Atheism

As we continue to respond to the abuse of curriculum authority that tried to present to 12 year olds in Texas that belief in God is in effect a culturally stamped but ill supported notion, it is appropriate to pause and watch how William Lane Craig responds to the sort of arguments presented by Dawkins et al as a refutation of arguments to God. Arguments that any number of triumphalistic YouTube videos announce as “destroying” arguments in support of theism: Further food for thought, and of course strictly verboten in today’s radically secularised public school classroom. END PS: It is worth the further pause to look at Plantinga’s collection of two dozen or so theistic arguments.

As we continue to respond to the abuse of curriculum authority that tried to present to 12 year olds in Texas that belief in God is in effect a culturally stamped but ill supported notion, it is appropriate to pause and watch the always entertaining — and perfect for twelve year olds — but oh so pointedly insightful Ravi Zacharias: Food for thought — of course, strictly verboten in today’s radically secularised class room. END

As we continue to address the abuse of curriculum authority that tried to present to 12 year olds in Texas that belief in God is in effect a culturally stamped but ill supported notion, it is appropriate to pause and watch Kreeft’s video lecture: Food for thought. END

Yesterday, I highlighted a case in Texas in which a School-level Critical Thinking Curriculum has been manipulated to set an assignment (in a section for 20 points) gives a question requiring the answer that “There is a God” is not fact or credible view but a cultural commonplace, poorly supported and dubious assertion that apparently students felt was effectively equivalent to “myth.” Documents: Today, we need to begin to address this attempt to discredit ethical theism under colours of education. At first level, ethical theism is foundational to the charter of modern Constitutional Democracy, the US Declaration of Independence, 1776. Something that can and should be memorised by school students (and which it would be difficult indeed for educators or Read More ›

We usually end our religion coverage with the new atheists, but I’m in a rush this morning, and this is easy, so … via Jerry Coyne’s blog, here: I reported earlier (see here and here), that the Templeton World Charity Foundation (TWCF), as well as two seemingly reputable philosophical societies (the Analysis Trust and the Aristotelian Society), are sponsoring a conference in Oxford next March on “The Metaphysics of the Trinity: New Directions“. … The philosopher and atheist Anthony Grayling, Master of the New College of the Humanities and a supernumerary fellow at Oxford, didn’t like this conference at all, and expressed his displeasure. More. Of course, the Trinity is a philosophical concept, whether a self-satisfied ignoramus chooses to understand Read More ›

Leah Libresco, here, including: Both my parents don’t believe in God, so I was raised as an atheist. We had a Christmas tree, but my parents were definitely upfront about the fact that they thought religions weren’t true. I was the kid in high school who worked to get us to stop doing a toy drive for Samaritan’s Purse (which uses the toys to evangelize to poor children). And, post-conversion, I still think that’s a wildly inappropriate charity for a public school to partner with. I grew up on Long Island, where the vast majority of my classmates were secular Jews, so between that and my family, I thought of religion as something that was not only wrong, but wrong Read More ›

We’ve followed the adventures of the Pastafarians with some interest because of the strange turns they take. Originally a concept invented by new atheists to mock the growing evidence against Darwinism as their creation story, pastafarianism has seemingly morphed into ridicule of actual religions by insisting on getting one’s face on a driver’s licence while wearing a spaghetti strainer. And so now, from Masachusetts: The Mass. Registry of Motor Vehicles is allowing a Pastafarian woman to wear a colander in her driver’s license picture. This comes after The American Humanist Association’s Appignani Humanist Legal Center’s attorneys were enlisted to assist with the woman’s appeal after she was denied the right to wear it in her license photo by the RMV. Read More ›

Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry offers an example, using Larry Krauss as a springboard: Metaphysical claims are claims based on a certain type of logic — metaphysical logic. For example, the claim that a universe of finite causes cannot explain its own existence and so must find its source in some infinite ground of existence, an uncaused cause, is a logical claim, which can be debated using a specific set of logical tools, just like mathematical claims. Maybe it’s wrong. But it’s a logical claim, not a scientific claim. I point this out because, circling back to Krauss, this sort of confusion is endemic. Krauss in fact wrote a whole book-length non-sequitur about this: a book titled A Universe from Nothing, which became Read More ›

How many lives did Dawkins save, you say?  Carson doesn’t believe in Dawkins’ religion, Darwinian evolution. All doctors should be as ignorant as Carson. As so often, we close our religion coverage for the week with a new atheist: Richard Dawkins on US prez contender Ben Carson: On Dr. Ben Carson specifically Richard Dawkins said, “You just told me all the Republican candidates except one doesn’t believe in evolution, I mean that’s a disgrace. For a senor a very eminent, distinguished doctor, as he is, to say that is even worse. Because of course evolution is the bedrock of biology and biology is the bedrock of medicine. For a distinguished doctor to not understand, I have to use the word Read More ›

Someone reminds us of Lawrence Krauss’ claims that quantum mechanics makes it inevitable that something comes out of nothing just by random processes and that our existence is random and inevitable because of quantum mechanics. See here at BBC News (2014): Their admittedly controversial answer is that the entire universe, from the fireball of the Big Bang to the star-studded cosmos we now inhabit, popped into existence from nothing at all. It had to happen, they say, because “nothing” is inherently unstable. This idea may sound bizarre, or just another fanciful creation story. But the physicists argue that it follows naturally from science’s two most powerful and successful theories: quantum mechanics and general relativity. Here, then, is how everything could have come Read More ›

For two hours. Maybe they should all go to relationships counselling twice a week. Hat tip: Stephanie West Allen at Brains on Purpose

Here: Dawkins worries about the way US university campuses are becoming places for unlearning liberty. Well yes, but neither Dawkins nor Maher seems able or willing to understand that progressivism is not about liberty; it is about control of an increasingly subject and dependent population. They congratulate themselves on being “liberals,” but might find out the hard way that progressives are not liberals in any classical sense. Note:  I was originally alerted to this item by a friend who noted, in what may have been an earlier version of the clip (I saw it), that they started by focusing on how wrong the idea of design in nature is.  Can’t currently find that version at Mediaite.  

It is important, as we go on to deal with understanding the deadlock on discussions about design theory, to understand how many evolutionary materialists and fellow travellers address evidence and reasoning. For example, in recent weeks, here at UD, we have had to address how not even self-evident first principles of reason are regarded by many objectors to design thought. Similarly, once record (or testimony) does not fit the preferred narrative, it is going to be dismissed as inadequate and/or delusional or as suspected of fakery.  In effect, after all, our senses and perceptions are not utterly reliable, so if something does not fit the lab coat clad evolutionary materialist narrative, something must be wrong. The case of Jesus of Read More ›

I passed by and noted a dismissive comment (or a few) regarding US Presidential candidate, retired neurosurgeon Dr Ben Carson: CASE A: he’s running for President of the United States of America; he’s a politician who’s put religion and science into his platform. He willingly exposed himself to criticism and does not deserve a pass because he did good things as a surgeon. CASE B: Dr Carson. He is clearly a talented physician, but get him talking about evolution or cosmology and he turns into Ken Ham. Looks like a classic case of willful ignorance to me; he should know better. Is that acceptable for the president of a world power? CASE C: Surgery is to science what carpentry is Read More ›

As usual, we close off our religion coverage for the week with inspirational messages from the new atheists. As many new atheists appear to have gone to relationship counselling (possibly why they are no longer threatening to sue each other or creating scenes in elevators for a global public?),  we are once again proud to serve our house product (; ) Richard Dawkins. We understand that the lost messiah portrait of Dawkins has been found: Hallelujah, the lost painting is found! I am so delighted. https://t.co/9aHaASQuNA — Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) August 7, 2015 Meanwhile, the second Volume of his autobiography is virtually in hand, https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/635868366679359493 Today arrived my first advance copy of the 2nd volume of my autobiography, UK Edition. Read More ›