Hey Buzz: Glad you found my site. I have slept a few hundred times or more since I wrote this account, but it still largely applies, except that my basis for nonbelief is stronger now than it was then. I didn't know you had a blog. That was an interesting read about your friend Jeremy, as was his original post. I suppose you could call me and your friend (former) "cradle" Christians, but the term leaves a bad taste in my mouth for some reason. My family went to church, of course, but the decision to accept Jesus was my own based on what I knew and how I felt at the time. I lived that life for years. And then, with more studying and better information, I changed my mind. Thanks for sharing. Hope things are well in Maryville.
Good questions. Your wise to withhold ultimate judgment about that which is probably unknowable. The claims about the afterlife can't guarantee anything but wishful thinking and hope to people who are afraid to think that this life is all there is. In "The God Delusion," Dawkins proposed a scale by which people can gauge how confident they are in the existence of God or not. A staunch atheist, Dawkins was at 6 out of 7 or something like that. His main point was that while you will find few, if any, atheists claiming with 100 percent certainty that there is no god - and I'm certainly not there either - you will find plenty of believers who are 1 on the scale and who say they know with 100 percent certainty that there is, all without a stitch of evidence.
Because \'Merica, I guess. I don\'t get it either. I cover government meetings for the newspaper, and I have a lot of respect for, oddly enough, a local solid waste commission, that doesn\'t do a prayer or the pledge or anything at the start of meetings - unlike all the other publicly funded boards in this county that illegally start with a prayer, usually to Jesus.
Did you have an argument to make or did you just want to throw some insults and ad hominems at me? I'll make your argument for you. You were going to say, I suppose, that since Jesus brought a new covenant, Christians no longer have to abide by the stringent, arcane laws of the Old Testament. But what about in Matthew 5:18-19 when Jesus said that all laws should be obeyed: "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." So, which is it?
Blamer: I didn't follow all of this, but you're right, most simply mentioned Jesus or God in passing, but in the one example that I cited, the kid did identify as a Christian, which is partly what I was concerned about. But I agree with you, teachers and parents aren't doing kids any favors by teaching them about the world, and in some cases providing false information, without helping them sort through why something might be true or false and developing skills so they can determine the veracity of truth claims on their own.
Thanks for add, Daosorios. Glad you enjoyed it. I will indeed check out what's new over at Skeptic Ink. Peace!
Jay: I'm with you. I don't know if I have been banned or not since I have largely stopped watching his stuff because of the issues you mention, but I was one of his followers who disagreed with him on his opinion of Harris, and we sparred a time or two in the comment section on Facebook. After checking, it appears that he has indeed "defriended" me on Facebook. I haven't thought to look because frankly, I wasn't terribly interested in hearing what he had to say anymore, since he apparently is only interested in dismissing Harris and Dawkins as bigots rather than actually taking the time to read and understand their arguments. This unwillingness to honestly deal with what they have actually said, particularly with Harris, rather than what he perceives are their prejudices, of course, negatively colors whatever else he might have to say on other topics, so I have tuned out for now. If you have followed Harris since The End of Faith was released through today, you will find that he has been remarkably consistent on the topic of Islam and religion in general. In my view, Harris hasn't changed, and I don't recall liberals bashing him after his The End of Faith came out. He was endlessly praised. What about A Letter to a Christian Nation? Where are the liberals saying that Harris hates Christians? Liberals in their quickness to castigate those who dare to challenge Islam are the ones who have changed.
Like you, I certainly thought Shives was more reasonable and intellectually honest than people like Greenwald and Werleman, and for awhile, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
You said: "Perhaps he's incapable of distinguishing criticism of islam from genuine bigotry toward muslims?" I doubt that this is the case, since he's clearly capable of making and understanding nuanced arguments on other topics. I think it's either that Shives hasn't read or listened to Harris' full argument on Islam and jihadism or he is simply falling in lockstep with the regressives because it's easier, that's the path of least resistance, and of course, he'll win more fawning supporters that way.
He would probably get us embroiled in World War III, but I would be interested to see how Trump might deal with someone like Putin. He would probably try to insult him into submission.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Brainchild