Profmth MitchThis is part one of a series examining an argument many Christians regard as among the most convincing proofs that Jesus was raised from the dead, namely, that Jesus' disciples willingly died as martyrs for preaching that Jesus had been raised from the dead. No one, it is claimed, would willingly die for a lie. In this series, the argument is examined and three refutations of it are offered.
Links:
Christian apologist Josh McDowell setting forth the
"wouldn't die for a lie" argument—
DID the disciples die for a lie? (Part 1)Profmth Mitch2009-02-27 | This is part one of a series examining an argument many Christians regard as among the most convincing proofs that Jesus was raised from the dead, namely, that Jesus' disciples willingly died as martyrs for preaching that Jesus had been raised from the dead. No one, it is claimed, would willingly die for a lie. In this series, the argument is examined and three refutations of it are offered.
Links:
Christian apologist Josh McDowell setting forth the
"wouldn't die for a lie" argument—
6. On the question that keeps coming up in comments about whether public schools may restrict speech, see, e.g., the United States Supreme Court's decision in Tinker v. Des Moines School District: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html As the Court said in that case, schools may limit free speech in various ways, but public schools are not "enclaves of totalitarianism" where school officials "possess absolute authority." Students "are 'persons' under our Constitution" and, as such, "are possessed of fundamental rights which the State must respect."A Deeper Meaning?Profmth Mitch2011-08-27 | This video follows up on my "O Necessary Sin of Adam (Does Christian Theology Need Adam & Eve?)" video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXOvYn1OAL0
I am pressing my Christian respondents to be more specific in their replies (whether text or video).
ADDED 11.16.11: A piece by evangelical pastor Mark Driscoll in which he argues that "[t]he very basis of Christianity is effectively undermined" by denying the historicity of Adam and Eve. He asserts, "What one cannot do ... is deny the existence of Adam and Eve and remain faithful to the Scriptures and their account." http://pastormark.tv/2011/11/16/the-biblical-necessity-of-adam-and-eveO Necessary Sin of Adam (Does Christian Theology Need Adam & Eve?)Profmth Mitch2011-08-24 | How important, if at all, are a historical Adam and Eve to Christianity? Does the Gospel make sense without them? If the Bible is wrong about Adam and Eve, how, if at all, can one be sure that it's not wrong about Jesus Christ? Recently, National Public Radio's "Morning Edition" did a story about a controversy brewing among Evangelical Christians with respect to Adam and Eve's historicity. This is not a uniquely Evangelical controversy. And some Christians across the denominational spectrum have offered alternative, science-friendly positions (e.g., evolutionary theology) that eschew Adam and Eve's historicity.
ADDED 11.16.11: A piece by evangelical pastor Mark Driscoll in which he argues that "[t]he very basis of Christianity is effectively undermined" by denying the historicity of Adam and Eve. He asserts, "What one cannot do ... is deny the existence of Adam and Eve and remain faithful to the Scriptures and their account." http://pastormark.tv/2011/11/16/the-biblical-necessity-of-adam-and-eve
Music (intro): selection from "The Exsultet"It Is Finished! (ProfMTH Gets Married)Profmth Mitch2011-08-09 | A quick summary of my getting married today (August 9, 2011). Pardon the sound quality at points. It's my first time primarily using a web cam to make a video.
========================================================
I have been doing some blogging over on Tumblr: http://profmth.tumblr.com This is a video version of one of my blog entries, addressing the American Atheists' recently filed lawsuit to have the so-called World Trade Center "Cross" removed from the National September 11 Memorial and Museum in New York City.
And if you're on Google+, say "Hey!" there, too: +ProfMTH MitchJesus: A Know-It-All? (How Jesus Is Not God by the Standards of Christian Apologetics)Profmth Mitch2011-06-06 | A quick look at an example of how Christian apologetics ignores and even undermines the scriptures upon which Christianity is purported to be based. The New Testament plainly and unqualifiedly says--in the voice of Jesus, no less--that God the Father has unique knowledge vis-a-vis precisely when Jesus will return, that this knowledge is available to no one else. "The Father ALONE" knows; no one else knows (Mt 24:36, cf Mk 13:32). If, as the New Testament plainly and unqualifiedly claims, God the Father's knowledge is unique here, then necessarily as a biblical matter Jesus cannot be omniscient (nor can the Holy Spirit be omniscient, for that matter), which, by the apologists' own standards, means Jesus is not God.
TheologyFromTheXSide's video response to "Camping Out for the Rapture" (to which I'll be directly responding in the near future): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeiKCqeZXwk
If you're on Tumblr, say "Hey!" too: http://profmth.tumblr.comCamping Out for the Rapture (Jesus is a false prophet too.)Profmth Mitch2011-05-20 | The most interesting thing about the controversy surrounding Harold Camping's prediction that Jesus will return on May 21, 2011, is that Christians who are criticizing and denouncing the prediction seem to miss the fact that their own beliefs are plagued by problems quite similar to the problems that plague Mr. Camping's prediction.
Links:
I. The 4 Christian videos which I quote in this video:
A. DefendTheFaithOrg's video "Harold Camping & His End-Times Fictions"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZppWmoMxRQ (Apologia Christian Ministries website: http://defendthefaith.org ) BTW, DefendTheFaithOrg has comments on approval restriction, so good luck on trying to get through to them via comments.
C. QuestionChrist's video "Is Judgment Day REALLY May 21st" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEJvBFl1dmg (I had to cut the clip of this video from my video because it was giving me problems, but the video is well worth checking out for a Christian critique of Camping's prediction.)
If you're on Tumblr, say "Hey!" too: http://profmth.tumblr.comWestboro Baptist Church: Are They Christians?Profmth Mitch2011-03-05 | A response to the user TheologyFromTheXSide's video in which he asserts that the Westboro Baptist Church is not a Christian movement. What, if anything, is the in-kind difference between what the WBC says and does and what the Bible and many other Christians say and do vis-à-vis the same issues? I contend there is no in-kind difference.
If you're on Twitter, be sure to stop by and say "Hey!": http://twitter.com/ProfMTHDanger, you say?Profmth Mitch2011-03-02 | Some Christians are fond of saying that atheists have no morality and homosexuals present various threats to society--especially to children. Let's have a look at how some Christians did in the morality and threat-to-society departments in February 2011.
N.B.: This video is intended to be a sarcastic poke at moralizing, self-righteous Christians and their claims. It is *not* (and was not intended to be) a scientifically valid study with statistically significant results pertaining to the relative morals of Christians and nontheists. If the sarcasm gets by you, please read this again.
Music: "Ye Watchers and Ye Holy Ones" (AKA: "All Creatures of our God and King")
Interesting blog entry by Christian Kenneth Sheppard entitled "Immoral Atheism?": http://www.patrolmag.com/2011/03/03/kenneth-sheppard/immoral-atheismTaking the Defense Out of DOMAProfmth Mitch2011-02-28 | The Obama administration recently announced that it will no longer defend section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA") against court challenges because, the administration has come to conclude, it is unconstitutional. This video briefly examines the basis for the administration's decision and sets out to correct the record about the history of presidents deciding not to defend duly enacted federal laws against court challenges. N.B.: 13 times in the past six years alone the Department of Justice told Congress it would not defend a law. Many of those decisions came in cases in which the solicitor general determined the government was bound to lose in court. http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2011/03/attorney-general-eric-holder-confronts-fallout-from-doma-decision.html
3. Frank H. Easterbrook, "Presidential Review", 75 Case W. Res. 905, 921 (1990).
4. Freytag v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/90-762.ZS.html
5. Easterbrook at 906; Lear Siegler, Inc. v. Lehman, 842 F.2d 1102 (9th Cir. 1988).
6. Neal Devins, "The Law: Defending Congress's Interests in Court: How Lawmakers and the President Bargain over Department of Justice Representation", Presidential Studies Quarterly 32 (1) (March 2002), pp. 157-168.
An opinion piece by Professor Aziz Huq of the University of Chicago Law School arguing that in addition to not defending Section 3 of DOMA, the Obama administration should refuse to enforce it: http://www.slate.com/id/2286737
It appears that the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives is going to seek to have the House intervene in court to defend Section 3 of DOMA: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/03/speaker-boehner-moves-to-begin-doma-defense.htmlFailure by Divine Design (A Christian Construction of Unbelief)Profmth Mitch2011-01-23 | A look at one of the main ways Christians construct unbelief and the rejection of their religion's claims--a method that is, it seems to me, far more about reaffirming Christian identity and faith than responding to nonbelievers.
Among other things, as a number of the comments have noted, this establishes what Ricky Gervais said at the Golden Globes, i.e., "Thank God for making me an atheist." :-)
4. David Snow and Richard Machalek's article "On the Presumed Fragility of Unconventional Beliefs" http://centauro.cmq.edu.mx/dav/libela/paginas/infoEspecial/pdfArticulosLaicidad/100101213.pdf
5. Some people have asked for a source for the story about William Lane Craig and Jesus' tomb. Here ya go: http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=2931 By the way, Craig has said the same sort of thing in his writings and in talks. I discuss this in my "The Shifting Sands of Evidence and Argument" series--a title I borrowed from something Craig wrote here: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6489
6. Excellent lecture by Paula Fredriksen of Boston University entitled "Paul and Augustine on the Redemption of the Jews" (lots of related stuff in the lecture and it's just very interesting): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9NBIhdFkpU
7. A video I did a couple of years ago about the notion of unconditional reprobation in "Reformed" or Calvinist Christianity (title "The Doctrine of Unconditional Reprobation"): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sScMTOleVxs
If you're on Twitter, be sure to say "hi": http://twitter.com/ProfMTHScalia, the Constitution, & ControversyProfmth Mitch2011-01-08 | Some thoughts on Justice Antonin Scalia's claim that the United States Constitution does not protect against discrimination on the basis of gender or sexual orientation.
http://twitter.com/profmthWhen WAS Jesus Born?Profmth Mitch2010-12-23 | The New Testament's infancy narratives—the only biblical records of Jesus' birth and the events surrounding it—differ from and contradict one another. This video looks at a few of the differences and contradictions.
Apologies for the reupload. I had to correct something in the video. Merry Christmas!
Music (intro): "When Was Jesus Born" (by Sons of Heaven)Brief Bible Blunders Episode #17Profmth Mitch2010-11-23 | Happy Thanksgiving! The 17th in a series of looks at biblical oddities.
If you're on Twitter, be sure to say "hi": http://twitter.com/profmthGod Appointed Hitler? (The New Testament, Government, & Morality)Profmth Mitch2010-11-20 | While some Christian apologists are fond of asserting that but for the existence of their god, humankind would lack any real basis to criticize (must less do something about) Hitler and his Nazi regime, they all seem to forget that their holy book, the New Testament, unqualifiedly commands subjection and obedience to government as an instrument established by their god. Christians who would criticize or overthrow the Nazi government (or ANY government) would have to violate their god's unqualified commandment in order to do so. Therefore believers are on the horns of a dilemma here: act on their god's purported "objective morality" and in the process violate their god's commands as set forth in Romans, 1 Peter, and Titus OR obey their god's commands and be forced to stand by watching a horrible regime persecute and kill people.
#2" Carter, T.L., "The Irony of Romans 13", Novum Testamentum 46(3) (July 2004): 209-228.
#3: Tiefel, Han, "The German Lutheran Church and the Rise of National Socialism", Church History 41(3) (Sept 1972): 326-336.The Source of Liberty?Profmth Mitch2010-10-23 | TheAtheistAntidote inadvertently identifies one of the pitfalls of calling the biblical god "the only true source" of liberty.
Music: "Free Fallin'" (String Tribute Players)Jesus Cannot Be the AtonementProfmth Mitch2010-09-19 | The New Testament is full of applications of Passover imagery to the execution of Jesus. However, Passover had nothing to do with atonement for sins. In this video, we'll see how Jesus' death failed to fulfill the actual Jewish ritual for atonement on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur)--this despite all the claims that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the Law.
P.S.: Pardon my voice. I'm getting over a nasty cold.
Music (outro): "It's All Made Up" by ScoutBrief Bible Blunders Episode #16Profmth Mitch2010-09-12 | The 16th in a series of quick looks at biblical oddities. (Edited on my laptop, so fingers crossed that it comes out OK.)
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=E8D251DB458C1191How Proposition 8 Went Down (Part 2 of 2)Profmth Mitch2010-08-15 | Continuing my look at the recent ruling in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which struck down California's Proposition 8 as violative of the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Part 1 of this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV3fkpR74AkHow Proposition 8 Went Down (Part 1 of 2)Profmth Mitch2010-08-15 | Part 1 of a look at the recent ruling in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which struck down California's Proposition 8 as violative of the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
12. Donald P. Haider-Markel, Alana Querze, & Kara Lindaman, "Lose, Win, or Draw?: A Reexamination of Direct Democracy and Minority Rights", 60 (2) Political Research Quarterly 304 (June 2007).
13. "It's all about children (or at least the anatomical possibility thereof)." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzUFYNjUTcMUnnatural?Profmth Mitch2010-07-31 | What exactly does it mean to say that homosexuality is unnatural?
4. Igor Primoratz, "Sexual Perversion", 34 (2) American Philosophical Quarterly 245, 247 (1997).
5. Id. at 245.
6. Richard B. Hays, "Relations Natural and Unnatural: A Response to John Boswell's Exegesis of Romans 1", 14 (1) The Journal of Religious Ethics 184, 194-195 (1986).
For the Thomists and those interested in the Thomistic approach to this issue, Eugene F. Rogers of the University of North Carolina published an interesting article a little over 10 years ago entitled "Aquinas on Natural Law and the Virtues in Biblical Context: Homosexuality as a Test Case." 27 (1) The Journal of Religious Ethics 29 (1999).
Some very interesting data on acceptance of homosexuality in the United States. Particularly noteworthy is the significant increase in acceptance of homosexuality among Catholics and men.
Come say "hi" on Think Atheist: http://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/ProfMTHRape by Deception (or Caveat Amator!)Profmth Mitch2010-07-25 | In the wake of an Israeli court's finding an Arab man guilty of "rape by deception" for lying to a Jewish woman to get her to have sex with him, I look at the concept of rape by fraud or deception and contend that it's not unreasonable--problems with the Israeli case notwithstanding. (I am NOT defending the Israeli court's decision.) The law tends to afford people's money and property more protection than their bodily integrity and sexual autonomy.
Links:
1. Blog entry on the Israeli "rape by deception" case, which includes reference to the conviction of an Israeli Jew for the same crime.
3. Patricia J. Falk's article "Rape by Fraud and Rape by Coercion." In the paper, Falk provides a veritable catalogue of cases pertaining to this issue. For those interested in more examples of cases (including "tough" cases), Falk's article is quite useful.
4. Larceny by false pretenses in Massachusetts. One does well to keep in mind that not just any false statement of fact will suffice for criminal liability. The statement must go to a material, significant matter. Moreover, statements that can reasonably be construed as mere opinion or statements that are, as they say, nothing more than "puffing" (think padded bra or a used car salesperson saying "this car is the best one on the lot") are insufficient for criminal liability.
6. "Adult Impersonation: Rape by Fraud as a Defense to Statutory Rape" from the Northwestern University Law Review (among other things, it has a nice overview of the law with respect to rape by fraud or deception)
9. Unfortunately, Susan Estrich's Yale Law Journal article "Rape" is not generally available online. However, if you have access to JSTOR, you can get the full text of the article here:
http://www.jstor.org/pss/796522William Lane Craig Is Not a Constitutional ScholarProfmth Mitch2010-07-14 | Christian apologist William Lane Craig demonstrates that among the many things he is not (e.g., not a philosopher, not an historian, not a logician, not a theologian), he is also not a constitutional scholar. Among other things, he advocates a constitutional literalism that would allow a state to ban Christianity if it so chose.
LINKS:
William Lane Craig's audio blog on Christian Legal Society v. Martinez:
Text of the speech in which Justice Antonin Scalia rejects "strict constructionism" as an approach to interpreting the United States Constitution and says that he is not a strict constructionist":
Interview in which Justice Scalia says the Incorporation Doctrine was a mistake
http://fora.tv/2009/02/23/Uncommon_Knowledge_Antonin_ScaliaThe Shifting Sands of Evidence & Argument (Why Religious Arguments Fail to Persuade) Part 2Profmth Mitch2010-07-09 | As anyone who has participated in or even just watched various religious arguments being presented and debated knows, religious arguments tend to be persuasively inert and, usually, are found compelling only by those who already accept the conclusion of such arguments. This two-part video attempts to get at some of the reasons for this.
Back in late March 2010, my friend Myintellectualjourny asked me to respond to some questions about, inter alia, things theists and nontheists have in common. I had been thinking a lot and writing a bit about persuasion, particularly (though not exclusively) in the context of religious arguments. Eventually, I came to suspect that I had identified some of the common ground MIJ had asked me to talk about. I'm no longer so sure, but I'm offering this video both as an answer--a long overdue one at that--to MIJ's request AND, more generally, as a basis for discussion about the roles and effectiveness (or ineffectiveness, as the case seems to be) of religious arguments.
Links:
1. Jennifer Faust's article "Can Religious Arguments Persuade?"
5. Lorne L. Dawson's article "When Prophecy Fails and Faith Persists: A Theoretical Overview" (which provides an excellent account of the role of cognitive dissonance in religious belief):
Music: (intro and outro of part 2) "Credo" Giovanni Palestrina (For those who have asked, the words during the intro are "Credo in unum deum," i.e., I believe in one god--the opening words of the Nicene Creed.)The Shifting Sands of Evidence & Argument (Why Religious Arguments Fail to Persuade) Part 1Profmth Mitch2010-07-09 | As anyone who has participated in or even just watched various religious arguments being presented and debated knows, religious arguments tend to be persuasively inert and, usually, are found compelling only by those who already accept the conclusion of such arguments. This two-part video attempts to get at some of the reasons for this.
Back in late March 2010, my friend Myintellectualjourny asked me to respond to some questions about, inter alia, things theists and nontheists have in common. I had been thinking a lot and writing a bit about persuasion, particularly (though not exclusively) in the context of religious arguments. Eventually, I came to suspect that I had identified some of the common ground MIJ had asked me to talk about. I'm no longer so sure, but I'm offering this video both as an answer--a long overdue one at that--to MIJ's request AND, more generally, as a basis for discussion about the roles and effectiveness (or ineffectiveness, as the case seems to be) of religious arguments.
Links:
1. Jennifer Faust's article "Can Religious Arguments Persuade?"
5. Lorne L. Dawson's article "When Prophecy Fails and Faith Persists: A Theoretical Overview" (which provides an excellent account of the role of cognitive dissonance in religious belief):
Music: (part 2) "Credo" Giovanni PalestrinaBrief Bible Blunders Episode #15Profmth Mitch2010-07-07 | The 15th in a series of quick looks at biblical oddities.
Music (outro): "If God Said It, I Believe It"Defeat for Religious Privilege; Victory for EqualityProfmth Mitch2010-06-30 | A follow-up to my series on religious exemptions from the law, discussing the United States Supreme Court's recently announced decision in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez.
Music: (outro) Gregorian "Losing My Religion"The World Cup (An American Man Responds)Profmth Mitch2010-06-11 | A response to my friend, the great Coughlan666's video in which he explained the World Cup and football in general to the Americans in his audience.
N.B.: My apologies to the Germans in my audience. Apparently, "Endless Love" is not a song you're allowed to hear.
Music: "All My Rowdy Friends Are Coming Over For Monday Night Football" by Hank Williams, Jr.
"Endless Love" by Matthew Morrison and the "Glee" castA Logical Rant on...Jesus! (A Response)Profmth Mitch2010-05-05 | Does the existence of Christianity and its influence as a religion and the alleged harmony of the Bible tell us anything about whether Jesus was divine? No. Moreover, the claim that the Bible is an inerrant, harmonious collection of texts is an article of faith, not an empirical statement based on observation of inerrancy and harmony in and among the actual texts.
A response to the following video that appears on ThePursuitBlog channel here on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kto7xnJToK0Brief Bible Blunders Episode #14 (And, have you seen this man?)Profmth Mitch2010-04-24 | The 14th in a series of quick looks at biblical oddities. Despite Jesus' command in Matthew 28:19 to baptize converts "in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit," not a single baptism mentioned in the New Testament uses this Trinitarian baptismal formula.
As ReligionFreeDeist reminded me in a text comment, there is some debate about whether the Trinitarian baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19 is a later addition to the text. See, e.g., Eusebius's quotation of the text, which does not include any reference to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I don't know whether there is enough evidence to settle the question one way or the other, but even if the Trinitarian formula is original in Matthew, not once does the New Testament depict the use of it.
Appearances of the cartoon image of the prophet Muhammad courtesy of the recent "South Park" controversy and threats against its creators. BTW, I screwed up the abbreviation for "peace be upon him" at the end (using "BPUH" instead of "PBUH"). Oh, well.
Music (outro): "If God Said It, I Believe It"God Killed Jesus (Responsibility & Christianity)Profmth Mitch2010-03-28 | The Christian tradition has attempted to hold a number of people and things responsible for the execution of Jesus, but analysis reveals that the only one responsible for it is the Christian god.
Isn't it a sin only when a person does something God does NOT want the person to do?
Carl Ginet's "In Defense of the Principle of Alternative Possibilities: Why I Don't Find Frankfurt's Argument Convincing": http://www.jstor.org/pss/2216254
By the way, I've gotten a lot of comments and questions about the notion that Jesus' death should be viewed as a suicide or felo-de-se. That seems quite reasonable to me given what appears in the New Testament -- see, e.g., John 10:17-18 ( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2010:17-18&version=NASB ). Moreover, as Raymond Brown points out in his "The Death of the Messiah", a number of early Christian writers believed Jesus' death to have been miraculous and completely under Jesus' control. See, e.g., Tertullian, who in his Apology claims that on the cross Jesus "with a word expressing his own will dismissed his spirit, forestalling the work of the executioners." (Link to the quoted section of Tertullian's Apology: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.iv.iii.xxi.html ) In short, Jesus killed himself.
Music (intro and outro): "All Glory, Laud, and Honor"GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS? NONSENSE!Profmth Mitch2010-03-01 | Do our legal rights ultimately come from a god -- specifically, the Christian god? No.
Intro music: "My Rights, Your Rights" by Mad ProfessorAn All-Star Tribute (i.e., Roast)Profmth Mitch2010-02-23 | Some of the stars of YouTube come out to "congratulate" ProfMTH on the channel reaching the 10,000-subscribers mark.
To all the participants, thank you SO much. You made me laugh out loud. Outstanding work!
The great people who contributed to this video (in order of appearance):
A very warm welcome to all the new subscribers. And to my continuing subscribers, you're gorgeous, baby. Don't ever change. ;-)If Veritas48 has questions, then I have answers.Profmth Mitch2010-02-21 | My crack at responding to Veritas48's five NEW questions for atheists.
There are a few audio glitches in the video. Sorry. My computer is dying a slow death and not going gently into that good night. I'll have a new computer soon.
The drawing of me and some of the other drawings in this video are from DarkMatter's video and I appreciate his suffering me to borrow them for this little project.Coming Soon: An All-Star TributeProfmth Mitch2010-02-20 | An all-star "tribute" coming soon. :-)
This preview was the work of the great QualiaSoup:
N.B.: Regarding Matthew as the second gospel, I mean chronologically. I know the order of the gospels as they appear in the New Testament -- believe me, I do. ;-)
As for the "love that is more wonderful than the love of women," see 2 Samuel 1:26.
More nonsense: Scientologists bring their "magic touch" to Haiti. http://current.com/items/91996381_scientologists-healing-haitians-with-a-magic-touch.htmBabies in HellProfmth Mitch2010-01-23 | Why doesn't the Bible address the fate of babies who die without baptism or without faith in Jesus? Here's a look at one Christian's opinion -- and it's a doozy (as one of the comments here said, it takes Christian apologetics to a new level of WTF) -- and the insight it gives us into the religious mindset.
Links:
1tmoch's video "Where do babies go when they die?"
Intro, "Jesus Loves the Little Children"
Outro, "Looney Toons"Secularism, Christians, & SocietyProfmth Mitch2010-01-20 | Responding to ChristoferL's recent video "Secularism is Anti-Christ II." Are Christians meant to be involved in social policy and government?
Music: "Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus" by SelahLiberal & Moderate ChristianityProfmth Mitch2010-01-09 | Some thoughts about and questions for liberal and moderate Christians. If you get an error message when trying to view it, hit the "HQ" button. If that doesn't work, try adding &fmt=18 to the URL for the video. One or the other of these seems to solve the problem -- whatever the problem is. Hello, YouTube, maybe this could be fixed?!
Links:
My "Questions for Biblical Inerrantists and Literalists" video--
A number of questions and statements in the comments section about Mary's virginity. Back in April 2008, I did a 2-video series called "The Fuss about Mary's Virginity" that addresses a number of them. The following is a link to the first part:
"Glory to God in the Highest" (from Handel's "Messiah")
"We Three Kings of Orient Are"
"Simeon's Lullaby"
"Mary, Did You Know?" (outro)Atheists & Religious Tests for Public OfficeProfmth Mitch2009-12-17 | State religious tests for public office are unconstitutional. They violate the 1st Amendment.
N.B.: The "no religious test" provision in Article VI, Section 3 of the United States Constitution applies only to the federal government.
Music: "Tu Scendi Dalle Stelle" (intro and outro); "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing"Obeying the Law ... Impossible?Profmth Mitch2009-12-09 | A question about ChristoferL's recent video regarding whether human beings can obey Yahweh's law.
Music: "I Have a Little Dreidel"Adam + Eve = Plan BProfmth Mitch2009-11-15 | Among the odd things one finds in the Genesis creation stories is that the search for a "suitable helper" for Adam first takes place among the animals and birds Yahweh created. When that doesn't work out, Yahweh creates Eve.
Music: (intro) "The Odd Couple" theme; "The Dating Game" theme; "The Newlywed Game" themeWhen None Means Some (& Other Apologetic Alchemy)Profmth Mitch2009-11-11 | A video response to Fivepointbaptist's response to the first episode of my "Brief Bible Blunders" series. Fivepointbaptist takes the "fifth gospel" approach to all of this, adding elements to the Gospel of John until it seems to make sense.
Links:
Fivepointbaptist's video "Bible Blunders Refuted!"--
Music at the end: "To Be Like Jesus"Oppressed Become Oppressors (Battle for Same-Sex Marriage in D.C.)Profmth Mitch2009-10-27 | 3.3.10 Same-sex marriage is legal in Washington, D.C. The people in this video did NOT prevail. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/04/us/04marriage.html?hp
Just like their oppressors -- white Christians who used the Bible, "natural law", and religious arguments to justify discrimination against blacks -- these black Christians are using the same sorts of arguments to justify discrimination against homosexuals in the name of their god.
Link to the full video on the Rightwingwatchdotorg channel:
Music: "O To Be Like Thee"Questions for Biblical Inerrantists & LiteralistsProfmth Mitch2009-10-25 | After looking at some of the pitfalls of the notion that the Bible is inerrant and the literalist approach to the Bible, I ask inerrantists and literalists a couple of questions.
And let me just say how proud I am that this video was #27 on Sunday in South Korea. Booyah! South Korea, it's you and me, baby.
Links-
1. Luke Timothy Johnson's essay "Scripture and Experience":