Gorilla God Sightings

Facebook’s advertising robot seems to think I am a Christian, probably because almost all of my friends are, so today I saw an advertisement on the right hand margin for the following website: God Sightings. The ad invited me to:

Share your God Sightings with others around the world as you read The One Year Bible online for FREE!

The title of the book and site is obviously an allusion to alien sightings, but I’m not going to assume they are aware of what they are alluding to. I never take that for granted anymore with people who aren’t very well read. Anyway, the site was worth a visit if only for the following promotional quote on the front page:

It’s funny how easy it is to miss God’s sacred entrances in our everyday lives. God Sightings opens our eyes to how he is working right here—right now—and always has been.
—Elisa Morgan, Publisher, FullFill

Ah, dear Elisa… It’s “funny” how easy it is to miss God’s “sacred entrances” simply because God does not exist and you have to consciously fabricate the “sightings”! “Funny” how that works.

***UPDATE***
Having browsed the site some more, I had to change the title of this post from “Alien God Sightings” to “Gorilla God Sightings.” Watch this promotional video from the site to see why:

Richard Norman examines the “‘belief-lite’ version of religion”

Beyond belief:
Some sophisticated arguments for God have been made in response to the New Atheists. Richard Norman puts the ‘New Believers’ to the test.

When I read the following passage from this article, I immediately thought about my fellow MKs:

Most people give their allegiance to a particular religion not because they judge that its doctrines are uniquely true, but because it is the religion in which they find their cultural roots. It defines their identity. And it does so through a particular set of practices and rituals, and a particular set of metaphors, and a particular set of stories. And it is this above all, I think, that explains why, for all the intellectual implausibility of the traditional doctrines, intelligent and sensitive people continue to identify themselves as Christians or Muslims or whatever.

Evolution & Creationism at War in the Mind of a Scientist

“A mind like that…is a disgrace to the human species.” I agree.

“Why Do You Need to Prove God Doesn’t Exist?”

“I’m just exposing your flawed reasoning.”

The Not-So-Mysterious Self

In the beginning, the Genesis story teaches that humans are made in the image of the divine. This godly image is the distinguishing feature of humankind compared to the rest of creation. Christianity generally teaches that humans were not only “special” to God, but were distinct from all other creatures because we had the freedom to choose and because we alone have souls that will live on forever.

Today, I would argue that those who believe in the human soul are mistaking their own limited self-consciousness for an extravagant wish to live forever.

The Lie of No Conflict Between Science and Religion

I ran across this great article by Sam Harris that addresses the Christian insistence that science and Christianity are not in conflict:
“The Strange Case of Francis Collins.”

Here is an excerpt:

Here is how Collins, as a scientist and educator, currently summarizes his understanding of the universe

Michael Shermer’s Baloney Detection Kit

Michael Shermer, the editor of Skeptic magazine and author of Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time, goes over his very useful Baloney Detection Kit:

PZ Myers on Religion and Science

The biologist PZ Myers has posted an article explaining his views on why religion and science are incompatible, Christian faith is at odds with science. I highly recommend it.

Angry Conversations with a Childhood Friend & Calvinist: Part VIII

Calvinist Friend:

I’m jumping around a bit in my response, but next I want to address your analogy of baldness and hair color to support your assertion that you have not placed your faith in no god. Think of an alternative analogy. Light has color. But what color do you call the absence of light?

Angry Conversations with a Childhood Friend & Calvinist: Part VII

More angry conversations with a Christian academic; the mental masturbation continues…

Calvinist Friend:

Ok, here’s my next round of comments. First, I agree with your comments on the relative meaninglessness of dictionary definitions. Nonetheless, I disagree that evidence and proof have the same meaning, even by dictionary standards.

“Argument from Banana” Guy Shows Ignorance of Evolution

There is a new post on the ScienceBlogs website titled, “Dumbass Quote of the Day.” The post features some recent comments by the evangelist Ray Comfort. He is best known to most people as Kirk Cameron’s co-host on the television show “The Way of the Master.” He is best known to me for his anti-logic “argument from design” video in which he slowly peels a banana. During the process, which has strong, unintentional suggestions of homoeroticism, Kirk Cameron gazes enraptured, while Comfort describes how God designed the banana with a “non-slip” surface to allow humans to grip it. As the ScienceBlogs article above reveals, Comfort’s ignorance about natural selection does not end with the banana; it extends to the swine flu virus as well! Nothing is funnier than arrogant ignorance. (Unless it fills people with hate and causes them to get out their pitchforks.)

Angry Conversations with a Childhood Friend & Calvinist: Part VI

Calvinist Friend:

You define faith as “belief in something without evidence”. However, the dictionary definition for faith is “belief that is not based on proof”. There’s a difference between evidence and proof. True faith should have evidence supporting it. Otherwise we call it “blind faith”, and my God hasn’t called me to have a blind faith.

Angry Conversations with a Childhood Friend & Calvinist: Part V

Calvinist Friend:

Well I can see that you are a fairly angry and close-minded individual who will only accept limited evidence that fits into your own framework and that only subscribes to your own narrow definitions, so I agree that it would be better that we both call it quits for now (I’m sure you haven’t heard the last of me though). You actually fit nicely into the box that I imigned you to be in when we first started this conversation. It’s always a devilishly warm feeling when people fit into the stereotypes that I have of them.

Angry Conversations with a Childhood Friend & Calvinist: Part IV

Calvinist Friend:

Wow! Once again, you provide more logical inconsistencies, demonstrate several fallacies, and misinterpret what I say or believe. You make an attack out of ignorance to say that I lack training in logic. How do you know what exact training I have in logic? I don’t need your judgment or assessment of my training.

Angry Conversations with a Childhood Friend & Calvinist: Part III

Calvinist Friend:

I’m glad you recognize that science cannot answer all questions. I agree. I’m glad too that you must admit that you don’t know how the universe came into existence. So the other part of my original question that you didn’t answer is what will you accept as evidence for an intelligent designer? Because you recognize that there is a gap here in human knowledge, then I want to know what evidence you are willing to accept that God fills that gap.