Iron Chariots Wiki - User contributions [en]

Mere Christianity

2007-06-08T17:30:53Z

Micah: grammar correction

A book written by [[C.S. Lewis]] and publish in 1952 that comprises Lewis ideas about a basic Christian philosophy that everyone can agree upon. The ideas for the book came from a series of radio talks he gave during WWII. These talks were subsequently published in books ''Broadcast Talks'' (1942), ''Christian Behavior'' (1943), ''Beyond Personality'' (1944). ''Mere Christianity'' compiled those ideas into one book that Lewis edited the content to better reflect his later understanding of Christian doctrine.

''Mere Christianity'' is divided into four book sections and then into chapters. The arguments are broken up into the same structure for easy reference.

== Lewis's Motives for Writing the Book ==
* Lewis wanted to stop divisive discussion about "high Theology or even ecclesiastical history" with non-Christians because "the discussions of those disputed points has no tendency at all to bring an outsider into the Christian fold" (Mere Christianity, Preface viii).
* Lewis made an analogy of equating Christianity to a building: "['Mere' Christianity] is more lake a hall out of which doors open into several rooms. If I can bring anyone into that hall I shall have done what I attempted. [...] The hall is a place to wait in, a place from which to try the various doors, not a place to live in. For that purpose the worst of the rooms [...] is, I think, preferable" (Preface xv).

== Definitions ==
* Mere Christianity -- core values and teachings of Christianity that all denominations can agree upon
* Law of (Human) Nature -- "decent behaviour", which people have a freedom to obey or disobey. This law is created by God. ''(editor's note: Lewis struggles to explain this concept)''

== Book 1 - Right and Wrong as a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe ==
=== Chapter 1 - The Law of Human Nature ===
Law of Human Nature encompasses human behavior and moral codes. Lewis identifies that people have freewill to obey or disobey this "law." Also, Lewis identifies a "standard of behavior that everyone expects one another to follow.

=== Chapter 2 - Some Objections ===
In Chapter 1, Lewis describes the Law of Human Nature. Sometimes, he refers to it as the Law of Nature, which can make the first chapter confusing. Some people believe Lewis is talking about scientific laws such as Physics and Biology. This chapter is his rebuttal.

::"I conclude then, that though the differences between people's ideas of Decent Behaviour often make you suspect that there is no real natural Law of Behaviour at all, yet the things we are bound to think about these differences really prove just the opposite. But one word before I end. I have met eople who exaggerate the differences, because they have not distinguished between differences of morality and differences of belief about facts. For example, one man said to me, "Three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?" But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did-if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather, surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did. There is no difference of moral principle here: the difference is simply about matter of fact. It may be a great advance in knowledge not to believe in witches: there is no moral advance in not executing them when you do not think they are there. You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mousetraps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house."

We learn that if we believe something, the Natural Law of Behaviour supports us to take action on those beliefs. If we believe that witches exist, we have a right to give them the death penalty. We don't execute witches, anymore, because we don't believe they exist. By this philosophy, if we believe someone (or some group) was the anti-Christ, we would be justified in giving them the death penalty.

Another example if you think all Muslims are terrorists, you have a right to execute them by this moral philosophy. If you don't think all Muslims are terrorists, you don't have that right.

Witch hunts still happen in modern times in South Africa and India (see Wikipedia article "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Modern_witch-hunts Witch-hunt]"). Lewis's philosophy may justify these actions.

Lewis is advocating Christians to examine history from a perspective that if they believed the enemy is a horrible being, they have a right to put that enemy to death. Also, Lewis is advocating that we do not re-examine history from present moral philosophy.

On this point, Lewis's moral philosophy is flawed.

=== Chapter 3 - The Reality of the Law ===
=== Chapter 4 - What Lies Behind the Law ===
=== Chapter 5 - We have cause to be Uneasy ===
From the arguments presented, Lewis concludes there is a creator. Lewis emphasises, "[w]e have not yet got as far as the God of any actual religion, still less the God of that particular religion called Christianity."

== Book 2 - What Christians Believe ==
=== Chapter 1 - The Rival Conceptions Of God ===
=== Chapter 2 - The Invasion ===
=== Chapter 3 - The Shocking Alternative ===
Lewis presents the most famous argument of the book, the [[Liar, Lunatic or Lord]] "trilema" located at the end of the chapter.
=== Chapter 4 - The Perfect Penitent ===
=== Chapter 5 - The Practical Conclusion ===

== Book 3 - Christian Behavior ==
== Book 4 - Beyond Personality: or First Steps in the Doctrine of the Trinity ==

== External Links ==
* [http://www.lib.ru/LEWISCL/mere_engl.txt Mere Christianity etext]
* [http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/?t=assertions Mere Assertions]: A response by [[Dan Barker]]
* [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gaunilo2/mere.html Review of ''Mere Christianity''] at [[Internet Infidels]]

{{stub}}

[[Category: Apologetic literature]]
[[Category: Books]]

Mere Christianity

2007-06-08T17:25:10Z

Micah: /* Chapter 5 - We have cause to be Uneasy */ made statement about creator clearer and added Lewis quote

A book written by [[C.S. Lewis]] and publish in 1952 that comprises Lewis ideas about a basic Christian philosophy that everyone can agree upon. The ideas for the book came from a series of radio talks he gave during WWII. These talks were subsequently published in books ''Broadcast Talks'' (1942), ''Christian Behavior'' (1943), ''Beyond Personality'' (1944). ''Mere Christianity'' compiled those ideas into one book that Lewis edited the content to better reflect the Lewis's understand of Christian doctrine.

''Mere Christianity'' is divided into four book sections and then into chapters. The arguments are broken up into the same structure for easy reference.

== Lewis's Motives for Writing the Book ==
* Lewis wanted to stop divisive discussion about "high Theology or even ecclesiastical history" with non-Christians because "the discussions of those disputed points has no tendency at all to bring an outsider into the Christian fold" (Mere Christianity, Preface viii).
* Lewis made an analogy of equating Christianity to a building: "['Mere' Christianity] is more lake a hall out of which doors open into several rooms. If I can bring anyone into that hall I shall have done what I attempted. [...] The hall is a place to wait in, a place from which to try the various doors, not a place to live in. For that purpose the worst of the rooms [...] is, I think, preferable" (Preface xv).

== Definitions ==
* Mere Christianity -- core values and teachings of Christianity that all denominations can agree upon
* Law of (Human) Nature -- "decent behaviour", which people have a freedom to obey or disobey. This law is created by God. ''(editor's note: Lewis struggles to explain this concept)''

== Book 1 - Right and Wrong as a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe ==
=== Chapter 1 - The Law of Human Nature ===
Law of Human Nature encompasses human behavior and moral codes. Lewis identifies that people have freewill to obey or disobey this "law." Also, Lewis identifies a "standard of behavior that everyone expects one another to follow.

=== Chapter 2 - Some Objections ===
In Chapter 1, Lewis describes the Law of Human Nature. Sometimes, he refers to it as the Law of Nature, which can make the first chapter confusing. Some people believe Lewis is talking about scientific laws such as Physics and Biology. This chapter is his rebuttal.

::"I conclude then, that though the differences between people's ideas of Decent Behaviour often make you suspect that there is no real natural Law of Behaviour at all, yet the things we are bound to think about these differences really prove just the opposite. But one word before I end. I have met eople who exaggerate the differences, because they have not distinguished between differences of morality and differences of belief about facts. For example, one man said to me, "Three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?" But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did-if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather, surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did. There is no difference of moral principle here: the difference is simply about matter of fact. It may be a great advance in knowledge not to believe in witches: there is no moral advance in not executing them when you do not think they are there. You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mousetraps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house."

We learn that if we believe something, the Natural Law of Behaviour supports us to take action on those beliefs. If we believe that witches exist, we have a right to give them the death penalty. We don't execute witches, anymore, because we don't believe they exist. By this philosophy, if we believe someone (or some group) was the anti-Christ, we would be justified in giving them the death penalty.

Another example if you think all Muslims are terrorists, you have a right to execute them by this moral philosophy. If you don't think all Muslims are terrorists, you don't have that right.

Witch hunts still happen in modern times in South Africa and India (see Wikipedia article "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Modern_witch-hunts Witch-hunt]"). Lewis's philosophy may justify these actions.

Lewis is advocating Christians to examine history from a perspective that if they believed the enemy is a horrible being, they have a right to put that enemy to death. Also, Lewis is advocating that we do not re-examine history from present moral philosophy.

On this point, Lewis's moral philosophy is flawed.

=== Chapter 3 - The Reality of the Law ===
=== Chapter 4 - What Lies Behind the Law ===
=== Chapter 5 - We have cause to be Uneasy ===
From the arguments presented, Lewis concludes there is a creator. Lewis emphasises, "[w]e have not yet got as far as the God of any actual religion, still less the God of that particular religion called Christianity."

== Book 2 - What Christians Believe ==
=== Chapter 1 - The Rival Conceptions Of God ===
=== Chapter 2 - The Invasion ===
=== Chapter 3 - The Shocking Alternative ===
Lewis presents the most famous argument of the book, the [[Liar, Lunatic or Lord]] "trilema" located at the end of the chapter.
=== Chapter 4 - The Perfect Penitent ===
=== Chapter 5 - The Practical Conclusion ===

== Book 3 - Christian Behavior ==
== Book 4 - Beyond Personality: or First Steps in the Doctrine of the Trinity ==

== External Links ==
* [http://www.lib.ru/LEWISCL/mere_engl.txt Mere Christianity etext]
* [http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/?t=assertions Mere Assertions]: A response by [[Dan Barker]]
* [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gaunilo2/mere.html Review of ''Mere Christianity''] at [[Internet Infidels]]

{{stub}}

[[Category: Apologetic literature]]
[[Category: Books]]

Mere Christianity

2007-06-03T17:07:36Z

Micah: /* Definitions */ added definition for "Law of (Human) Nature"

A book written by [[C.S. Lewis]] and publish in 1952 that comprises Lewis ideas about a basic Christian philosophy that everyone can agree upon. The ideas for the book came from a series of radio talks he gave during WWII. These talks were subsequently published in books ''Broadcast Talks'' (1942), ''Christian Behavior'' (1943), ''Beyond Personality'' (1944). ''Mere Christianity'' compiled those ideas into one book that Lewis edited the content to better reflect the Lewis's understand of Christian doctrine.

''Mere Christianity'' is divided into four book sections and then into chapters. The arguments are broken up into the same structure for easy reference.

== Lewis's Motives for Writing the Book ==
* Lewis wanted to stop divisive discussion about "high Theology or even ecclesiastical history" with non-Christians because "the discussions of those disputed points has no tendency at all to bring an outsider into the Christian fold" (Mere Christianity, Preface viii).
* Lewis made an analogy of equating Christianity to a building: "['Mere' Christianity] is more lake a hall out of which doors open into several rooms. If I can bring anyone into that hall I shall have done what I attempted. [...] The hall is a place to wait in, a place from which to try the various doors, not a place to live in. For that purpose the worst of the rooms [...] is, I think, preferable" (Preface xv).

== Definitions ==
* Mere Christianity -- core values and teachings of Christianity that all denominations can agree upon
* Law of (Human) Nature -- "decent behaviour", which people have a freedom to obey or disobey. This law is created by God. ''(editor's note: Lewis struggles to explain this concept)''

== Book 1 - Right and Wrong as a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe ==
=== Chapter 1 - The Law of Human Nature ===
Law of Human Nature encompasses human behavior and moral codes. Lewis identifies that people have freewill to obey or disobey this "law." Also, Lewis identifies a "standard of behavior that everyone expects one another to follow.

=== Chapter 2 - Some Objections ===
In Chapter 1, Lewis describes the Law of Human Nature. Sometimes, he refers to it as the Law of Nature, which can make the first chapter confusing. Some people believe Lewis is talking about scientific laws such as Physics and Biology. This chapter is his rebuttal.

::"I conclude then, that though the differences between people's ideas of Decent Behaviour often make you suspect that there is no real natural Law of Behaviour at all, yet the things we are bound to think about these differences really prove just the opposite. But one word before I end. I have met eople who exaggerate the differences, because they have not distinguished between differences of morality and differences of belief about facts. For example, one man said to me, "Three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?" But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did-if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather, surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did. There is no difference of moral principle here: the difference is simply about matter of fact. It may be a great advance in knowledge not to believe in witches: there is no moral advance in not executing them when you do not think they are there. You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mousetraps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house."

We learn that if we believe something, the Natural Law of Behaviour supports us to take action on those beliefs. If we believe that witches exist, we have a right to give them the death penalty. We don't execute witches, anymore, because we don't believe they exist. By this philosophy, if we believe someone (or some group) was the anti-Christ, we would be justified in giving them the death penalty.

Another example if you think all Muslims are terrorists, you have a right to execute them by this moral philosophy. If you don't think all Muslims are terrorists, you don't have that right.

Witch hunts still happen in modern times in South Africa and India (see Wikipedia article "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Modern_witch-hunts Witch-hunt]"). Lewis's philosophy may justify these actions.

Lewis is advocating Christians to examine history from a perspective that if they believed the enemy is a horrible being, they have a right to put that enemy to death. Also, Lewis is advocating that we do not re-examine history from present moral philosophy.

On this point, Lewis's moral philosophy is flawed.

=== Chapter 3 - The Reality of the Law ===
=== Chapter 4 - What Lies Behind the Law ===
=== Chapter 5 - We have cause to be Uneasy ===
From the agruments given, Lewis concludes there is a creator.

== Book 2 - What Christians Believe ==
=== Chapter 1 - The Rival Conceptions Of God ===
=== Chapter 2 - The Invasion ===
=== Chapter 3 - The Shocking Alternative ===
Lewis presents the most famous argument of the book, the [[Liar, Lunatic or Lord]] "trilema" located at the end of the chapter.
=== Chapter 4 - The Perfect Penitent ===
=== Chapter 5 - The Practical Conclusion ===

== Book 3 - Christian Behavior ==
== Book 4 - Beyond Personality: or First Steps in the Doctrine of the Trinity ==

== External Links ==
* [http://www.lib.ru/LEWISCL/mere_engl.txt Mere Christianity etext]
* [http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/?t=assertions Mere Assertions]: A response by [[Dan Barker]]
* [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gaunilo2/mere.html Review of ''Mere Christianity''] at [[Internet Infidels]]

{{stub}}

[[Category: Apologetic literature]]
[[Category: Books]]

Mere Christianity

2007-06-03T15:38:54Z

Micah: /* Chapter 2 - Some Objections */ added section about witches with rebuttal

A book written by [[C.S. Lewis]] and publish in 1952 that comprises Lewis ideas about a basic Christian philosophy that everyone can agree upon. The ideas for the book came from a series of radio talks he gave during WWII. These talks were subsequently published in books ''Broadcast Talks'' (1942), ''Christian Behavior'' (1943), ''Beyond Personality'' (1944). ''Mere Christianity'' compiled those ideas into one book that Lewis edited the content to better reflect the Lewis's understand of Christian doctrine.

''Mere Christianity'' is divided into four book sections and then into chapters. The arguments are broken up into the same structure for easy reference.

== Lewis's Motives for Writing the Book ==
* Lewis wanted to stop divisive discussion about "high Theology or even ecclesiastical history" with non-Christians because "the discussions of those disputed points has no tendency at all to bring an outsider into the Christian fold" (Mere Christianity, Preface viii).
* Lewis made an analogy of equating Christianity to a building: "['Mere' Christianity] is more lake a hall out of which doors open into several rooms. If I can bring anyone into that hall I shall have done what I attempted. [...] The hall is a place to wait in, a place from which to try the various doors, not a place to live in. For that purpose the worst of the rooms [...] is, I think, preferable" (Preface xv).

== Definitions ==
* Mere Christianity -- core values and teachings of Christianity that all denominations can agree upon
* Law of (Human) Nature -- (need a definition)

== Book 1 - Right and Wrong as a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe ==
=== Chapter 1 - The Law of Human Nature ===
Law of Human Nature encompasses human behavior and moral codes. Lewis identifies that people have freewill to obey or disobey this "law." Also, Lewis identifies a "standard of behavior that everyone expects one another to follow.

=== Chapter 2 - Some Objections ===
In Chapter 1, Lewis describes the Law of Human Nature. Sometimes, he refers to it as the Law of Nature, which can make the first chapter confusing. Some people believe Lewis is talking about scientific laws such as Physics and Biology. This chapter is his rebuttal.

::"I conclude then, that though the differences between people's ideas of Decent Behaviour often make you suspect that there is no real natural Law of Behaviour at all, yet the things we are bound to think about these differences really prove just the opposite. But one word before I end. I have met eople who exaggerate the differences, because they have not distinguished between differences of morality and differences of belief about facts. For example, one man said to me, "Three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?" But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did-if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather, surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did. There is no difference of moral principle here: the difference is simply about matter of fact. It may be a great advance in knowledge not to believe in witches: there is no moral advance in not executing them when you do not think they are there. You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mousetraps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house."

We learn that if we believe something, the Natural Law of Behaviour supports us to take action on those beliefs. If we believe that witches exist, we have a right to give them the death penalty. We don't execute witches, anymore, because we don't believe they exist. By this philosophy, if we believe someone (or some group) was the anti-Christ, we would be justified in giving them the death penalty.

Another example if you think all Muslims are terrorists, you have a right to execute them by this moral philosophy. If you don't think all Muslims are terrorists, you don't have that right.

Witch hunts still happen in modern times in South Africa and India (see Wikipedia article "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Modern_witch-hunts Witch-hunt]"). Lewis's philosophy may justify these actions.

Lewis is advocating Christians to examine history from a perspective that if they believed the enemy is a horrible being, they have a right to put that enemy to death. Also, Lewis is advocating that we do not re-examine history from present moral philosophy.

On this point, Lewis's moral philosophy is flawed.

=== Chapter 3 - The Reality of the Law ===
=== Chapter 4 - What Lies Behind the Law ===
=== Chapter 5 - We have cause to be Uneasy ===
From the agruments given, Lewis concludes there is a creator.

== Book 2 - What Christians Believe ==
=== Chapter 1 - The Rival Conceptions Of God ===
=== Chapter 2 - The Invasion ===
=== Chapter 3 - The Shocking Alternative ===
Lewis presents the most famous argument of the book, the [[Liar, Lunatic or Lord]] "trilema" located at the end of the chapter.
=== Chapter 4 - The Perfect Penitent ===
=== Chapter 5 - The Practical Conclusion ===

== Book 3 - Christian Behavior ==
== Book 4 - Beyond Personality: or First Steps in the Doctrine of the Trinity ==

== External Links ==
* [http://www.lib.ru/LEWISCL/mere_engl.txt Mere Christianity etext]
* [http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/?t=assertions Mere Assertions]: A response by [[Dan Barker]]
* [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gaunilo2/mere.html Review of ''Mere Christianity''] at [[Internet Infidels]]

{{stub}}

[[Category: Apologetic literature]]
[[Category: Books]]

Mere Christianity

2007-03-23T03:52:51Z

Micah: /* Chapter 2 - Some Objections */ grammar

Mere Christianity

2007-03-23T03:51:04Z

Micah: /* Lewis's Motives for Writing the Book */ Typo

Mere Christianity

2006-12-07T14:37:51Z

Micah: /* Book 2 - What Christians Beleive */ Corrected typo "Beleive"

Main Page

2006-11-26T17:58:15Z

Micah: reverting spam/vandalism by Woelzdjo to last version

__NOTOC__ __NOEDITSECTION__
{|style="width:100%;text-align:center;margin-top:+.7em;background-color:#fcfcfc;border:1px solid #ccc"
|-
|<div style="font-size:162%;border:none;margin: 0;padding:.1em;color:#000">Welcome to [[Iron Chariots]],</div>
<div style="top:+0.2em;font-size: 95%">the [[counter-apologetics]] encyclopedia.</div>
|}

{|style="width:100%;background:none;margin:-.8em 0 -.7em 0"
|style="font-size:95%;text-align:left;white-space:nowrap;color:#000"|[[Project:Introduction|Overview]] '''·''' [[Help:Editing|Editing]] '''·''' [[Help:Contents|Help]]
|style="font-size:95%;padding:10px 0;margin:0px;text-align:right;white-space:nowrap;color:#000"|
[[:Category:Browse_categories|Categories]]
|}
<div style="background-color:#fffcf0;border:1px solid #ccc;margin:0px 200px">
{{Quote-source|And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had '''chariots of iron'''.|{{bible|Judges 1:19}}}}</div>
{{Main Page banner}}

This wiki is intended to provide information on [[apologetics]] and [[counter-apologetics]]. We'll be collecting common [[arguments]] and providing responses, information and resources to help counter the glut of misinformation and poor arguments which masquerade as "[[evidence]]" for [[religious]] claims.

The complexity of issues surrounding religion ensures that any proper assessment requires us to delve into a number of philosophical, historical and sociological topics. Our ultimate goal is to provide a robust and definitive resource for:

* [[atheist]]s seeking responses to common apologetic arguments
* [[theist]]s who are questioning the efficacy of their beliefs
* [[apologist]]s who feel that their "pet" argument is above reproach
* individuals of any philosophical ideal who have an interest in religious studies

Initially, we'll be focusing on [[:Category:Arguments|arguments]], [[:Category:Christian apologists|Christian apologists]], and [[:Category:Christian groups|Christian groups]] who practice apologetics. We will also talk about individual [[:Category:Famous atheists|atheists]] and [[:Category:Atheist groups|atheist groups]]. As the site expands, we'll address many more religions, arguments and issues.

==Contributions==
If you're interested in contributing to the site (in the non-monetary sense), you must [http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&type=signup register] first to get a username. You might also want to register at the [http://forum.IronChariots.org IronChariots.org Forums] so you can post there.

If you want to contribute in the ''monetary'' sense, please see [[Project:Site support]].

For more information, please take a look at these pages:
* [[Project:Introduction]]
* [[Project:Editing guidelines]]
* [[Project:Neutral point of view]]

If you're looking for some new or incomplete articles that need writing, please consider taking some suggestions from this page:
* [[Project:Requested pages]]

Mere Christianity

2006-11-23T17:28:46Z

Micah: changed category from Christianity to Appologetic literature

Mere Christianity

2006-11-23T17:24:10Z

Micah: added "stub" status and added to the Category Christianity

Mere Christianity

2006-11-23T17:18:18Z

Micah: created, it is mostly a stub article for now

Jesus Christ

2006-10-15T06:03:45Z

Micah: added image of Jesus from "The Last Supper" painting

[[Image:Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) - The Last Supper (1495-1498) Jesus cutout.jpg|thumb|right|Jesus in Leonado da Vinci's painting "The Last Supper"]]

'''Jesus Christ''', according to [[Christian]] Doctrine, is the "Only begotten Son of [[God]]," who came to die for the sins of man, so that all people may have everlasting life in heaven.

{{quote-source|For God so loved the World that he gave his only begotten son, so that whosoever believe in him will have everlasting life|{{bible|John 3:16}}}}

The Jesus of [[the Bible]] is shown to perform [[miracles]], such as walking on water, curing the blind, and raising the dead. He also commands great respect with his desciples.

==Historical Jesus==

Despite the fact that 2 billion people worldwide believe that Jesus was a real person, who was born of a virgin, lived, prescribed laws, got up the nose of the Jewish Council, fell out of favor with his subjects, and then got nailed to a tree, there is no hard evidence that such a person existed.
There are some passing references to people that ''may'' have been Jesus.

Some [[atheist]]s consider discussion of the existence of a historical Jesus to be a [[red herring]]. They argue that, while a person named Jesus may or may not have existed, there is clearly no reason to believe that he had special powers, was the son of God, or performed miracles. Even if it could be firmly established that Jesus the man existed, this would not be evidence for the extraordinary claims that make up the foundation of the Christian religion.

==Naming==

"Jesus" is the anglicised version of the Latin ''Iesus'', from the Greek ''Iesous'', from the Aramaic ''Ieshua/Yeshua'', from which we get the modern westernised name Joshua.

"Christ" is the anglicised version of the Greek word ''christos'', which is a translation of the Hebrew word ''Mashiach'' (Messiah), meaning "[one who is] anointed". Contrary to the popular opinion, Christ isn't a reference to Jesus' family or surname in the modern western tradition. ''Christ'' refers to the state of being "annointed" (a common reference to being a teacher or priest or some form of authority). Many Christian sects refer to him as Christ Jesus.

More precisely, he should be referred to as ''Jesus the Christ''. As a person, he is normally referred to as ''Jesus of Nazareth'', although this obviously contradicts the tradition that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

[[Category: Religious mythology]]
[[Category: The Bible]]
[[Category: Deities]]

File:Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) - The Last Supper (1495-1498) Jesus cutout.jpg

2006-10-15T05:57:16Z

Micah: This is Jesus from the "The Last Supper" painted by Leonardo da Vinci. Source: WikiMedia Commons URL: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leonardo_da_Vinci_%281452-1519%29_-_The_Last_Supper_%281495-1498%29.jpg License: Public Domain

This is Jesus from the "The Last Supper" painted by Leonardo da Vinci.

Source: WikiMedia Commons
URL: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leonardo_da_Vinci_%281452-1519%29_-_The_Last_Supper_%281495-1498%29.jpg

License: Public Domain

Talk:Cherry picking

2006-08-22T15:47:40Z

Micah: comments on image attribution

==Image Attribution==
The Creative Commons license for the image requires attribution (See [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0]). I could not find on Flikr where the author specifies in the manner the attribution to be carried out. I don't know if attribution on the photos page is acceptable. The alternative is to remove the image.
-- [[User:Micah|Micah]] 06:29, 22 August 2006 (MST)
----
The attribution already exists on the main page for the image...what appears in the article is a thumbnail with a link to that page and doesn't have to include the credit. -- [[User:Sans Deity|Sans Deity]] 07:18, 22 August 2006 (MST)
----
I'll take that as executive policy and make future image submission only attribute on the image's main page. Thank you. -- [[User:Micah|Micah]] 08:47, 22 August 2006 (MST)

Talk:Cherry picking

2006-08-22T13:29:09Z

Micah: Image attribution

Prayer

2006-08-22T04:03:24Z

Micah: added image of Praying Mantis knelt in prayer

{{quote-desc||Now, you come along, and pray for something. Well suppose the thing you want isn't in God's Divine Plan? What do you want Him to do? Change His plan? Just for you? Doesn't it seem a little arrogant? It's a Divine Plan. What's the use of being God if every run-down schmuck with a two-dollar prayerbook can come along and fuck up Your Plan?|[[George Carlin]]}}

[[Image:Praying_mantis.jpg|thumb|right|Praying Mantis knelt in prayer. Photo by Roger Smith.]]
'''Prayer''' is the act of speaking to a [[god]], either mentally or out loud, to profess loyalty or ask for favors.

==Christianity and Prayer==

Prayer in the [[New Testament]] is presented as a positive command ([[Colossians]] 4:2; [[1 Thessalonians]] 5:17). Christians are challenged to include prayer in their everyday life, even in the busy struggles of [[marriage]] ([[1 Corinthians]] 7:5) as it brings people closer to God.

Prayer in the New Testament is also presented as being completely dependable. For example:

* [[Matthew]] 7:7 "Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!"
* Matthew 17:20 "For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you."
* Matthew 21:21 "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."
* [[Mark]] 11:24 "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours."
* [[John]] 14:12-14 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father. Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I will do it."
* Matthew 18:19 "Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

Thus, the stipulations one must fulfill for having their prayers answered are these:

# Have faith. It doesn't matter how much, for even someone with the faith of a mustard seed will have their prayers answered.
# Don't doubt in your faith.
# Believe in Jesus and the works that he does.
# Believe that you will receive what you pray for.
# If you really want your prayer answered, get a group of people to all pray for the same thing.

The [[Bible]] says that if you adhere to these rules then this is what God will do for you:

# He will answer your prayers, no matter what you ask for.
# Nothing will be impossible for you if you pray about it.

==Objections to Prayer==

# As the George Carlin quote suggests, the act of prayer seems a little odd for people with belief in a god who is supposed to be [[omniscient]] and [[omnibenevolent]]. Clearly an omniscient god would already be aware of your problems and know what you want. Ultimately, your request may be regarded by God as either [[good]] or [[evil]]. If it is good, then why would God not have granted your wishes already? If it is evil, then why would God ever grant your request?
# Billions of people pray for various things every day. Many of the prayer requests are even contradictory. For instance, in a football game, often the players and fans on both sides are praying to win. If God answers prayers, which side should He choose? The side that prays loudest?
# Christians often state that God can answer prayers in one of three ways; "yes", "no", or "wait". This makes God no different from random chance. After all, when you pray it can either happen (i.e. God answers "yes"), not happen (God answers "no), or you have to wait to see if it will happen (God answers "wait").
# "Successful" prayers rarely have an unambiguous form. Apologists point to events like cancers that go into remission or people waking up from comas as [[evidence]] for the power of prayer. Yet cancer goes into remission and people wake up from comas all the time. How are we to tell the difference between cancer that healed naturally (or thanks to the presence of skilled doctors) and cancer that was cured miraculously? A commonly asked question is, "Why doesn't God heal amputees?" Live footage of a severed limb miraculously regrowing would be far more convincing as proof of the power of prayer. Yet such prayers are apparently never answered, or answered away from the prying eyes of meddlesome investigators.
# Some people say that it isn't God's will to perform unambiguous miracles through prayer. However, if it's all just God's will then why pray? God will just do what he wants to whether you pray about it or not.
# Christians might also say that God doesn't want to provide unambiguous proof of his own existence since this would deny faith. However, this rationalization ignores the myriad of times in the Bible that he does just that.
# Another common rationalization is that God uses unanswered prayers to demonstrate his power through the suffering person's life. For example, a patient with terminal cancer whose faith is deepened because of their ordeal. This begs the question, however, of why an all-knowing and all-loving God couldn't think of a less painful way to accomplish that particular goal. It also begs the question of why a person who already had faith has to endure more pain to have it "deepened".
# A less common rationalization is that a person who gets their leg shot off in a way chose to be on that battlefield of their own [[free will]] and, thus, God has no obligation to heal them. However, this ignores the millions born with missing limbs that were never healed. It's not that God ignores some amputees, it's that he ignores all amputees.
# Some might say that God does heal amputees by divinely inspiring doctors and scientists to cure them. This, however, is easily refuted by [[Occam's Razor]]. God's inspiration isn't necessary for doctors and scientists to find ways to cure amputees. And why did God feel the need to bypass this kind of helpful inspiration for thousands of years and reduce the suffering only in the modern age?
# Others say that God can't be tested since he's so much higher than us. This ignores the story of Gideon in the Old Testament and Thomas in the New Testament who both did exactly that and who received the proof that each had asked for.
# Some Christians say that Jesus never specified when he would answer prayers and that maybe he will answer them in the afterlife. This is unfair since God apparently answers so many other prayers during the believers' lifetimes. Also, the verses quoted above are unambiguous in the fact that they state that whatever you ask for you'll get during your life.
# Some might bring up the objection that these verses aren't to be taken literally. Firstly, the verses themselves are certainly written like they should be taken literally. Secondly, if this objection is used the believer must provide an objective reason why these verses are non-literal. If no reason can be provided then the verses should continue to be taken literally.
# Matthew 21:21 says that you must have faith and not doubt for your prayers to be answered. This offers a convenient loophole for unanswered prayers. If you pray and you satisfy every single stipulation and yet your prayer is never answered, Christians can always fall back on saying "You didn't believe enough" or "You doubted your faith". Since there is no empirical way to define how much belief is "enough", this becomes an [[ad hoc]] explanation which makes prayer [[unfalsifiable]].
# It's important to remember statistical probability when considering supposed miracles. For example, let's say there's a disease that has no cure and let's say 999,999,999 people so far have contracted it but none have survived. However, let's say the millionth person to contract it ''does'' survive. This isn't a miracle; it simply means that the odds of survival are now 1 out of 1,000,000.
# Finally, when all else fails a Christian might say "People have believed in Jesus for 2,000 years. There must be a good reason for it." This is a non sequitur because it ignores the political and cultural forces that shape all societies and modes of belief throughout time and instead focuses on its own supposed inherent goodness. It also fails to account for all of the other competing beliefs that survived with it for equally long or longer periods of time like Islam and Judaism. Strangely, you don't hear Christians arguing that there must be good reasons for those religions' survival too!

==External Links==

* [http://whydoesgodhateamputees.com/god5.htm Why Won't God Heal Amputees?]
* [http://www.valleyskeptic.com/george.htm George Carlin on Religion and Prayer] (full version)

Banana argument

2006-08-22T03:24:01Z

Micah: added Raybanana.jpg image to page

[[Image:Raybanana.jpg|thumb|right|Ray Comfort with a banana]]
The banana argument is a variation on the [[argument from design]], saying that some things are the way they are because they were designed especially for our pleasure and comfort.

Note that the banana:

# Is shaped for human hand
# Has non-slip surface
# Has outward indicators of inward content:
#: Green-too early,
#: Yellow-just right,
#: Black-too late.
# Has a tab for removal of wrapper
# Is perforated on wrapper
# Bio-degradable wrapper
# Is shaped for human mouth
# Has a point at top for ease of entry
# Is pleasing to taste buds
# Is curved towards the face to make eating process easy

==Counter-Arguments==

# The bananas that we eat today were specifically bred by humans to be a size that we like. Natural bananas are much smaller. This is a bit like [[Douglas Adams]]' analogy of a puddle thinking that the hole it's in was perfectly designed to contain the puddle.
# The fact that a banana fits perfectly in our hand says a lot more about the [[evolution]] of hands than it does about bananas. The human hand is very versatile, able to change shape enough to hold a tiny pebble or a large basketball. Lots of the things we don't eat also fit in our hands.
# We eat all kinds of food. The coconut is also enjoyed by humans as food yet, apart from having a non-slip surface (like almost all objects) and being pleasant to eat (like most food), it holds none of the other properties of the banana. A cow, which some might say is far more delicious than a banana, is fairly difficult to hold in the hand when in its natural form. Like many other foods, cows also require some very particular preparation before eating otherwise some nasty diseases can result. The diseases come from bacteria that theists would also say were created by God.
# Speaking of bacteria, the number of objects in the universe that are inedible and even dangerous to humans far outweighs the number of objects that are tasty.
# Far from being proof that the entire world is custom made for our pleasure, this seems to be a case of [[cherry picking]] certain features to find one good example.

==History==

* The banana argument was presented by [[Ray Comfort]] as "the atheist's worst nightmare" the [[Way of the Master]] episode entitled "[[The Beauty of a Broken Spirit-Atheism]]".

* Ray Comfort conceded that this is a bad argument in episode #103 of the [[Hellbound Alleee]] show.

* The argument was not original to Ray Comfort; somebody please find more information for this article.

==External Links==
* [http://youtube.com/watch?v=9zwbhAXe5yk&search=atheist%20banana Video clip of Ray Comfort presenting the banana argument]
* [http://hellboundalleee.blogspot.com/2006/05/ray-comfort-concedes-banana-argument.html Hellbound Alleee announces that Comfort conceded the banana argument]
* [http://ecclesia.org/truth/atheist.html The banana argument in written form, presented completely without intentional irony]

[[Category: Arguments]]
[[Category: Arguments for the existence of God]]
[[Category: Teleological arguments]]
[[Category: Arguments from design]]

File:138785main image feature 460 ys quarter.jpg

2006-08-22T03:17:39Z

Micah: corrected link

This mosaic image, one of the largest ever taken by NASA's Hubble Space Telescope of the Crab Nebula, is a six-light-year-wide expanding remnant of a star's supernova explosion. Japanese and Chinese astronomers witnessed this violent event nearly 1,000 years ago in 1054, as did, almost certainly, Native Americans.

The orange filaments are the tattered remains of the star and consist mostly of hydrogen. The rapidly spinning neutron star embedded in the center of the nebula is the dynamo powering the nebula's eerie interior bluish glow. The blue light comes from electrons whirling at nearly the speed of light around magnetic field lines from the neutron star. The neutron star, the crushed ultra-dense core of the exploded star, like a lighthouse, ejects twin beams of radiation that appear to pulse 30 times a second due to the neutron star's rotation. The colors in the image indicate the different elements that were expelled during the explosion. Blue in the filaments in the outer part of the nebula represents neutral oxygen, green is singly-ionized sulfur, and red indicates doubly-ionized oxygen.

Image Credit: NASA, ESA, J. Hester (Arizona State University)

NASA
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_460.html

License:
"NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages." -- [http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/guidelines/ Image Use Guidelines] 10.13.05

Cherry picking

2006-08-22T03:15:48Z

Micah: added image

[[Image:Cherry_picking_med.jpg|thumb|right|Photo by Matt McGee]]

[[Cherry picking]] refers to the practice of choosing quotes and research which supports ones views while ignoring credible quotes and research, in the same branch of study, which undermines or contradicts ones views.

==Example of Cherry picking==

A [[Christian]] pacifist might quote the [[sermon on the mount]]:

{{Quote-source|But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.|Matthew 5:39}}

while ignoring the Christian marines favorite bible quote:

{{Quote-source|Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.|Matthew 10:34}}

[[Category:Logical fallacies]]

File:Cherry picking med.jpg

2006-08-22T03:13:51Z

Micah: corrected links and formatting on the info of the image

Harvest started today on one of our two cherry trees -- these are Bings and this is my daughter grabbing one off the tree this morning.

We invite all the neighbors to come pick cherries and word has apparently spread around over the years, so now we have people driving in from God-knows-where to get free cherries. And the tree will be bare by Monday/Tuesday.

Part of my [http://www.flickr.com/photos/pleeker/sets/1719042/ 1/365 project: 1 photo per day for 365 days.]

License: [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/ Creative Commons Attribution & No Derivative Works]

Original Title: June 10, 2006: Picked!

Author: Matt McGee

Source: [http://flickr.com/photos/pleeker/164453373/ Flickr link]

File:Cherry picking med.jpg

2006-08-22T03:10:34Z

Micah: Harvest started today on one of our two cherry trees -- these are Bings and this is my daughter grabbing one off the tree this morning. We invite all the neighbors to come pick cherries and word has apparently spread around over the years, so now we have

Harvest started today on one of our two cherry trees -- these are Bings and this is my daughter grabbing one off the tree this morning.

We invite all the neighbors to come pick cherries and word has apparently spread around over the years, so now we have people driving in from God-knows-where to get free cherries. And the tree will be bare by Monday/Tuesday.

Part of my [[1/365 project: 1 photo per day for 365 days.|http://www.flickr.com/photos/pleeker/sets/1719042/]]

License: [[Creative Commons Attribution & No Derivative Works|http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/]]
Original Title: June 10, 2006: Picked!
Author: Matt McGee
Source: [Flickr link|http://flickr.com/photos/pleeker/164453373/]

Talk:Polygamy

2006-08-22T02:55:32Z

Micah: Added page to ask for feedback on an image for the page

== Image for Page ==
I was thinking that the following might be a distant possibility for the image to represent this page. It has a Creative Commons license as long as the work is Attributed and there are no derivative works. Maybe it is not as serious as it should be. I'll let you decide.

http://flickr.com/photos/kevlar/195235014/

I guess the alternative. Is the guy with 5 girls in bikinis. (Also, Creative Commons)
http://flickr.com/photos/2rokbotoy/157483144/

Are these pictures out of bounds? [[User:Micah|Micah]] 19:55, 21 August 2006 (MST)

Genesis

2006-08-21T18:25:32Z

Micah: added image of supernova

{{stub}}

[[Image:138785main_image_feature_460_ys_quarter.jpg|thumb|right|In the beginning...]]

Genesis is the first book of the [[Judaism|Judeo]]-[[Christianity|Christian]] [[Bible]]. It includes some of the best-known Bible stories, including:
* The two creation stories (the seven days of creation, [[Adam and Eve]]).
* Cain and Abel
* The flood and [[Noah's ark]]
* The tower of Babel
* The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah
* Abraham told to sacrifice his son Isaac
* Jacob sold into slavery by his brothers
* Jacob interprets the pharaoh's dreams

[[Category: The Bible]]

File:138785main image feature 460 ys quarter.jpg

2006-08-21T18:22:14Z

Micah: This mosaic image, one of the largest ever taken by NASA's Hubble Space Telescope of the Crab Nebula, is a six-light-year-wide expanding remnant of a star's supernova explosion. Japanese and Chinese astronomers witnessed this violent event nearly 1,000 ye

This mosaic image, one of the largest ever taken by NASA's Hubble Space Telescope of the Crab Nebula, is a six-light-year-wide expanding remnant of a star's supernova explosion. Japanese and Chinese astronomers witnessed this violent event nearly 1,000 years ago in 1054, as did, almost certainly, Native Americans.

The orange filaments are the tattered remains of the star and consist mostly of hydrogen. The rapidly spinning neutron star embedded in the center of the nebula is the dynamo powering the nebula's eerie interior bluish glow. The blue light comes from electrons whirling at nearly the speed of light around magnetic field lines from the neutron star. The neutron star, the crushed ultra-dense core of the exploded star, like a lighthouse, ejects twin beams of radiation that appear to pulse 30 times a second due to the neutron star's rotation. The colors in the image indicate the different elements that were expelled during the explosion. Blue in the filaments in the outer part of the nebula represents neutral oxygen, green is singly-ionized sulfur, and red indicates doubly-ionized oxygen.

Image Credit: NASA, ESA, J. Hester (Arizona State University)

NASA
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_460.html

License:
"NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages." -- [[Image Use Guidelines|http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/guidelines/]] 10.13.05

Evidence

2006-08-21T14:32:23Z

Micah: added picture that "Evidence should be weighed."

{{WP-name|Evidence}}

[[Image:PeopleScale.jpg|thumb|right|Evidence should be weighed.]]

[[Evidence]] is, in a general sense, anything used to support an assertion. The standards used to determine what sort of evidence is acceptable can vary, depending on the situation.

What may qualify as evidence in a casual argument might not qualify in a formal debate, legal proceeding or scientific investigation. Hearsay, for example, is often used in casual conversation to support a claim, yet it isn't permissible in most court rooms. In [[science]], evidence is usually expected to be empirically observable, falsifiable and repeatable. Scientific experimentation, depends on the analysis of many results in order to determine patterns of consistency and eliminate elements of chance.

==Counter-Apologetics==
When skeptics object to apologist's claims on the basis of insufficient evidence, they're generally referring to a lack of scientific evidence or a preponderance of anecdotal evidence. For any given claim, there exists a [[burden of proof]] which must be supported by evidence. The defining characteristic of the required evidence rests in its quality - not quantity.

If, for example, someone claims "God answered my prayer" that is both an assertion (of a specific occurrence) and evidence 'for' the general assertions about the existence of God and the efficacy of prayer. Unfortunately, the quality of that evidence is exceptionally low. So low, in fact, that such a claim is only considered evidence in the very broad, definitional sense. Anecdotal evidence and bald assertions have no evidentiary value and serve only as additional claims.

Suppose that 2.5 million people all testified "God answered my prayer". The sheer quantity of evidence is sufficient to warrant an investigation of the claims, but those testimonies still don't qualify as sufficient evidence to support acceptance of the claim. Increasing the quantity of claims doesn't increase the quality.

Apologists commonly make claims supported by anecdotal evidence, hoping that the sheer quantity will be sufficiently convincing. Unfortunately, this tactic is often effective and claims like, "80% of the population believes in God, they can't all be wrong" can be very convincing to those who don't critically examine the claim. This argument works because people are reluctant to write off that 80% as delusional, stupid or insane.

The truth is that they most definitely '''can''' be wrong. At some point in human history, the overwhelming majority believed that the earth was the center of the universe. That majority was wrong. They weren't necessarily delusional, stupid or insane, they were simply ignorant of the facts and wrong.

==External Links==
{{Def-word|evidence}}