videos on YouTube. We non-Christians are in this together as we face overwhelming numerical and political odds against Christians, especially the religious right in America. To pre-order it on Amazon, where you won't be charged until it ships, follow this link.

The following clip from "The Wrath of Khan" expresses my thoughts as I ponder the impact of this anthology:

The Evolution of God from Yahweh in a Box to the Super Mega Deity of the Universe

0 comments

The God of modern Christian theology is a philosophically supercharged God far removed from the physically limited and dimwitted Yahweh whose identity has as much in common as a horse and buggy does with a Lamborghini Aventador LP 700-4.   Ironically, Christian apologists such has WL Craig totally ignore this primitive and limited tribal God in favor of the easy to defend modern concept of a nameless figure that has evolved from the New Testament whose image is rooted in the pagan Classical Tradition. (1)

 When a person “becomes a Christian”, it’s not the ancient Near Eastern tribal Yahweh they are presented with, but a slick modern super deity with few links to the Old Testament . . . known simply as God with a capital “G” who is really an anthology of Classical pagan attributes taken on after having absorbed the myths of other ancient Near Eastern Semitic gods.  This apologetically hopped up deity which grew out of the ideals of Neo-Platonism is constantly gathering apologetic power be they from the Summa Theological concepts of Thomas Aquinas to Karl Rahner’s Systematic Catholic Theology to Barth’s Protestant Church Dogmatics and on to Alfred North Whitehead’s Processed Reality.  The evolution of God is now considerably much like the woman Lucy in the current hit movie of the same title or a God who continues to acquire any philosophical protection the best apologists can mentally bestow upon him.

Given the cruelty and barbarism of the religion of Isis I submit this song:

0 comments

Damn It! The Saint's Head Breaks Off

0 comments
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=547659308642357

Now there's going to be Hell to pay!

How a Lie about Bill Gates Disproves Pascal’s Wager

0 comments
Can you afford not to trust him?!
Hey Facebook, As some of you may know, I’m Bill Gates. If you click that share link, I will give you $5,000. I always deliver, I mean, I brought your Windows XP, right? ” (And it’s still running on Facebook as a “Friend” Shared it with me.)
In just 16 years over 400,000 Facebook users disproved Pascal’s famous 360 year old Wager due to the fact that these Facebook believers took the Pascal’s Wager Challenge and ALL 400,000 proved Pascal’s Wager was wrong! Even though the facts were out for years, people just couldn’t believe that a picture of Bill Gates himself holding a promissory note shared by hundreds of thousands was a huge lie!
 Hey (according to Pascal’s Wager), go ahead; what have you got to lose except tens of thousands of dollars and can you really afford to be that foolish?!  So can you simply afford not to trust what over 400,000 people believed to have been the Gospel Truth?
Finally, someone needs to post a picture of Jesus Christ also holding up a sign claiming eternal Heavenly bliss if you not only believe yourself, but "Share" this divine promissory note with all your friends.  After all, if you’re a non-believer, what have you got to lose?

The Finalized Book Cover of "Christianity is Not Great"

0 comments


This is the finalized cover of my anthology "Christianity is Not Great."

To see the description and contents follow this link. To pre-order it on Amazon, where you won't be charged until it ships, follow this link. It's slated for an October 14th publication date. 


This is a "great" book, get it? ;-)

James Lindsay On Ending the Philosophy of Religion

0 comments
It is very difficult to see the matter of theism as something to treat seriously as a philosophical object. We shouldn't. It is a theological object, and theology is only "pseudo-philosophical," as Carrier puts it, and pseudo-academic, as I outlined above. No one is required to take such a thing seriously or engage its "best" arguments, as if it has any, as if the real contenders haven't already been dealt with thoroughly and repeatedly, and as if any argument stands up to the simple and straightforward question that's been waiting for them all along: "Where's the evidence?"

But because the idea that we should engage any position's best case is generally true in philosophy proper, and all academic debate, it is an easy value to turn into a false virtue. The principle simply doesn't apply here because theology is pseudo-academic, though. Misapplying it as a false virtue, a moral value defining a particular kind of thinker, I think, is exactly what apologists for the philosophy of religion are doing, and I think it constitutes a confusing and unproductive avenue in the conversation that should not continue. LINK.

Christians Have A Gambling Addiction

0 comments


 I’ve been pondering Pascal’s Wager, and I think that he might actually have been onto something.  Not in the sense that his wager was valid, of course.  
His bet was far too simplistic.  Its fatal flaw of assuming that the Christian god is the only deity which might exist, is glaringly apparent to everyone except for believers.  Philosophers such as Homer J. Simpson have dissected it:

Objective Evidence Trumps Subjective Experiences Every Time

0 comments
Q: What about someone who believes God exists wholly apart from evidence, say, on the basis of their religious experience, like William Alston and William Lane Craig argue, who claim the existence of God can be immediately known and experienced wholly apart from objective evidence?

A: I'd say such a claim itself is not based on objective evidence, which is the only reality check we can have against false subjective claims. For the evidence of subjective religious experiences is trumped by the objective evidence that the Christian god, the one they claim to have subjectively experienced, does not exist. That kind of objective evidence abounds. Objective evidence is also the reality check for all people of faith who claim similar subjective experiences are veridical. People of faith who reverse this by claiming subjective religious experiences trump all objective evidence are not thinking like adults, so they must go to the children's table. They are deluded. They are Epistemological Solipsists.

Quote of the Day On The Philosophy of Religion, by Loftus

0 comments
Secularists should teach the Philosophy of Religion in the classroom the same way they write their books, although they should allow for student interaction and debate. If the discipline is to be taught then this is one of the ways to do it right.

Dr. Hector Avalos Calls For Ending Religionist Philosophy of Religion

0 comments
I've been wondering what Hector thinks of my call for ending the Philosophy of Religion, since I'm basing it on his call to end biblical studies. So I asked him. He has not followed the discussion that much but enough to say this (per email):
My proposal is "to end biblical studies as we know it" (The End of Biblical Studies, p. 15),which means in its current religionist and apologetic orientation. So I am for ending the philosophy of religion if its only mission is to defend religion and theism. So, akin to my vision of the end of biblical studies, I would say that the only mission of the philosophy of religion is to end the philosophy of religion as we know it.
He also provided a progress report so far on his call to end biblical studies:

There is No Better Method Than Science

0 comments

I Recommend Dr. James Lindsay's Blog "God Doesn't; We Do"

0 comments
Look on his front page right here, especially the post titled "William Lane Craig talking bizarro."

Can religion be destroyed?

0 comments
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?"

0 comments
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

0 comments
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

0 comments
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

0 comments
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.

Christopher Hitchens - Christianity is Immoral

0 comments

I'm Very Pleased My Call To End the Philosophy of Religion Made The Richard Dawkins Foundation Site

0 comments
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.

Sam Harris on "Why Don't I Criticize Israel?"

0 comments
LINK. I wonder how many Christians will agree with what he says?