web analytics

Tag: Big Bang

Cheap shot skepticism, courage and cowardly ‘free thought’

Today I am enjoying the privilege of sitting in on some high school senior religion classes (through virtual conferencing software) and taking the role of non-believer, challenging the students on what they believe, especially in regards to the resurrection.

Some may think it difficult to take the role of the skeptic but I find it to be astonishingly easy.  So easy, it reminded me of some observations about skeptics and their arguments- or more precisely, the wind that carries them- that I’ll share now.

It’s easy to be a skeptic because it is much easier to not believe something as … continue reading...

Atheism as ‘Gateway Drug’ to Drifting Away

As of this writing, I am facilitating a course/discussion regarding the decline of Christianity in America.  Someone made a point in the discussion that is similar to one I’ve made previously… but I can’t find where I made it so I’m making it anew.  🙂

The question begins with a look at the measured increase in self-identified ‘religious nones’ in America since around 1990.  (This data can be found linked to here.)  In 1990, some 8% of Americans identified themselves as having no religion.  Today, that figure has doubled.  In the meantime, there has been a drop in … continue reading...

Scientism: The Atheist’s Religion of Faith

I’m getting some hits regarding scientism but don’t actually have any posts dedicated to it.  I thought if I’m going to be looked at on the subject I should make at least a few deliberate comments.  They should not be construed, however, as exhaustive.

Scientism can refer to a few different ideas and I denounce them all. 🙂  It goes without saying that people who exhibit ‘scientism’ would not use the word to describe themselves and they will resent the suggestion that they are as described.

Because this post is pretty lengthy here is a list of the headings in … continue reading...

Atheists strain to demostrate my description of them is not a strawman

I have been hugely entertained by reading an extended forum discussion responding to my post yesterday which was a paraphrase of several conversations I’ve had in the last few months.  As one might expect, it was immediately objected that my protrayal was mere strawman and does not represent the ‘real atheist’ position.   This begs a very interesting question:  isn’t any argument put forward by an atheist a real atheistic position?  It begs another question:  if I did not represent the real atheistic position, why do so many atheists espouse it, engage in the same kind of tactics, and why did … continue reading...

A Conversation on Final Regress and First Causes

I recently had a conversation with some gents that I thought I would paraphrase for my blog.  I think I’ve had the same kind of conversation a dozen times in the last three months.  I have combined all the conversations into one paraphrase.  The Internet is filled with conversations like this.  If you have got one feel free to share.  Enjoy.

Them:  We believe science is the only way to learn about the world and religion is just faith-mongering superstition.  There is no scientific basis for believing in the existence of God.  Belief is just irrationalism.  I know what you’re … continue reading...

Religion (ie, Christianity) requires higher scrutiny because it demands massive commitments

In the last week or so I had two exchanges where the debate turned on why the atheist/agnostic was demanding a higher level of scrutiny for ‘religious’ claims than other kinds of claims.  In one of the cases, the really odd thing is that the person(s) had admitted that science, being limited as it is to the natural order, is unable to touch the supernatural and yet continued to say that science nonetheless remains the best way to learn about the world.   This is not coherent.  When pressed, in this case they again admitted that science couldn’t prove or disprove … continue reading...

One Atheist Admits I’m Right, Another Responds to Big Bang Post

Atheist One.

It is not very often that you get an admission as clear as the one that was posted on my forum today.  I asserted in this post on my blog that at the bottom, most atheistic arguments against the existence of God are based on the ‘presumption of naturalism’ with   The atheist on my forum said:

At the conclusion, you argue that the evidence will show God’s existence if only we give up our assumption that all explanations must be natural.  What you fail to give us is any compelling reason why we must abandon that assumption.… continue reading...

Who made God? Who made the Universe? Chicken, meet the Egg

The question ‘Who made God’ is one of the first questions a young child asks.  It is an obvious question with a difficult to comprehend answer.  The problem is when adults get stymied.   Worse is when grown men who ought to know better and claim they do get it wrong.  For example, this little bit from Christian turned atheist Dan Barker says:

The mind of a god would be at least as complex and orderly as the rest of nature and would be subject to the same question: Who made god? If a god can be thought eternal, then so … continue reading...

Introducing a Budding Apologist: The Religious Implications of the Large Hadron Collider

What follows is submitted by an up and coming apologist named W. E. Messamore.  His webpage is linked at the bottom and to the right.  I invite readers to take a look at it.  I like what I see and note that he and I have similar trains of thought and areas of emphasis.  For example, in a recent post on his blog he listed Lewis’s The Great Divorce as one of his top books to recommend.  That is my number two favorite book- number one being Lewis’s Perelandra (Space Trilogy, Book 2).  Without further ado, here is Mr. … continue reading...