• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Need anti-inerrancy resources help

This is a type of conversation I have had many times already with evangelistic Christians, where they promote to their impressionable audience only resources which agree with their pre-existing view. You can challenge them on that very principle, even without getting into the details of the books themselves. Is it better for people to become familiar with several different views of a subject, rather than one? Questions like that are a bit uncomfortable for them to answer. They will search around for an excuse to justify it. For some, it will work on themselves. For some, they will be slightly aware of their bias.
 
Does the wit being a strawman matter to you?


Back to topic:

What are some resources that match the descriptions outlined in the OP?
 
Brian63 said:
In this thread though, all I want are names of resources. I want to compile a list.
Click to expand...
What good is such a list? You aren't going to read any of those books yourself, and neither will these prophecy-believers read any of them.

The best list of "resources" is simply a list of the Bible texts which are interpreted as prophetic. Then just read the text carefully, in its entirety. Just the "list" by itself is no good -- the text must be read carefully to see what it's really about.

The mere act of alerting them to the existence of other scholarly views may be something new to them.
Click to expand...

Not at all. They know of contrary scholarly views and they just laugh at them (without ever reading them of course). I once heard a preacher ridiculing the scholars -- he referred to the scholars at "Princeton Theological Cemetery --- uh, sorry, I meant Seminary" and the congregation laughed. That's the closest they'll ever come to knowing or caring about those other scholarly views.

If all you do is give them this "list of scholarly resources" it's just one more item for them to laugh at for entertainment.

The best way you can help these prophecy-believers is first to study thoroughly one of the major prophecy claims yourself, i.e., the Bible text of it -- read the whole text, not just the famous phrase or summary, but the whole chapter, even 2 or 3 chapters, to give the whole context of the prophecy (or whatever it really is). Then, with minimum guidance from any expert, just look up anything about the historical context, such as what happened later that could be a fulfillment of that prediction. YouTube or Wikipedia is just fine -- easy for anyone to access. Nothing fancy.

So just study that prophecy and maybe a wiki page about it yourself, thoroughly, get the date of writing, etc. -- then you'll probably see many flaws in claiming it was a real prediction of the future. And then you'll have something serious to offer to those believers who are probably misinterpreting that Scripture. In almost every case they have not studied the complete Bible text and the historical context of it.

And the only "list" you need to offer them is the Bible text(s) per se, completely (only one is probably enough, but also 2 or 3 prophecy examples if you have the time), all the text of it along with anything claiming to explain it. Challenge them: "You've never really read that entire Bible text yourself -- you're just repeating this preacher's rhetoric without checking it out yourself." Once you or the prophecy-believer has done this reasonable homework, i.e., read the Sacred Text completely, and checked whatever commentary you can find, you'll get a good understanding of it, see the ambiguity in most cases, and the errors of those who misinterpret it.

Many believers begin to lose their faith in "prophecy" when they read that entire Bible text for themselves. Usually they are disappointed when they seriously check into it. This simple homework is all they are lacking, not a list of scholarly books claiming to explain it to the unenlightened.
 
"What good is such a list?"

That was already explained. The awareness that there even exists such a list may be something new to them. You say they know of contrary scholarly views and they just laugh at them. Do you speak for all of them?

I have experiences that contradict your prediction. [Some] People did not laugh at them. They were unaware of them. They did not know how to react. Even if they did dismiss them at first reflex, that does not mean that will be their everlasting reaction. It may have been their first defense mechanism to hearing this news.

I can speak from firsthand experience that decades ago I was stunned at first learning of the existence of atheists who were bible scholars. That stuff is supposed to be the arsenal of Christians, isn't it? So just having that extra bit of knowledge, even if I did not study biblical history or archaeology, was enough to modify my perspective. The goal in this case is to have a similar impact. It will not work on everyone. Maybe some though. Even then it will not be immediate, but it can grow over time.
 
The problem is they will have their lists too. Touting the works of true belivers claiming archaeology suports the Bible. David E. Graves. James K. Hoffmeir and many others. Minor pests like David Armstrong and others of his ilk. It is not like the true believers haven't heard this before. For laughs, check out Armstrong's blog. I am banned there.
 
Brian63 said:
Does the wit being a strawman matter to you?


Back to topic:

What are some resources that match the descriptions outlined in the OP?
Click to expand...
Any basic physics, general science, cosmology, or evolution texts that run counter to biblical interpretations.

Any texts moral moral philopshy that contradict the immorality of the bible. While David is a Christian hero in reality he was a treacrous brual man who tossed morality aside when it suited him.

If you are just looking for books to quote than Politesse may have a point, you have not done your homework. Back in the 90s Larry King hosted a panel debate between Evangelicals and scientists. Bill Nye was one of them. The science side looked like complete idiots.

There are several areas of debate as I see it.

1. Christian claims of an absolute morality based in the bible.
2. Christian claims of physical reality based in the bible.
3. Open ended biblical interpretation.

As I have said before I was asked to be a judge at a regional Christian home schooled debate. You have to realize how well prepared these people are in a formal situation.

Whatever you say will be spun. The experienced Christian will spin it on the spot. They adapt. A recent phenmena is that sceince proves the bible and faith.

So, pick a narrow scope and search the net for books. I have never read any atheist books that refute religion because it is a useless effort. I go by my knowledge of science and the general reading I have done as an adult.

Way way back when I joined an old version o the forum I started reading books. Several histories of Christianity. I touched on the bible in a 70s philosophy class and I re]read it. I read the somewhat academic Oxford Commentary on the bible.

I can't reduce all that to a few book titles.
 
Cheerful Charlie said:
The problem is they will have their lists too. Touting the works of true belivers claiming archaeology suports the Bible. David E. Graves. James K. Hoffmeir and many others. Minor pests like David Armstrong and others of his ilk. It is not like the true believers haven't heard this before. For laughs, check out Armstrong's blog. I am banned there.
Click to expand...

Yes. They will have their lists. They hear their names of famous Christians who are supposed to be awesome philosophers and scientists and historians. They will cite CS Lewis, Lee Strobel, William Lane Craig, Michael Behe, etc. They are bombarded with these types of names throughout their indoctrination. No question at all many (not all) of them have their lists.

What they probably do not have is awareness of other contrary lists. Their churches/pastors likely did not tell them much about Earl Doherty, Daniel Dennett, Michael Martin, Dan Barker, Richard Carrier, etc. How will they react to such people who have studied particular subjects in depth, and doing so led some of them to deconvert? The reactions will vary from person to person and also change over time. Their reflex reaction may very well be different from their reaction a week from now or a year from now. It will depend on what other little tidbits of knowledge they pick up. So I do not measure the success/failure on how they responded just within the first 2 seconds. They may laugh now, and that will be the immediate defense mechanism. In the longer-term they may think very differently.

I have had discussions with many Christians on this theme, and they sometimes are unsure how to react. They are not all laughed off immediately. Even if that was the case, that again does not mean what it appears. It may be because what you are showing to them represents a threat to their worldview and as a defense mechanism they instinctively laugh at it. It may trouble them more than they let on though.
 
Brian63 said:
"What good is such a list?"

That was already explained. The awareness that there even exists such a list may be something new to them. You say they know of contrary scholarly views and they just laugh at them. Do you speak for all of them?

I have experiences that contradict your prediction. [Some] People did not laugh at them. They were unaware of them.
Click to expand...

Really? This is about a "live seminar of a group heavily focused on promoting biblical prophecies, End Times, etc. Their brochure came in the mail . . ."

And you really believe they're unaware of contrary scholarly views on prophecy? They've not read those scholars, of course, but anyone promoting prophecy seminars is aware of those other scholars for sure, and does all the usual :hysterical: :rotfl:rofl rofl lol etc. whenever such scholarly resources/books are cited.

No, what they need, in order to improve their understanding, is to read the entire prophecy text and do some checking on the historical context (especially tell them what you learned when you did this homework). This will help them much better than handing them a list of stuffy elitist scholars who have differing interpretations in their lengthy long-winded volumes.

Brian63 said:
I can speak from firsthand experience that decades ago I was stunned at first learning of the existence of atheists who were bible scholars. That stuff is supposed to be the arsenal of Christians, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Maybe YOU were stunned. But these prophecy-crusaders you're speaking of will not be stunned when you tell them of university scholars who have different interpretations than theirs and hand them a list of your "scholarly resources" -- they will fall over laughing. (Or is it your intention to make them choke to death laughing -- on second thought, maybe that strategy would work.)


But -- here's a serious question: Do you really expect them to READ those scholarly books, or rather is it only that they have a LIST of names, like a trophy for them to put on the shelf (or for YOU to display on your shelf), like a status symbol? Or maybe even obtain a few of these scholarly volumes, to display on the shelf, so they can say: "See here, see all these great scholars I've read, here on my shelf, to prove that I'm educated and have credentials to prove I'm an expert" etc.? so my claims about this must be the truth.

Being able to display a list names of experts, or their books on your shelf, to establish your status, can be a way to win the argument, in some cases. There is a point there.
 
A lot like Evangelicals themselves, actually. They are certain the Bible exists, and though they are not interested in seriously reading or studying it beyond whatever their pastor filters into bite size chunks for them on Sundays, they think you should be compelled into faith by the very fact of the book's existence. You should go read the Bible and have a come to Jesus moment, even if they have been pretty lazy about taking it in since their own apotheosis moment occurred.
 
Politesse said:
Well, do let us know if vaguely referencing the existence of books that disagree with them converts any heathens. :D
Click to expand...

Are you that unfamiliar with how deconversions happen? They are not instantaneous. They tend to take years or even decades to occur. They include several contributing factors. This can be among them though.

Do you really think that if I did not see it happen myself then they did not have their beliefs challenged at all? I know of Christians who secretly were troubled by Christian beliefs or atheist arguments for years. They would not display it publicly and especially not right away after they heard it. But they still had an effect.

If you only look at their immediate reaction and determine success/failure on that, then you are missing the point.
 
"you really believe they're unaware of contrary scholarly views on prophecy?"

I do not know if the leaders of the group are. They are giving handouts and lectures to people who they believe are unfamiliar with biblical prophecy on the whole. They are trying to impress their audience with how prophetically accurate and amazing the bible is, therefore their flavor of Christianity is true. If the audience is indeed that unfamiliar with religion and philosophy and such, then the audience (even if not the group leaders) may be less aware of contrary views.
 
Brian63 said:
Politesse said:
Well, do let us know if vaguely referencing the existence of books that disagree with them converts any heathens. :D
Click to expand...

Are you that unfamiliar with how deconversions happen? They are not instantaneous. They tend to take years or even decades to occur. They include several contributing factors. This can be among them though.

Do you really think that if a person does not deconvert instantly then they did not have their beliefs challenged at all? I know of Christians who secretly were troubled by Christian beliefs or atheist arguments for years. They would not display it publicly and especially not right away after they heard it. But they still had an effect.

If you only look at their immediate reaction and determine success/failure on that, then you are missing the point.
Click to expand...
You are a crusade to de-convert? I view that as flip sides of the same coin.

I do not seek to deconvert or eliminate religion. I seek to protect my rights as a citizen against encroachment on my life. To do that I have to understand religion and that is why I participate here.

Out in the real world I don't care what you believe. Freedom of belief is what the western systems are all about.
 
That is a view I used to hold. Then I realized it was very naive.

Our beliefs impact our decisions.
Our decisions impact our actions.
Our actions have consequences on ourselves and each other.
Therefore, our beliefs will have effects on ourselves and each other. That is true for other people too, including their religious beliefs.

Even if that was false and religious beliefs could only affect religious people, I still care about those people. I do not like seeing them hurt by their own religious beliefs. Do you care at all when a person's religious beliefs hurt themselves? Do you only care when it hurts you?


Our beliefs, including our religious beliefs, heavily intertwine with other beliefs we hold about ethics, science, politics, existential views, how we should raise children, how other people should be treated, etc. A person's religious beliefs and its consequences cannot be isolated out from the rest of their worldview. If you want someone's religious beliefs to not encroach on you, you are effectively (without realizing it) wanting various other beliefs of theirs to not encroach on you. Their beliefs will though, such as political views. So your approach is a non-starter.

I heard one atheist phrase it well awhile back:
"I do not want just separation of church and state. I want separation of religion from planet".
 
It is naive that the cultural inertia for both Islam and Christianity that has built up for over a thousand years is going to be reduced.

We ave a pluralistic society. For that to exist we all have to tolerate things we do not like. Atheist can be as morlay ambiguous and hypocritical as theists.

If Christians believe in creationism that is fine. It should be covered in a high school class on religion, not in a science class.

Tolernce and comromose. That is the approach to take with Christians. Mutually assured survival. Chrtians tolerate oters and in turn get tolerance. IMO ornized atheism can be as ideological as theism. There are disoytes in atheism.

I don;t know the nature of te event yiu are preparing for. If Christians may be watching and you perform badly it will only reiforce views of atheism.

I am not god, so to speak. As such it is not for me to say somebody should or shuld not have religious faith. If not that would make me like the aggressive Evangelicals.''Being atheist does not mean having no moral philosophy, which is one of the Christian agruments. Atheists have no morality.

If yiu go into it as a debate and just quote mne books which Chrtans may be aware of you may end up lookng inept.

Chrisstans are often well versed in atheist literature and have responses for it. They are as active as many atheists are.

Even as atheist I do love biblical metaphors.

Sounds like Daniel In The Lions Den may apply.
 
"It is naive that the cultural inertia for both Islam and Christianity that has built up for over a thousand years is going to be reduced."

Are you sure about that? No progress has ever been made against those religions? At all? Anywhere?

Anyhow, I have experience debating religion online for ~20 years and this past summer especially I have engaged in a project of visiting different local churches on Sundays, identifying as an atheist, having good discussions with staff people and lay members, and also with pastors in private discussions. So far I have visited ~25 churches and half of them involved a later discussion with a pastor. Those tend to last approximately 2 hours. That is not counting all the other discussions with other people inside their church.

Yes, several of those Christians were very new to atheist points of view. Some pastors were very transparent and open with me about theological problems they had with their religion or frustrations with their church members, etc. A pastor admitted to me that he would soften his language against atheism as a result of our discussion (and we have even become friends).

If you are that concerned that this type of meeting would result in a bad appearance, perhaps you do not understand how to conduct yourself properly in this type of situation. Some added experience and reflection may benefit you.
 

Chronicle of the Pharaohs: The Reign-By-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt With 350 Illustrations 130 in Color Hardcover – October 1, 1994​

by Peter A. Clayton (Author)


Here is a book you should add to your list. You need to know true Egyptian history to understand how fake Bible pseudo-history truly is. If the Bible was true, we should read of the Egyptians in Canaan, their wars, military campaigns, their centuries of hegemony over Canaan. From Moses and the exodus to Joshua and judges, the Egyptions are most conspicous by their absence. By the time the first Israelites began writing their fraudulent history, they had forgotten all of this history of Egypt in Canaan. All of it.

I found this a truly useful book to understand just how false the Bible truly is. Read carefully it is chock full of gotchyas. Rameses II fough the Hittites 20 years and that did not make it into the Bible? And Christians claim Rameses II was the Pharoah of the exodus?
 
Brian63 said:
"It is naive that the cultural inertia for both Islam and Christianity that has built up for over a thousand years is going to be reduced."

Are you sure about that? No progress has ever been made against those religions? At all? Anywhere?

Anyhow, I have experience debating religion online for ~20 years and this past summer especially I have engaged in a project of visiting different local churches on Sundays, identifying as an atheist, having good discussions with staff people and lay members, and also with pastors in private discussions. So far I have visited ~25 churches and half of them involved a later discussion with a pastor. Those tend to last approximately 2 hours. That is not counting all the other discussions with other people inside their church.

Yes, several of those Christians were very new to atheist points of view. Some pastors were very transparent and open with me about theological problems they had with their religion or frustrations with their church members, etc. A pastor admitted to me that he would soften his language against atheism as a result of our discussion (and we have even become friends).

If you are that concerned that this type of meeting would result in a bad appearance, perhaps you do not understand how to conduct yourself properly in this type of situation. Some added experience and reflection may benefit you.
Click to expand...
oood luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom