CA136 Nobody Dies For A Lie

We shouldn’t be surprised by a world containing pointless suffering if it’s not set up with the welfare of conscious creatures in mind. But there’s a deeper problem with theism and its demands. Affirming theism requires moral judgments, as it entails endorsing the permissibility of suffering allowed by a benevolent God, which feels like a … Continue reading CA138 The Demand of Theism – Is it immoral to believe in God? →

I’m joined today by Jonathan Machnee, an autistic researcher who has conducted the largest English language ethnographic study of Christians and ex-Christian autistics (autism 1, or what was formerly known as Asperger’s Syndrome or high-functioning autism). His research has included data mining over 26,000 autistics and conducting over 500 interviews with autistic Christians and ex-Christians … Continue reading CA137 Why are autistics less religious? w/ Christianity on the Spectrum →

I critique Mel Gibson’s claim on the Joe Rogan Experience that “nobody dies for a lie,” which many apologists have used in the past to argue that the martyrdom of Jesus’ disciples supports the truth of the resurrection, as they wouldn’t die for something they knew to be false. First, I challenge this by questioning … Continue reading CA136 Nobody Dies For A Lie →

Do apologists actually believe what they’re saying? I’m joined by Counter Apologist to discuss his “Paradise Hell” thought experiment and to try to explain why theistic attempts to account for evil are so unpersuasive. What decision would you make if eternity were on the line? Linktree

We discuss Philip Goff’s conversion, the online reaction to it, and what his “heretical Christianity” involves. Is he a real Christian? What does he think about the resurrection, the ascension, the miracles of Christ, the virgin birth, the trinity, inerrantism, the atonement, and God’s nature? Amos Wollen – Conversion Review: Christianity gains a new smart person Randal … Continue reading CA134 Philip Goff’s Conversion to Christianity →

Two Christian apologists reviewed my series on the moral argument for God on their channel, Democracy of the Dead. I recorded my own counter-response shortly thereafter, but thought it was too profanity-laden and impolite to release. Generally speaking, it’s good to remain dispassionate in these online spaces, but I let my frustration get the better … Continue reading CA133 The Moral Argument for God – Have I Been Debunked? →

Zac (Adherent Apologetics) and I explore a few of the things that drew me to agnosticism. Religious ambiguity, disagreement among epistemic peers, the diversity of the theistic tradition (as well as the varieties of non-theism), the seeming inscrutability of the prior probability of theism, and my acceptance of the value-selection hypothesis have all played a … Continue reading CA132 From Atheism to Agnosticism (w/ Adherent Apologetics) →

I’m interviewed by Fuad Abdullah Harahap (@fubilosophy) about my deconversion, the sad state of Christian apologetics, my issues with the skeptic community, free will, the afterlife, agnosticism, and a few other topics. Fubilosophy Linktree

What would convince you of God’s existence? Specifically, the Christian God. What would change your mind and cause you to convert? I name three things: Christian aliens, miracles, and religious experience. That’s not an exhaustive list, but those things would dramatically raise my credence in Christian theism. I spend the most time talking about religious … Continue reading CA131 What would convince you? →

The world is religiously ambiguous: It can be interpreted in various incompatible ways, and the interpreters are not necessarily violating any standards of rationality in doing so. As for me, I don’t feel any position being forced on me by the evidence. My best efforts to judge the total balance of evidence weighing for and … Continue reading CA130 Am I Agnostic? →