Paradigm shift

 

It´s happening, fam. The Second Religiosity is now. Make of this content whatever you wish. 

Complete shocker: Free will is...real?!

 

Speaks for itself. Free will denial has always been one of the most silly cyber-atheist talking points, so I suppose it´s a good thing for those guys that we know have objective scientific evidence (as opposed to, you know, mere personal anecdotes) that Voluntarist Free Will really does exist, I mean, duuuude, who knew?!

Babies are born mystics

 

Pre/trans fallacy on speed? 

Deceiving spirits

 

Here we go again. I actually wondered about this myself: if even the Anti-Christ makes miracles, how can miracles prove the Catholic Church? Or Christianity in general? How do we know *they* aren´t the Anti-Christ?

From MythVision, commenting the recent conversion/reversion of YouTube personality Joe Schmid to Catholicism. 

Challenge / counter-challenge

 

Should atheists say a daily prayer? Two approaches...

Social experiment

 

I admit that I never heard about the famous Princeton philosopher Joe Schmid before. Perhaps because he is just a random guy on YouTube who happens to study philosophy somewhere at Princeton? Recently, Schmid shocked his fellow atheists/agnostics by converting (or strictly speaking reverting) to Catholicism. Or did he? 

Some suspect he is just trolling. His video does look unserious, but perhaps he is just the hyperactive autistic type? Anyhow, this is the current drama on YouTube right now. 

Do I care? Nupe. But in case you´re interested, the first video above is Schmid´s conversion story, while the second is a critique from Derek of MythVision. 

Materialist Monday (OK, Tuesday local time)

 

Is dead, stays dead? 

In case you´re interested...

The infamous missing third fragment of Mark was a prank!

Freak show

 

There is some truth to this, tbh. 

Listen, atheist!

 

A little reminder.

Atheist psychosis

Britt Hartley´s dangerous idea

 

I somehow managed to miss this Britt Hartley video. It´s called "The ugly side of atheism / 5 things I hate about atheists (as an atheist)". The most sensational move is when Hartley uses secular psychology and evolutionary theory *to undercut the claims of atheists to rationality*. How can atheism be "rational" if our senses are fundamentally unreliable? Exaaactly...but this is of course a popular *Christian* argument against atheism! Here used by a fellow atheist to cut the perfectly "rational" (male) on-line atheists down to size.

I suppose we could call "Britt Hartley´s dangerous idea"...

The main reason, I think, why Hartley is so controversial in (male) atheist on-line spaces is that she "wants to both have the cake and eat it". In a very real sense, she wants spirituality without Spirit and religion without God. Differently put, she wants to keep the social and psychological dimensions of religion without the metaphysics. I think her (male) atheist detractors (and presumably her religious detractors, too) see this as a kind of LARP. A quasi-religious LARP, to be exact.

Could it work on a mass scale? Maybe. After all, civic religion is a thing. Still, since the LARP is supposedly rooted in our most basic psychological make-up, sooner or later the participants might feel drawn to actual religion, seeing it as "the real thing" or "the missing ingredient". Why not assume that a psyche molded by evolution to "feel" or even "see" Spirit *actually feels or sees Spirit*? The metaphysics are real. Especially if the LARP is very self-consciously modelled on explicitly religious communities (say Christian ones). I think Hartley´s (male) opponents see her as in some objective sense too "spiritual" or religious.

As usual, there is also an discussion on how atheism is male-coded (it´s cold, hard, rational yada yada) whereas religion and spirituality are female-coded. Hartley never says it out loud, but I think she suspects that her male critics see her as "the weak and confused woman" who can´t let go of her emotional support blanket.

Hartley has controversial takes on a few other topics, too. Would secularism really turn the United States into "Norway"? (I assume she means Sweden!) Do atheists really have higher IQ than religious people? 

Could be interesting to watch. 

The Spinoza method

 

OK, this is going to be a rant, but whatever...

"The Spinoza method" seems to be just another version of the OTF. And probably even more silly, since it presupposes from the start that all religious scriptures should be interpreted literally (does that include "The Gospel of Thomas"?) and are obviously fake. But the atheist narrator admits that billions of people believe in it. So clearly it isn´t *obviously* fake, is it? The point of the rhetoric is obvious: the small minority who has seen through it are Brights. And everyone else is an idiot. I suppose that must be a wondeful thing to hear when you´re in senior high or college (where most American atheists took up their atheism). Smart people! LOL.

Since the main point of the video is to attack Christianity, it´s actually quite funny that the last segment of this video comes across as an evangelization tool for...wait for it...Zoroastrianism! Now, Zoroastrianism is probably the religion I most would *like* to be true, so the idea that Jesus is really the Shaoshyant does have a certain intrinsic appeal. But no, I don´t believe it either. 

A competent Christian apologist should be able to respond to this video. Sure, the response might be "wrong", but I think it could be made to sound convincing. Simply presupposing that you´re right won´t help you there, buddy.

Now, do Woke.

Lack of belief in Australia

 

I linked to some of MythVision´s skeptical-minimalist Bible documentaries before. Here, he discusses what would make him go back to Christianity. Spoiler: probably nothing at this point.

I would be convinced that "God" or "the supernatural-spiritual" exists if I had a very strong experience suggesting just that. Not sure what would convince me of Christianity specifically, though. Or American evangelicalism in particular. Even a strong experience of Jesus could be interpreted in a pluralist manner, after all. Especially if he comes draped in the Star-Spangled Banner! I mean, why not the flag of Vatican City, huh?

For discussion purposes. The floor is open.

The Mecca-Medina conflict

 

Styx is experiencing some turbulence right now, but the latest rumor takes the prize. Apparently, some people somewhere claim that he is a Muslim or is becoming one. Eh? The reason seems to be that he wants to end Trump´s war with Iran. So presumably Styx is now a Twelver Shia Muslim, then. As opposed to a Christian Protestant Nationalist? Or what? 

He seems to be an occultic libertarian. As he has been for the past two decades or so. 

And btw, I´m aware of the "Mecca-Medina conflict" and have read the Tibetan Book of the Dead. There!

Ahem

 

No? 

Ye are gods

 

Some lesser known facts about Stanley Kubrick´s weird masterpiece "2001: Space Odyssey". Note the quasi-religious messaging of both Clarke´s novel and the film. But...but...I thought we were an atheist and secular civilization?! 

Materialist Monday

 

If you like your atheism raw, here is Carrier´s attack on the rather notorious Old Testament prophet Ezekiel...

Prophecy and History: Some Pointers

Back to Nebadon

 

For some reason, I feel like linking to this old blog post of mine. OK, not *that* old. It´s from December 2024.

On a fandor to Nebadon

See also here:

Not a very good blog post

Answers for atheists

A mere lack of belief

 

Credit: XKCD

Skeptics and angry atheists on the web, like all the time. Or no? 

Concealment

 

According to atheism as informed by modern science, God doesn´t exist. Humans are temporary products of a blind process of evolution that didn´t have them in mind. Here is an intriguing idea: God does exist *and* humans are products of a blind process of evolution that didn´t have them in mind.

How does that make you feel, earthling?  

Sister Shroom

 

Apparently, this atheist chic takes magical mushrooms. She proceeds proposing a natural explanation to the weird patterns appearing in psychedelic visions. Interesting, to be sure. But note that her explanation is perfectly compatible with pantheism. Here we go again: "spiritual atheism" is either shame-faced spirituality or a quasi-religous LARP. Or perhaps both.

Or as a sixties hippie would no doubt have put it: Dude!