CADRE Comments

Though I wrote this years ago, this is a canard that continues to be repeated by fundamentalist atheists, so it's worth another look. ** A favorite fundamentalist atheist myth over the years has been that prison inmates are overwhelmingly Christian, and that this in some way proves that Christianity is bad for morals. As a former prison employee myself, and having written an article for the Christian Research Journal on the subject of inmates and spirituality (see link below), I’d like to collate some of my findings and observations on this claim, as well as comment on a response that has been issued by a group called Errant Skeptics.  The atheist case builds on statistics reputedly obtained on March 5, 1997. The statistics indicate that some 83% of inmates with a known religious affiliation profess for some faith in the Judeo-Christian tradition.  There are a few problems, initially, with what relevance this data has.  First, it represents a very sma...

Dr, Ralph Hood, University of Tenn, Chattanooga , inventor  of the M scale. Part 1: The "M" Scale   This article is a summary my book,  the  Trace of God  by  Joseph Hinman  ( available on Amazon ). I recently   posted essays  showing that the true Christian concept of Supernatural is mystical experience nothing more. Now I show mystical experience is empirical, thus SN is empirical. I wrote this for an academic conference,  it was accepted. I posted it in two parts that's I'm uniting them here. First I will Discuss how to study it empirically then Ill talk about the three arguments I make out of that. The argument from religious experience is deemed too subjective to be of any real interest to rationally minded skeptics. Yet over the last 50 years, a huge body of empirical scientific work has emerged in peer reviewed journals that strengthens the case for religious experience as a God argument....

As Jesse Duplantis begs for $54 million to buy a jet plane, let's remember this little ditty popularized by Josh McDowell (though I am sure he didn't originate the basic idea): For example, suppose a student comes into the room and says, “Hey-I have a stewed tomato in my right tennis shoe. This tomato has changed my life. It has given me peace and love and joy that I never experienced before.” It’s hard to argue with a student like that if his life backs up what he says.  Yes, it's hard to argue with a student like that, but it's not because his life backs up what he says.  It's because we long ago fell into this trap where subjective experience trumps objective fact. In an objective sense, you could run that student in circles with arguments on why the stewed tomato isn't that cause of his peace. The most obvious point is that it has the bearing of the tail wagging the dog. But the real reason you can't argue with this student is because all the ...

Good Reasons For The Resurrection http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2018/05/good-reasons-for-resurrection.html link Over on the Secular Outpost Blog Jason Thibodeau introduces an argumemt against the resurrection: (1)  God is completely rational, thus (2)  Any action that God performs is undertaken on the basis of some good reason. (3) There is no good reason for God to resurrect Jesus from the dead. therefore (4)  God did not resurrect Jesus from the dead . [1]   Thibodeau issues a challenge to produce a "good" reason why God would raise Jesus from the dead. The  problem is with no criteria as to what is a "good" reason he just doesn't have to ever agree that there is a good one. It will be seen from the discussion that this is just what he's done. He doesn't actually ever deal with real reasons believers give for the resurrection.

This is an exchange from the comment section from this blog,it is not a personal attack   against the commemorate. I post  because think it illustrates important points about how to deal with science in apologetics. Also I am sire the discussion will continue and all readers are urged to join. Joe: that's like saying "you keep criticizing capitalism but you have to use economics to do it." Skep: - No, Joe. It's actually more like saying "you keep criticizing capitalism, but you take advantage of the capitalist system whenever you find it economically worthwhile." This statement does not imply that capitalism is the only economic system. But it does point out a blatant hypocrisy. Joe: there is no hypocrisy in being critical of science and using scientific thinking. The porpoise of criticism is to make science better. The use of science is limited to those areas where it applies. I don't use science to tell me about God because God is...

We've almost all taken antibiotics at some time or another; this past week I took a few to take care of a pesky cut on my foot that required it. Which segues into another of the reasons "Terra Firma" gives for why the Bible is not inspired: he thinks if it was, it would have told us about things like quantum physics and antibiotics. As he puts it:   “ Thou shalt boil thy water lest the invisible creatures therein bring sickness upon your body .” Invisible creatures living in the water and making people sick? This would have sounded very odd to people in ancient times. But you know what? Not only would it impress modern day readers, it would have saved millions of lives. Why oh why didn’t Jesus warn people about germs? Apart from the egocentric self- privilege this awards modern people, it's also shortsighted, as I demonstrated in this video from 2011:   Yes, if God had told us how to create antibiotics, "Terra Firma" would today be complaining ab...

Herbert Marcuse   (1898-1979)  warned of rise of one-dimensional  man The dangers of scientism and the loss of humanity have been lurking over modernity for a long time. These things go way back to the nineteenth century. What we see emerging today as the perils brought on by scientism is just the modern outcome of trends that were engaged by Albert Schweitzer as early as 1900. Schweitzer is all but forgotten today. He’s mainly remembered as a great humanitarian who went to Africa to nurse the poor. In the early part of the twentieth century and up to the 1960s he was given huge respect one of the most profoundly brilliant and great men of human history. Schweitzer had four brilliant careers going at the same time. He was a theologian, philosopher, Bible Scholar and concert musician. In addition to all that he built organs. After having achieved greatness with his book  Quest of the Historical Jesus [12]  he went to medical school and became a doctor....