Showing posts from August, 2012

Is God Complex?

Atheists such as Dawkins often argue that a complex creation such as the universe (or the Multiverse) requires a complex creator. If the creator is complex, these clever people think, then the odds of "him" existing are much less and so God is improbable. It would hysterical to hear what Kierkegaard would say, probably something like, "sure God is improbable, there's no better proof he's real." Aside from the ridiculous idea of attaching a probability to the likelihood of the basis of all that is existing, the atheist's point is to counter the design argument. Of course to make the argument they must assume God is like a big man in the sky rather than the ground of being. Tillich argues that this big man in the sky is behind much atheism. It is an anecdotal observation that now seems to be backed up by some emerging data. It is certainly the case that atheists are embroiled in a struggle against the superego-li

Theology is Respected by The Academy Around the World

young Paul Tillich (right) at Science Conference with Einstine (second from left back row) Atheists are always bad mouthing theology, but the vast Majority of them have never read a single page of real theology. They have no concept of what a real theology is about, they probably think it's like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell. They know nothing about it but they are so sure it's stupid. The bad mouthing began with Dawkins trying to overcome his deficit in theology without having to learn any. People who criticize his swill with the attack "he knows nothing about theology" which means his books are worthless when they attack theology. So he came up with the extremely inane response that "theology is stupid so I don't have to know about it to know its' stupid." Obviously if he doesn't know about it then he can't know it's stupid. I've seen atheist say "well it's about God so that's how I know it'

So Atheism is not an Oragnized movement? More on the Orgnaization

Once upon a time I wrote an article called "cracking the Jesus Myther's Phony Scholarship code." It was about things like the Jesus project which appears to be a true scholarly endeavor but is just a front for Jesus myth propaganda. Another good example of that is Religious It poses as a sight about religious tolerance but is really about how evil Christianity is. This is about the Jesus project . Now this is not the Jesus Seminar. let's be clear. This is the Jesus myther project of destroying belief in Jesus. This is an old blog, the piece I'm referring to is old also. The blog is "Richard Carrier Blogs" . Friday 26, 2008. The aims set froth: This will be like a fourth "Quest for the Historical Jesus" (or fifth or sixth, depending on how you count), with two major differences that shall define the Project: It will exclude all theological and dogmatic bias--conservative or liberal (none attending were sympathetic to either

Fictional Nazareth Issue Heats up

excavation in 1999 December of 2010 I did a piece updating a controversy from the early days (late 90s) of my apologetical life: the Nazareth as Inhabited at the Time of Jesus . This was on Atheist Watch, and the comment below was sent to Atheist Watch. That piece I did on atheist watch was in 2 parts. part 2 is here. Of cousre the mythers say no. The Pfan excavation, which they had been sighting as documentation for their view (it was going around big time, every message board had posts on the mythers using Pfan excavation. I'm the one who actually got hold of the guy to find his findings and who read his article to see if they were misquoting him. Now a new gang is saying his findings were no good (now that they know he doesn't back them). I recieved a comment (on Atheist Watch) to that old post from 2010: Anne Carly Abad says: I read this article about Nazareth: And the author debunks the dating of some of Pfann's finding

Updating the CADRE Biblical Archaeology Links

For the first time in a long time, I had the opportunity to update the CADRE links on Biblical Archaeology on the Christian History page . Here is the list of websites now listed on that site: Archaeology Sites Amazing Discoveries in Bible Archaeology A link page to various sites on Biblical Archaeology. Archaeology and the Bible The Associates for Biblical Research monitors new archeological discoveries of the ancient Biblical world, and in fact produces many of these new discoveries through its own staff of professional archaeologists. Source of the Radio Program "Stones Cry Out". Associates for Biblical Research To provide information to the Christian community and the general public by the most effective means available on the subject of Biblical archaeology and the creation/evolution issues. This information is to be obtained from original research and fieldwork, and the research and fieldwork done by others outside the organization. B.A.S.E Institu

What is the Best Argument Against Christianity?

Today, I discovered a post on Confident Christian entitled The Best Argument Against Christianity . The article makes a really good point that the best argument is not one of the arguments that atheists will often make on debate boards. I mean, who among those of us who are apologetics veterans have not heard debated to death the Argument from Evil or the scientific case against Christianity? Obviously, if there were no answers to these arguments most Christians would give up being Christians because (contrary to the arguments made by certain atheists) Christianity is a trust system and it is nearly impossible to trust what you cannot rationally accept. (Actually, that is an interesting post for another day.) So, what does the post point out is the best argument against Christianity? It is, as my very Christian father-in-law used to proclaim: "The best argument against Christianity is Christians." The article points out that many people view Christians (especially Evangel