Head to Head: Theism and the Skeptics [Part 1]

The most recent version of this post is available here.

You Don’t Know My Father

The most recent version of this post is available here.

“It’s Not What We Came For”

The Daily Mail Online has this interesting headline:

‘I don’t want to be a jihadi ... I want to come home’: How dozens of British Muslims who went to Syria to join ISIS ‘plead to return to UK after becoming disillusioned with the conflict’

Of course, after the fashion of many news outlets, the actual story fails to provide sufficient facts to judge whether its headline is accurate or whether it is merely the fond wish of the British media. Other news stories about ISIS show at least some of its adherents demonstrating considerable enthusiasm for their cause, to say the least.

Assuming the story is accurate, this is one ISIS fighter’s reason for his disillusionment:

“We came to fight the regime and instead we are involved in gang warfare. It’s not what we came for but if we go back [to Britain] we will go to jail.”

I’ll decline to express an opinion on what the British government should do with individuals of this sort since I don’t have a dog in their fight. I’m more interested in the sort of regret they are expressing, because it seems rather insubstantial.

Inbox: Agnosticism and Folly

HS has managed to find Blogger’s word limit for comments with the following reflection on my September 6 post, so I’ll post his email in full here, as I think he makes some interesting and thought-provoking points:

“It has always been my contention that Christ’s existence and the validity of his teaching (and of the bible in general) can be assigned a relatively high probability of correctness.

What You Don’t Know Can Kill You

The most recent version of this post is available here.

The Atheist’s New Clothes

The most recent version of this post is available here.

Is the Holy Spirit ‘Racist’?

Forgive the scare quotes, but they’re employed in the title with good reason, as will hopefully become clear.

We have been discussing the modern, leftist redefinition of the word ‘racism’ to include any and all generalizations about race, speaking out against sinful behaviour (or even identifying it) and even gently humorous references to obvious differences between racial groups.

This is not ‘hatred’ or ‘intolerance’, as racism has historically been defined, but an evanescent, constantly morphing definition of what is acceptable that functions largely as a means of disqualifying and marginalizing opponents of progressive social engineering.

Christianity and Racism

A more current version of this post is available here.

Is Christianity a Religion?

The most recent version of this post is available here.

Agnosticism and Folly

The most recent version of this post is available here.

Too Hot to Handle: A Reason Outside Ourselves

The most current version of this post is available here.

The Moment That A Human Being Encounters

A more current version of this post is available here.

The Deadliest Attack on Happiness

Author Trent Hand lists what he believes are the deadliest attacks on happiness:

1.   Comparing yourself to others

2.   Talking about your dreams instead of going to work on them

3.   Listening to people with nothing positive to say

4.   Focusing on the news

5.   Deciding someone else needs to change

6.   Thinking “happiness” is a destination you can reach

7.   Forgetting to say “thank you”

Clearing negative influences out of our lives does have a certain utility.

You Don’t Want to be ‘That Guy’

The most recent version of this post is available here.

Big Questions and the Loss of Faith

The most recent version of this post is available here.

It Ain’t Over ’til It’s Over

The most recent version of this post is available here.

The Bible Contains the Word of God

The most recent version of this post is available here.

Too Hot to Handle: Why I Don’t Share My Faith

The most recent version of this post is available here.

The ‘Moral Hazard’ of Calling ISIS a ‘Cancer’

The New York Times, or at least one Michael J. Boyle, wants us to be careful about calling wickedness wicked:

“But if the ‘war on terror’ has taught us anything, it is that such moralistic language can blind its users to consequences. Describing a group as ‘inexplicable’ and ‘nihilistic,’ as Mr. Kerry did, tends to obscure the group’s strategic aims and preclude further analysis. Resorting to ritualized rhetoric can be a very costly mistake if it leads one to misunderstand an enemy and to take actions that inadvertently help its cause.”

Mr. Boyle is correct to express reserve about Mr. Kerry’s choice of epithets: the behavior of ISIS in Iraq is far from inexplicable and quite strategic, though its consequences are horrific.

But the Times’ concern about moralistic language is misplaced.

Inbox: Qman Asks the $64,000 Question

“Very interesting and relevant blog. The question I have at this point is who actually benefits from it at this site? Is there anyone else out there? There seems to be little response as far as I can tell. I did not see a mission statement for this site and if it’s only very local, then wouldn’t a wider distribution be better for getting across insights like this?”

Ask and you shall receive ...