TreesNightly

One of the stupidest ideas in the Christian apologetic handbook is that the ability to construct self-defeating statements says something about the nature of reality. For example, I�ve seen posted twice this last week ( here  and here ) the claim that truth can be known because the statement �truth cannot be known,� is self-defeating. Yes, that particular statement is self-defeating, but to say the opposite must then be true is willfully ignorant. I shouldn�t have to explain why, but I will. If �truth cannot be known� is a known statement of truth, then it shows truth can be known making the statement wrong. The statement renders itself nonsensical by its own claim, hence self-defeating. However, if a internally consistent statement is all that is needed to ascertain the nature of valid knowledge, how about �we may or may not be able to know truth.� There is nothing self-defeating here. The two reasonable answers to the question of whether or not we can know all truths is not ...

Martin S Pribble recently started The Not Alone Project . It's a platform for atheists to post their stories in an effort to show those who think we live in a God-fearing world that many have nothing to fear. Growing up surrounded by Christians, I didn't think atheism was even an option for a long while, so I am happy to contribute to a site showing that not only is it an option, it is the best. The following is an excerpt from my post. Half way into high school I went to camp for the first time in my life. It was a Christian Science camp which would be a very odd choice if not for the fact that I was a Christian Scientist. The camp�s selling point to my parents was the promise to re-up my faith and to provide leadership opportunities as a Counselor-in-Training. The camp�s selling point to me was a canoeing trip in Canada and a three-day capture-the-flag tournament. That, and I just wanted to get out of the house. I feel like a little background in Christian Science is needed h...

�God of the gaps� is a type of theological perspective in which gaps in scientific knowledge are taken to be evidence or proof of God's existence. (from Wikipedia) History has shown us that many gaps can and have been filled as scientific knowledge grows. So much so, in fact, that it is perfectly reasonable to assume that there is a natural explanation for our remaining gaps. Theists tend not to come to this conclusion, for obvious reasons, but I wonder how long this conclusion may be avoided. I wonder how much longer this theological perspective will have any semblance of relevancy. The best example of a closed gap is Darwin�s shutdown of the argument from design. Of course, I realize there are still fringe individuals and backward denominations that dismiss evolution as a valid explainer of the world�s biological complexity, but if the slow-to-come-around Catholic Church is on board, it�s safe to say that the others are simply in denial. From most of my interactions with honest t...

Imagine you have a son mid-puberty. He appears to grow another inch every day, but his vocal cords are struggling to keep up with the man he is becoming. You�ve had the �birds and bees� talk, but whatever knowledge or values you managed to impart were filtered through the teenage mind. One day the police come to your door with a warrant for your son�s arrest. They take him into custody and make his bedroom a crime scene. You don�t get a full explanation until you follow the police cruiser to the station. Internet traffic monitoring provided just cause to make the boy a suspect for multiple counts of pornography viewing. Their CSI team then did a blacklight sweep and discovered suspiciously placed sperm discharges. Your son goes to court and is found guilty of both consuming pornography and masturbation, both serious felonies. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole. In this alternate reality, not only are watching porn and beating off crimes, they carry the same penalty as t...