Category Archives: Atheism

Literally Ilm-ul-Kalam means the science of debate. The foremost aim of introducing this knowledge was the defense of religious doctrines by means of logic and rational arguments. Those who engaged in this discussion were referred to as Mutakallimun(those who practice knowledge of Kalam). The older history of Ilm-ul-Kalam is associated with the rationalist group Mutazilites that emerged at the beginning of second century. Later on two other school of thoughts established such as Maturidites and Asharites who represented the mainstream Sunni theology and viewed Mutazilites approach contrary to Islamic tradition and holy scriptures which brought many conflicts among themselves. I do not intend to indulge in this long historical discussion.

We know that Atheism has almost defeated all the religions except Islam because many intellectuals, even though non-Muslims they are, have admitted the rationality of Islam, the only religion goes hand in hand with science and also confronting contemporary models and alternatives. The weapon atheists use for demolishing religion is sciencenot science actually.but scientism, the attitude of extending scientific laws and consequences to ethical, social, philosophical and religious values. Scientism has to do nothing with science. It is the misuse of science for achieving personal desires. It can be classified as a religion like Darwinism, Naturalism, Socialism and Marxism etc. Even in America people celebrate Darwin's day. Is Darwin a single genius lived on the planet? There are certainly many more but why did not they get as much protocol? The reason is obvious. Atheists view Darwin their pseudo-prophet who proposed an alternative theory of creation which is the building block of atheism. The most important things of our life such as God, ethics and meaning etc, do not exist physically. Now what scientismists do, they reject all these metaphysical entities solely on the basis of science. They argue that these things cannot be verified by science and what cannot be verified by science do not exist. It is an explicit fallacy to study metaphysics using scientific spectacles. The very definition of inductive logic on which science is based, suggests that there is no certainty in the realm of science. The relation between premises and consequences is that of probability. The scientific method is limited to observation and experimentation. What lies beyond sensory perception science has no right to deny its existence. If it did so, it would be the violation of its basic definition. With the praiseworthy, attractive and astonishing achievements of science people started applying scientific method to categories that were before thought to be domains of philosophy and religion. Unfortunately, it has also brutally disrupted philosophy which resulted in movements such as logical positivism limiting the broader view and scope of philosophy to materialistic approach to make it parallel and compatible with current dominant methodology and worldview. They usually neglect the probability of variation in scientific assertions, even though it has been experienced many times in the history of science. Science may be a knowledge but not all knowledge is science. Scientists do an observation at different places and times and then broadens it universally, but if someone came up with a contradictory observation at any other place or time the previous one would be discredited because scientific claims are always exposed to falsely . A theory is said to be scientific if it is empirically falsifiable.We have to make religious community aware of the misuse of science. Scientism has made our youth agnostic and skeptic regarding their ethical, moral and religious values. To increase the rational potential of people to steadfast on their faith, the comeback of Ilm-Ul-Kalam is inevitable. If we did not take a positive step for its comeback and reformation, the young generation will fall in the quagmire of confusion and tension forever.

Writer is a student of Science, Philosophy and Theology

Email:------arafatfani439@gmail.com

Read the original here:
Why is the comeback of Ilm-ul-Kalam necessary ? - Brighter Kashmir

C.S. Lewis (Max McLean) reflects on his spiritual journey in "The Most Reluctant Convert: The Untold Story of C.S. Lewis." Courtesy CSLewisMovie.com

The Most Reluctant Convert: The Untold Story of C. S. Lewis debuts in theaters on November 3 and brings the viewer into C. S. Lewis shoes, from his childhood to when his life begins anew as a full-fledged follower of Jesus.

The short movie is based on the successful stage production by the same name, which heavily draws from C. S. Lewis own account in his book Surprised by Joy, sometimes using direct quotes.

The biopic account is narrated by an older Jack Lewis who journeys with you, the viewer, through his life. Jack is played by acclaimed narrator and stage performer Max McLean, known for his solo stage shows based on Lewis books The Screwtape Letters and The Great Divorce.

The film also stars Nicholas Ralph as the younger Lewis and Eddie Ray Martin as Lewis as a child. The Most Reluctant Convert is directed by Norman Stone, who may be best known as the director of another film about C. S. Lewis, Shadowlands.

Ive personally had the pleasure of going to Oxford and Cambridge, Lewis grave, the Kilns (his home later in his life), the Eagle and Child (a pub frequented by Lewis and Tolkien), and studying the legendary man. The movie uses all of these real-world sites as sets, bringing a unique realism to the story.

Though the storytelling certainly delivers, the constant narration gives the impression of a documentary, and one should set their expectations appropriately. The film uses simplistic and beautiful cinematography as the camera follows the older Lewis through the critical events of his life.

From bookish boy to young professor, Lewis spiritual journey moves from indifferent child to rationalistic teen and atheist, to a dabbler in the occult, to a weakened atheist, to a believer in the transcendent, to aloof theist, and, finally, to reluctant Christian. In each step in the process toward Christ, Lewis dragged his feet, putting up his best fight against Gods draw on his life.

At the beginning, we hear a tirade from the old Lewis explaining what he would have said if youd asked him why he was an atheist all those years ago. His beginning monologue tears down Christianity, posing the problem of evil with rational and rhetorical force. From the beginning, the viewer knows it would take God himself to move a man like this away from his atheism, and that is precisely what happened.

Avid Lewis fans will enjoy how the movie fills between the lines of Surprised by Joy. People who have only heard of the Chronicles of Narnia will get an introduction to one of the most brilliant minds and greatest communicators of the twentieth century and his reluctant conversion to Christianity.

The movie debuts on November 3 and has a short run through November 7. To see if the film is playing at a theater near you, visit CSLewisMovie.com.

The filmmakers commitment to showing Lewis Christian story is apparent in their website, which includes a workbook that your small group or family can use to discuss the biblical truths in his story.

Here is the original post:
New CS Lewis film The Most Reluctant Convert is an inspiring account of a legendary story - Denison Forum

Phil Wood| Special to The News

"Believing is Seeing" is the title of a new book by Michael Guillen, Ph.D. On the front cover, "A Physicist Explains How Science Shattered His Atheism and Revealed the Necessity of Faith." This subject has been of great interest to me since discovering this quote from the Baha'i writings.

The fourth teaching of Bah'u'llh is the agreement of religion and science. God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions.

If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question isfound contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation. (Baha'i World Faith, p. 240)

Guillen begins this book with the story of how he became a scientist. He became interested in science when he was in the second grade. He went on to get a BS in physics and mathematics from UCLA and a Ph.D. in physics, mathematics, and astronomy. After graduating he went to Cambridge, Massachusetts, to teach at Harvard. After several years he left Harvard to work in broadcasting. His last job was as News Science editor at ABC news. He gives a fascinating account of his travels and adventures as a science newscaster and commentator.

The most interesting aspect of his story is his encounter with religion. He came to the conclusion that science did not answer all his questions and began to study religion. He studies the major religions of the world and ended up with a year-long study of the Christian Bible. He found many teachings in the Bible which were completely compatible with his understanding of science. After intensive study, he became a Christian.

The last section of the book is "Your Destiny." He begins with some comments made by college students who are attending a prestigious college in the eastern United States. They are being interviewed and presented with some strange comments about people and their beliefs.

The students accept these strange comments without comment indicating that whatever you believe is OK, without any consideration for facts or truth. He continues to consider the importance of these beliefs in relation to your worldview and how this can influence your actions. This emphasizes the importance of worldview in relation to conditions in the world.

I was not surprised by the results of Guillen's search and his decision to become a Christian and his comments on the importance of religion. The importance of religion is one of the basic Baha'I teachings.

"Religion is, verily, the chief instrument for the establishment of order in the world, and of tranquillity amongst its peoples. The weakening of the pillars of religion hath strengthened the foolish, and emboldened them, and made them more arrogant. Verily I say: The greater the decline of religion, the more grievous the waywardness of the ungodly. This cannot but lead in the end to chaos and confusion. Hear Me, O men of insight, and be warned, ye who are endued with discernment!" (Baha'u'llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 27)

Phil Wood, a Baha'i, from New England, resided 12 years in Barbados, 4 years in China, 35 years in Hutchinson. pwood1937@gmail.com, Phone: 620-314-8571

More:
Wood: The importance of faith - The Hutchinson News

Should religion go extinct? Should we accelerate evolution by killing off religion? Just as the Chicxulub asteroid 65 million years ago killed off 75% of life on Earth, including all non-avion dinosaurs, should we today take control of our evolutionary future by deselecting religion?

Religion should be selected out of the evolutionary process because it has outlived its adaptive usefulness. Oh yes, our ancestors needed religion at one time to establish altruistic communities that would care for selected populations. But the very tribal in-group loyalty that was once adaptive is now preventing the advance of rationality, restricting growth in scientific knowledge, and even preventing world peace. If we could replace religion with science, reason would then govern a single global society without conflict. Really? No, not really. So, just what is going on here?

Some anti-godders along with some theologians turn the analytical lenses of evolutionary theory toward the history of religion. What might this teach us? It appears that in the history of Homo sapiensthat religion united communities in reciprocal altruism. Caring for one another contributed to the health of individuals who grew to reproductive age, or even longer. This insured that the genes of these communities would survive into future generations. Religious communities survived because they were fit.

What does an evolutionary interpterion of religion teach us about God? Nothing. Yet, we cannot sidestep this most important of questions. Is there a divine reality? Is this divine reality gracious or not? Do we need religion in order to enjoy life in relationship with God? Could God get along without human religion?

The anti-godders in our society claim that science is on their side. Truth, justice, and peace are on their side. Is there any evidence to support this? Perhaps, yes.

During the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, what has made the news are religious yahoos who oppose vaccinations. The blood of Jesus is my vaccine, reads a protestors poster in a Sydney rally. Rev. Jackson Lahmayer of Sheridan Church in Tulsa will send you a religious exemption from Covid 19 vaccination or mask-wearing for only a $25 donation to his church. Yes, such examples suggest that religion is irrational and anti-science.

When political leaders insist that government mandated vaccines and masks follow the science, it is frustrating that such a dangerous anti-vax and anti-science force is at work in society. Does this in itself warrant the enforced extinction of religion?

Dangerous. Thats the way religion appears when looking at a very small screen. When we turn to a much larger screen, one that surveys the globe, we see that no major group opposes vaccinations, mask-wearying or public safety. The U.S. Conference of Roman Catholic Bishops along with the Vatican itself insist that receiving the Covid-19 vaccine is morally acceptable and responsible. On September 16, 2021, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America said that even if some individual persons might have good reasons for not receiving the vaccine, there is no exemption in the Orthodox Church for her faithful from any vaccination for religious reasons. Spokespersons for the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, along with pastors of Southern Baptist megachurches all agree: Get vaccinated! Wear masks! (Smith September 17, 2021).

In her attempt to survey the Orthodox Christian world, Scripps neuroscientist Hermina Nedelescu found that virtually all church leaders are strongly committed to following the science. The problem in an age of fake news and conspiracy theories is discerning just what is the most reliable science. In sum, todays religious tribes are overwhelmingly reliant on science at its best.

If youre anti-religious and pro-science, you may wish to switch categories so that religion becomes subsumed under science. One way is to give an evolutionary account of religion. Then, declare that this evolutionary account is superior to any account a theologian might give. This is the strategy pursued by anti-religious forces who wish to turn evolutionary science into the hegemonic worldview.

There are some things we can say about the history of religion that become illuminated from the light of evolutionary theory. Religious phenomena are adaptations, not just useless byproducts, claims evolutionary theorist Terrence Deacon(Deacon 2012, 492). Religion, according to anthropologist Solomon Katz, is a catalyst to promote cooperation and facilitate the emergence of the new moral leadership in scientific, technological, and political spheres(Katz 24:2 1999, 238).

A bit more completely, evolution researcher Augustin Fuentes tells us this: The human niche, our way of making it in the world, consists of extreme cooperation in complex social relationships, in childrearing, in foraging, in information sharing, and in the development of a symbolic, extended, and shared memory, wherein people, places, items, and relationships become imbued with meaning beyond their immediate sensory and temporal contexts(Fuentes 72:2 2015, 177).

Evolutionary insights illuminate todays religious adherents. What goes unnoticed, is that religious adherents are just as interested in the evolutionary interpretation as the anti-religious are. Theologians of the theistic evolution school, for example, like to hear from evolutionary theorists about the emergence of religion in our past. Such science gets incorporated into the theologians comprehensive grasp of Gods work within the creation. Theologians, for the most part, do not perceive a conflict with such science.

There are anti-religious belligerents, in contrast, who want to reduce everything spiritual to biology. This turns religion into a biological epiphenomenon. And a dispensable epiphenomenon at that.

Clearly, religion is man-made, according to the famed Franz De Wall, so the question is what good does it do for us(DeWaal 2013, 94-95). Religion does no good today. Is it time to rid us of religion?

Prominent among the anti-religious forces are those who believe atheism or agnosticism should patent scientific knowledge and prevent others from borrowing scientific authority. Like two species contending for the same evolutionary niche, science should adapt while religion go extinct.

Harvard entomologist and sociobiologist E.O. Wilson champions an Armageddon-like battle in which the scientific children of light will win a total victory over religious darkness. Scienceis the wellspring of all the knowledge we have of the real world that can be tested and fitted to preexisting knowledge.It is not just another way of knowing as often claimed, making it coequal with religious faith. The conflict between scientific knowledge and the teachings of organized religions is irreconcilable (Wilson 2012, 295). Religion should go extinct. Science should survive. Science alone should rule culture.

Should religion go extinct like the dinosaurs? No.

It might be more accurate to say Christianity is not under attack, it is under review, avers Patheos columnist Karl Forehand. Christianity along with the other prominent religions of the world should be subjected to review. Peaceful human flourishing requires every dimension of culture, including both science and religion.

In this review, lets get clear on a few items. First, religion and science are not like two species competing for the same cultural niche. Our global society needs both.

Second, neither science nor reason is the exclusive patent of atheism and agnosticism. Science and reason are the shared resource of Jews, Christians, Muslim, Buddhists, Hindus, along with the spiritual but not religious. To the religious mind, science exposits the book of nature just as scripture exposits special revelation. The most common attitude towards science in the Islamic world is to see it as an objective study of the world of nature, namely as a way of deciphering the signs of God in the cosmic book of the universe. Natural sciences discover the Divine codes built into the cosmos by its Creator, and in doing so, help the believer marvel at the wonders of Gods creation (Kalin 2002, 48).

In brief, knowledge of God comes from two books. The book of nature is interpreted by scientists. The book of special revelation is interpreted by the faithful. We need both to grasp the wondrous works of God in our world.

Third, despite the so-called tribalism of previous centuries that characterized religious rivalry, todays Parliament of the Worlds Religions rallies a concerted effort to bring to our planet peace, justice, and compassion. In addition to combating the virus we know as Covid 19, we must also fight moral viruses such as racism and sexism,. This according to Stephen Avino when opening the 2021 Parlaiment. (1893 Parliament in Chicago)

Fourth, measuring religion according to criteria drawn from social contribution or natural selection misses the most important point. The decisive point is God. The question of whether the world would be better off without religion has no logical bearing on the ontological question of Gods existence.the question of Gods existence is logically and factually independent of the question of whether belief in Gods existence is beneficial for the human species(Lilienfeld 38:4 2014). In order to raise and appraise the question of God, we need theologians. Not scientists, let alone anti-religious malcontents.

On the one hand, the public theologian engages in discourse clarification so that we all can assess the claim to cultural hegemony by the anti-godders among us. Further, the public theologian engages in worldview construction, which incorporates scientific knowledge into a theology of nature.

On the other hand, religion is under review. Within this review, the theologian needs to examine self-critically religions foundations. This includes raising the questions of God. Two such questions. First, does God exist? Second, if God exists, is God gracious?

Answering these questions prepares us much more adequately than evolutionary theory to ask the question: should religion go extinct?

Ted Peters is a pastor, professor, and author of both fiction and nonfiction. Visit: TedsTimelyTake.com.

Ted is emeritus professor of systematic theology and ethics at Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary and the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California. He co-edits the journal, Theology and Science at the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences. His fictional thrillers feature an inner-city pastor, Leona Foxx, who courageously challenges the structures of political domination buttressed by the latest in science and technology.

Deacon, Terrence. 2012. Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged from Nature. New York: W W Norton.

DeWaal, Franz. 2013. The Bonobo and the Atheist. New York: W W Norton.

Fuentes, Augustin. 72:2 2015. What evolution, the human niche, and imagination can tell us about the emergence of religion. Theology Today 170-181.

Kalin, Ibrahim. 2002. Three Views of Science in the Islamic World. In God, Life, and the Cosmos: Christian and Islamic Perspectives, by Muzaffar Iqbal, Syed Nomanul Haq, editors Ted Peters, 43-76. Aldershot UK: Ashgate.

Katz, Solomon. 24:2 1999. Toward a New Concept of Global Morality. Zygon 237-254.

Lilienfeld, Scott and RAchel Ammirati. 38:4 2014. Would the World be Better Off Without Religion? The Skeptical Inquirer 31.

Peters, Ted and Martinez Hewlett. 2005. Evolution from Creation to New Creation. Nashville TN: Abingdon.

Peters, Ted. 2018. Public Theology: Its Pastoral, Apologetic, Scientific, Political, and Prophetic Tasks. International Journal of Public Theology 12:2 153-177; https://brill.com/abstract/journals/ijpt/12/1/ijpt.12.issue-1.xml.

Peters, Ted, and Martinez Hewlett. 2009. Can You Believe in God and Evolution? Nashville TN: Abingdon.

Smith, Peter. September 17, 2021. Many faith leaders say no to endorsing vaccine exemptions. AP News https://apnews.com/article/health-religion-united-states-coronavirus-pandemic-coronavirus-vaccine-9c947acecd6ba26b4c78827b7b87c185.

Wilson, E O. 2012. The Social Conquest of Earth. New York: W W Norton.

Read the original post:
Should Religion Go Extinct with the Dinosaurs? | the future of religion - Patheos

How many gods don't you believe in?

Those above are just a small sample of gods and goddesses you don't believe in.

It may be of interest to atheists to know how many gods they don't believe in. Let's call the number N.

Problem Of Evil Debate Godless vs B3

Female atheist vs male Christian debate Problem Of Evil

There are a lot of issues in determining N.

It is estimated that there are 6,700,000,000 people currently living on the Earth and the total number of people who ever lived is 102,000,000,000 (102 billion or 102 thousand million depending on where you come from). It could be argued that everyone's idea of god is different, so this is N. Or, at least, this could be used as an upper bound for N, except that many people were (or are) polytheists. However, if we accept there would be (sometimes quite large) groupings of people with essentially the same religious beliefs, this would lower the estimate for N.

If these two effects roughly cancel each other out, then N = 102,000,000,000 may be a good starting estimate.

Adherents.com claims to have figures for 4,200 religious groups currently existing on Earth.

Using the ratio of current population to the total number of people who have ever lived, we get an estimate of 63,000 religious groups throughout human history. (Only Homo sapiens' religions are being considered. It may well be that other hominids believed in god or gods, but it would be pure guesswork to estimate the number of gods they believed in.)

The modern dominant (that is, have the most adherents) religions are monotheistic, but they are few in number. Wikipedia lists 309 Hindu deities. The ancient Hittites claimed to have 1000 deities in their pantheon. So for a rough estimate of the average number of deities per religion, we'll take the average of these 3 figures, giving 440 deities per religion.

This gives an estimate of N = 28,000,000.

For monotheists, the number of gods they don't believe in will be N-1, which, of course, will be very close to N. If the estimate above is correct, then (in some sense) atheists and monotheists only differ by 0.000036% in their beliefs.

In fact, working to 2 significant figures, even for the ancient Hittites this figure is the same.

Link:
How many gods? | Atheism | Fandom

October 6, 2021 October 6, 2021 By Adam Lee0 Comments

The leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention defy, then grudgingly submit to, a demand that they reveal what they knew about sexual predators in the denomination.Read more

By James A. Haught The long-foreseen Secular Age is arriving at a gallop. Survey after survey finds snowballing increases of Americans who say their religion is none. The 2017 American Family Survey found that nones have climbed past one-third of U.S. adults the highest ratio yet tallied. These churchless people have become the nations largest faith category. Released in November by Brigham Young University, the nationwide poll found that 34 percent of respondents called themselves atheist, agnostic or nothingRead more

Commonwealth: A Novel of Utopia, part 3, chapter 4 Authors Note: This is an excerpt from my novel Commonwealth. The rest of todays installment is free, but only on my Patreon site. If you want to read the next part today, its already up on Patreon as well. You can sign up for as little as $1/month, or $2 for exclusive authors notes and behind-the-scenes material. Theres also a table of contents for all published chapters. The corridor led toRead more

The religious right has immunized themselves against empathy, but now were in the throes of a crisis where empathy is vital for survival.Read more

One of Americas oldest and wealthiest denominations is in terminal demographic decline.Read more

The Pacific Republics rescue team is found out.Read more

Answering more of the anti-vax, anti-mask, pro-COVID falsehoods from the rights echo chamber.Read more

By James A. Haught Many atheists also are progressive social justice warriors striving to make life better and more equal for everyone. They include Daylight Atheism contributor James Haught. Heres a chapter from his 2016 book, Hurrah for Liberals. Free speech and free press mean the same thing: the right to voice any beliefs or ideas, even unpopular ones orally or on paper without fear of being punished for it. Sometimes its called freedom of expression. Through history,Read more

Why private prisons are a moral stain on society.Read more

Answering some of the most common falsehoods, half-truths and conspiracies about COVID that run rampant on social media.Read more

Original post:
Daylight Atheism - Freethought in the light of the sun

People who grew up in a home with relatively little credible displays of faith are more likely to be atheists, according to new research published in Social Psychological and Personality Science. The study indicates that cultural transmission or the lack thereof is a stronger predictor of religious disbelief than other factors, such as heightened analytic thinking.

Researchers have proposed a bunch of different theories about how religion works, why we have it, and such. I think that atheism is an ideal way to evaluate these theories. They tend to predict really different things about what ought to relate to atheism, explained Will Gervais, a senior lecturer in psychology at Brunel University London.

For the study, Gervais and his colleagues surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,417 U.S. residents. The survey included the Supernatural Beliefs Scale, which assesses the degree to which people hold supernatural beliefs and asked the participants to simply indicate whether they believed in God. The participants also completed psychological assessments of perspective-taking ability, feelings of existential security, exposure to credible cues of religiosity, and reflective versus intuitive cognitive style.

The researchers found evidence that a lack of exposure to credibility-enhancing displays of religious faith was a key predictor of atheism. In other words, those with caregivers who faithfully modeled their religious beliefs, such as going to religious services or acting fairly to others because their religion taught them so, were less likely to be atheists.

The importance of transmitted culture and context-biased cultural learning as a predictor of belief and disbelief cannot be overstated. Combined, this work suggests that if you are guessing whether or not individuals are believers or atheists, you are better-off knowing how their parents behaved, the researchers wrote in their article.

Participants with a reflective cognitive style were only slightly more prone to religious disbelief, while those with better perspective-taking abilities were slightly more prone to religious belief. The researchers found no significant relationship between existential security and religious disbelief.

A lot of people (atheists in particular) like to talk about how atheism comes from rational, effortful thought. This work joins other recent surveys in finding that this isnt too accurate, Gervais told PsyPost.

Our best estimate is that atheism mostly comes down to cultural learning specific cues were exposed to growing up about how sincerely those around us believe in God. Once those cultural inputs are accounted for, individual differences in more analytic cognitive reflection predict a little bit of surface variation, but its a pretty small piece of the puzzle.

But the study like all research includes some limitations.

Our work only looked at folks in the United States, which in a lot of ways is a peculiar place. And although our results are quite similar to results from places like the Czech Republic and Slovakia, theres still a lot we dont know about how religion and atheism work outside of the Western bubble that makes up most social science research, Gervais explained.

Doing this research and also talking to atheist groups, Im always struck at the mismatch between peoples narratives about their atheism and the research. So many people seem really convinced that theyre atheists because theyre super rational and science minded. But large-scale quantitative research basically never shows that to be a major predictor of atheism. So whats up here? Are the narratives off, or are our surveys just poorly calibrated wo whats going on? I mentally chew on this puzzle a lot, and am never all that satisfied by it.

The study, The Origins of Religious Disbelief: A Dual Inheritance Approach, was authored by Will M. Gervais, Maxine B. Najle, and Nava Caluori.

Excerpt from:
New psychology research identifies a robust predictor of atheism in adulthood - PsyPost

Photo: Andrew Klavan, by Embutler, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons.

Stephen Meyer was onThe Andrew Klavan Showto talk aboutReturn of the God Hypothesis. Klavan observes that atheism hasnt yet made the transition from the 20th to the 21st century. Meyer gently differs, offering that it is really stuck in the late 19th century, with Darwin and Marx. Freud comes along a little later, of course. However, the three are largely responsible for elaborating the outlook that sought to replace the Western theistic view with a system of thought that, in its own way, answered fundamental questions about human origins, the human future, and what to do about the persistent sense of human guilt.in his book, Meyer shows how scientifically outdated that atheist picture of reality truly is.

Klavan is persuaded. He and and Meyer were both impressed by the candor of atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel, cited in Meyers work, who praises theorists of intelligent design but prefers not to follow where they go. Why? Because as Nagel explains, he doesntwantthere to be a design behind nature. That is quite the admission. Other atheists, including atheist scientists, are not as honest with themselves, or as candid with their audiences. This very interesting conversation starts at about 1:08 over atThe Daily Wire.

Here is the original post:
Atheism Is Stuck in the Late 19th Century - Discovery Institute

In my latest book,Reflections on the Existence of God,I have attempted to demonstrate how atheism is one massive contradiction, and how theism is logical and fits the real world we live in. The evidence is compelling.

However, if the evidence points to the existence of a transcendent infinite spiritual force in the universe, this force will remain unknown to us unless it appears and reveals its identity. The human search for God will always be an effort in futility, unless God chooses to reveal Himself in a convincing manner.

Jesus is the only credible figure in history who made the claim to be God. In his bookTheEverlastingMan,G.K. Chestertonpointed out that no great moral teacher ever claimed to be Godnot Mohammed, not Micah, not Malachi, or Confucius or Plato or Moses or Buddha:

Not one of them ever made that claimand the greater the man is, the less likely he is to make the very greatest claim.

C.S. Lewismade this insightful observation:

If you had gone to Buddha and asked him, Are you the son of Brahman? he would have said, My son, you are still in the vale of illusion. If you had gone to Socrates and asked, Are you Zeus? he would have laughed at you. If you had gone to Mohammed and asked, Are you Allah? he would first have rent his clothes and then cut your head offThe idea of a great moral teacher saying what Christ said is out of the question.

For many years, the brilliant British scholarMalcolm Muggeridgewas an outspoken atheist. One of the reasons he eventually changed his mind was because of the man Jesus. He said that plenty of great teachers, mystics, martyrs, and saints have made their appearance at different times in the world, having lived lives and spoken words full of grace and truth for which we have reason to be grateful. Nevertheless, Muggeridge continues, man needs Gods special revelation on which he can build a religious belief and from which he can find wisdom and understanding. Muggeridge goes on to say that the only solution is for God to become man, which He did through the Incarnation in the person of Jesus Christ. God thereby:

set a window in the dark dungeons of our soul, that He might let in a light which would provide a view, and offer a way to be released from the misery of our self-centeredness and pride. In Jesus, eternity steps into time, and time loses itself in eternity.

However, I need to mention a second reason that Jesus and Christianity is where a person should start in his search for spiritual truth. Christianity is the only falsifiable religion in the world. In other words there is a way to prove that it is false. The reason I say this is because Christianity depends on certain historical facts to be true. (This, of course, would include Christs Resurrection.) Prove they never happened and Christianity is fraudulent.

Probably one of the most respected books on mans diverse spiritual longings is TheWorldsReligions by Huston Smith. Written in 1958, it is still used regularly in many college curriculums. Commentator Bill Moyers suggests it is one of the best books on comparative religion because of its objectivity and its sensitivity to all religious beliefs and practices. Smith, who was very well educated, didnt have any particular religious leaning. He was unbiased. And in the book, in the section on Christianity, he begins with these words:

Christianity is basically a historical religion. That is to say, it is founded not on abstract principles but in concrete events, actual historical happenings.

The Bible, he suggests, unlike most of the worlds great religious literature and traditions, is not centered on a series of moral, spiritual, and liturgical teachings but rather on what God did in history and what He revealed in history.

It seems over the years that many scholars have recognized that if you debunk the historical accuracy of the Bible and prove that Jesus did not rise from the dead, then Christianity would fall. Even the Apostle Paul acknowledged this. He said if Christ did not rise from the dead, our faith is worthless, and we should be pitied as fools. (I Corinthians 15:12-19)

The prominent philosopherDallas Willardsaid that the historical evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus is quite powerful. However, most modern people are totally ignorant of the facts. He noticed over the years however, that many a skeptic has set out to disprove the claims of the Christian faith, only to change their minds and eventually become Christians; Josh McDowell, J.N.D. Anderson, Lee Strobel, Frank Morison, Sir William Ramsay to mention but a few.

Willard points out that in their quest they are forced to examine the historical record and historical facts. They are forced to think clearly and to look reality in the eye. Willard goes on to say that modern people are irresponsible in their beliefs because they form their ideas about Jesus and the resurrection without examining the evidence.

To learn more about the evidence for God that exists, I invite you to read my bookReflections on the Existence of God. The book lays out, in short essays, much of the evidence for the existence of God that is available. We should seek to take the evidence offered and use it to make reasonable conclusions. What you will find is, as the evidence accumulates, it enables us to come to confident conclusions about God. Who He is. And, that He truly is.

Here is the original post:
The One Falsifiable Religion | Richard Simmons - Patheos

Chuck Lorre and Steven Molaro originated the American comedy television series Young Sheldon, which airs on CBS. The series is a prequel to The Big Bang Theory and portrays Sheldon Cooper as a nine-year-old boy growing up in East Texas with his family and completing high school. The title character is played by Iain Armitage.

The series narrator and executive producer is Jim Parsons, who represents adult Sheldon on The Big Bang Theory. Young Sheldon has aired 83 episodes as of May 13, 2021, bringing the fourth season to a conclusion. CBS renewed the show for a fifth, sixth, and seventh season in March 2021. The fifth season is set to release sooner than expected, so stay tuned for more information.

The fifth season will broadcast on October 7, 2021. The first episode will air at 8 p.m. ET on CBS. On Thursdays, this upcoming episodes with a 30-minute length will air. One Bad Night and Chaos of Selfish Desires is the title of the first episode. Episode 2 is titled Snoopin Around and the Wonder Twins of Atheism and will be released on October 14, 2021. The third episode, titled Potential Energy and Hooch on a Park Bench, will air on October 21, 2021.

As presented by CBS, the official synopsis is Sheldon and Missy both run away from home; Mary gets upsetting news about George Sr. The first episode of the season is supposed to focus on what truly transpires at the club between George and Brenda. George is dealing with remorse, which is expected to wreak havoc on his already tumultuous relationship with Mary.

As a result, the future episode will most likely focus on Marys response to Georges position with Brenda. Missys ability to come to grips with the problems of her love life will also be discussed. Sheldon and Missy may become friendlier as a result of their common experience with loves failures and their departure from home. Do you want to see a peek of the first episode? Come on, weve got you covered. Take a look at the video below to get a better idea of whats in store.

If watching Season 5 on CBS isnt possible, we understand. You can also watch it on a variety of platforms online. You may watch the show on CBS official website. In addition, the season premiere will be available on Paramount+, FuboTV, YouTube TV, Xfinity, Hulu+Live TV, and DIRECTV.

Another fascinating fact is that the show is also available on HBO Max (with a subscription, of course). On Amazon Prime, Google Play, iTunes, and Vudu, you can also rent episodes to stream. Unfortunately, Season 1 4 of Young Sheldon is not available to watch on Netflix USA, Hulu, Peacock, or Disney Plus.

Spoiler Alert!

Pastor Jeff is able to spend time with his newborn son when Mary volunteers to work nights at the church with Peg. Peg irritates Mary by refusing to contribute and claiming that Mary is always correct. Melissa returns home unhappy over Marcus and tries to isolate herself from the rest of the family. Georges attempts to help her feel better fail, resulting in a fight between George and Connie. Melissa rips Sheldons Professor Proton picture after he is insensitive.

As a result, George and Sheldon become enraged. Mary returns home in a foul mood and, without understanding the full incident, grounds Melissa, who is enraged that her mother always stands with Sheldon, and George is enraged that Mary does not respect his parenting. Sheldon speaks with Connie, who advises him to keep an eye out for his sister.

Georgie returns home, unintentionally worsening his parents dispute when he claims Mary doesnt realize hes dissatisfied in his profession and life because she didnt bother to ask. Sheldon notices Melissa fleeing and decides to pursue her as her brother.

They walk to a shack in the woods, where Melissa reveals how Marcus broke her heart at the roller rink by holding hands with a 7th grader called Nicole, and Sheldon consoles her. George may have a point, Mary confesses to Georgie. George meets Brenda Sparks at a pub and begins playing pool with her. These were the few updates about when the show will air. For more upcoming updates, readers can stay with us by bookmarking.

Go here to read the rest:
Young Sheldon Season 5 Episode 1 Time and What To Expect? - TheTealMango