by Mike This is a challenge to any christians reading this. Lots of you think that the ex-christians on this site are either running from God or have given up because they want to be 'in the world' in order to sin. You just can't get your heads round the fact that the Bible is full of holes, and that we haven't 'chosen' to disbelieve. Instead we disbelieve because once you read the Bible you realise that it is full of holes. I have three types of problems with the Bible, and I challenge the Christians to explain them, without resorting to personal attacks such as "If you were a real christian, you wouldn't need to ask these questions". Problem 1: There are many, many passages that clearly contradict each other. E.g. how many men were healed in the region of the Genesarenes, where the pigs hurtled down the bank into the water? How many angels were present at the empty tomb? Was the stone rolled away before anyone came to the tomb or while some were ...

sent in by Daniel As a Christian, I used to think that God defined what was good -- or at least that if he declared something good, then it must be good, or analogously, if he declared something bad, then it was bad. Hence by definitional fiat he could both be perfectly good, and at the same time do things like punishing people in hell which one might otherwise think of terribly cruel and evil. More recently I have questioned that way of seeing God and found it lacking. The following is a short article I wrote on the question. I'm interested in people's thoughts. Is God Good? Introduction Christians frequently proclaim the goodness of God. But what exactly do we mean when we say God is good? We have a general idea of what it means for a person to be good, but do the same or different criteria apply to God? Once we can determine what it means for God to be good, then does he satisfy the criteria? One answer is to ignore the evidence and claim dogmatically that God must satis...

For centuries there have been claims that the world was going to end. I was in a church that firmly believed that Y2K would signal the end of life as we knew it. In this episode of Bullshit , Penn and Teller will take a look into these claims and predictions. Thank you Penn & Teller

Launch in external player

film review by Charles G. Lambdin Intelligent design (ID) is a dressing up of the old “argument from design,” with technical jargon added to lend a thin veneer of scientific credibility. ID advocates’ opportunistic tactics, which have more in common with politicians than scientists, have been described as the “wedge” strategy — an attempt to gain academic acceptance by maintaining a presence in academic and scientific venues. A prime example of this is the film The Privileged Planet , a contemporary classic of pseudoscience. The film was produced by the Discovery Institute, a conservative think-tank whose expressed goal is the promotion of Intelligent Design. The film gained a degree of notoriety when the Discovery Institute boasted that The Privileged Planet was screening at none other than the Smithsonian Institute itself, with the implied endorsement of that august body. In fact, the Discovery Institute donated $16,000 to the Smithsonian, which by policy allowed the Discovery Instit...

A video lesson by Reginald Finley: For the comprehensive text version of this topic, click here .

by Salvatore This past Christmas Eve (2005) I was awaiting the arrival of a friend for a lunch date. He was running about thirty minutes late so I sat in my car listening to some talk radio (as I am wont to do). I switched over to an AM station and caught Paul Harvey ("The Rest of the Story") launching into a Christmas tale. (The following is my own paraphrased rendition.) As the story goes, there was a family all preparing to go to church at midnight on Christmas Eve. The father, an unbeliever, was reluctant to accompany but promised to stay up until their return. So the family set off to their service leaving the faithless father behind. As the night drew on, the snow started coming down pretty hard. After some time, he began to hear a thumping commotion on the front porch; something akin to snow balls being lobbed against the door. In curiosity, he opened the front door and noticed a small assemblage of birds that had sought refuge from the snowy tempest. Feeling compassio...

Two mothers with very different beliefs traded lives, leading to a dramatic homecoming, on the two-part season premiere of TRADING SPOUSES: MEET YOUR NEW MOMMY which began Wednesday, Nov. 2 (9:00-10:00 PM ET/PT) on FOX. Christian Fundamentalist Marguerite Perrin of Ponchatoula, LA, and Pagan Jeanne D’amico-Flisher of Boxborough, MA, traded places to try out the ultimate life change – leaving their families to take over a clan from another walk of life. As they met each other’s families and instilled their own set of rules, chaos ensued. Then, during the dramatic conclusion which aired Wednesday, Nov. 9 (9:00-10:00 PM ET/PT), viewers found out how each mom distributed the other family’s $50,000 prize and what caused one mom’s major meltdown after she returned home to her family. If you missed the misadventure, here is the exciting conclusion: Trading Spouses - Margaret freaking out Thanks to madamehel for finding and sending this in.