What's New on the Secular Web?
RSS FEED
May 19, 2012
New in the Bookstore: God and the Folly of Faith: The Incompatibility of Science and Religion (2012) by Victor J. Stenger.
It has become the prevalent view among sociologists, historians, and some theistic scientists that religion and science have never been in serious conflict. Some even claim that Christianity was responsible for the development of science. In God and the Folly of Faith, physicist Victor J. Stenger shows that this conclusion flies in the face of the historical facts.
May 10, 2012
New in the Kiosk: Undermining the Argument from Common Consent (2012) by James R. Henderson
"Peter Kreeft defends the Argument for Common Consent by claiming it is not an illicit appeal to the masses. While it is true that some appeals to the majority are legitimate, Kreeft fails to show that the Argument from Common Consent falls into this category. Given this, I argue that the argument carries no weight and adds nothing in the way of establishing god's existence."
April 20, 2012
Added Response to Richard Carrier's Alleged "Rebuttal" (2012) by Eric Laupot to the Christianity page in the Modern Documents section of the Secular Web Library.
According to Eric Laupot, Richard Carrier's alleged "rebuttal" to his first Vigiliae Christianae article published in 2000 is extremely muddled, as Laupot never referred to the Christiani as Christians or implied that they were Christians. Instead, Laupot has always maintained that the Christiani were Jewish Zealots or anti-Roman guerrillas (as opposed to pacifistic Christians)—an opinion ironically shared by Carrier himself! Carrier and Laupot therefore arrive at similar conclusions by different routes, a circumstance of which Carrier appears to be entirely oblivious. Carrier thus does not appear to understand Laupot's work. Moreover, top Latinists since 1866 have agreed that, contra Carrier, Fragment 2 belongs to Tacitus.
April 17, 2012
New in the Kiosk: Enigmas about the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (2012) by Alfonso Baeza
What sense does it make that the resurrection of Jesus, the momentous event of the Christian faith, should take place without any witnesses? Why was the risen Jesus not seen by anyone other than his own followers? Why did the apostles "doubt" in the presence of the risen Jesus or go so far as not recognizing him? Since it is the most important event of the Christian faith, how can we explain the remarkable differences that exist among the various evangelists regarding what transpired on the resurrection day? How can we understand that certain passages should present the risen Jesus as a spiritual being who would go through walls, appear and disappear at will and who had the appearance of "a spirit," etc., whereas others state that he was flesh and blood?
April 6, 2012
New in the Bookstore: The Code for Global Ethics: Ten Humanist Principles (2010) by Rodrique Tremblay.
Humanists have long contended that morality is a strictly human concern and should be independent of religious creeds and dogma. Rodrigue Tremblay has published this code for global ethics, which further elaborates ten humanist principles designed for a world community that is growing ever closer together. This forward-looking, optimistic, and eminently reasonable discussion of humanist ideals makes an important contribution to laying the foundations for a just and peaceable global community.
March 26, 2012
New in the Kiosk: Faith and Evidence (2012) by James R. Henderson
Ambrose Bierce takes faith to be "belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." Richard Dawkins terms 'faith' "belief that isn't based on evidence." Sam Harris says "Where we have reasons for what we believe, we have no need of faith." The word 'faith' is badly in need of rehabilitation.
March 23, 2012
Added Do Atheists Need a Moral Theory to be Moral Realists? (2012) by Jason Thibodeau to the Without God, What Grounds Right and Wrong? page under Morality and Atheism in the Modern Documents section of the Secular Web Library.
Despite the power and influence of the Euthyphro dilemma, many apologists maintain that theism alone has the resources to account for objective moral properties. These authors dispute the commonly held view that the argument of the Euthyphro demonstrates that morality must be independent of God (especially as this argument is applied to theories that ground morality in the character of God as opposed to His commands). They argue in addition that regardless of the outcome of that debate, a nontheistic worldview is not compatible with belief in objective morality. In this paper I demonstrate that the argument that there is no viable atheistic account of the ground of morality depends upon the mistaken assumption that theism itself has the kind of moral theory that atheism allegedly lacks.
March 1, 2012
New in the Kiosk: Pimpin' May Not Be Easy, but Try Being a Moderate Christian (2011) by James R. Henderson
If you're feeling like a pimp, go on and brush your shoulders off. If, alternatively, you're feeling like a moderate Christian, you have a tricky tightrope to walk.
|
