Counter Apologetics: Recent Episodes
Emerson Green
Two Christian apologists reviewed my series on the moral argument for God on their channel, Democracy of the Dead. I recorded my own counter-response shortly thereafter, but thought it was too profanity-laden and impolite to release. Generally speaking, it’s good to remain dispassionate in these online spaces, but I let my frustration get the better of me. However, I changed my mind. I trust that you in the audience can discern why I’m reacting as I do in the episode. My exasperation was entirely the product of their errors, oversights, and misunderstandings — all of which were completely avoidable, had they put one-tenth of the effort into their video that I put into mine. Their mistakes are not exclusively philosophical. In many instances, they simply misunderstand what is being said, for what purpose it’s being said, and even who is saying it. All in all, it was an extremely tedious video to review, but I hope that my commentary makes it interesting, or at least entertaining.
Linktree
Zac (Adherent Apologetics) and I explore a few of the things that drew me to agnosticism. Religious ambiguity, disagreement among epistemic peers, the diversity of the theistic tradition (as well as the varieties of non-theism), the seeming inscrutability of the prior probability of theism, and my acceptance of the value-selection hypothesis have all played a part in pushing me (somewhat reluctantly) to agnosticism.
Linktree
I’m interviewed by Fuad Abdullah Harahap (@fubilosophy) about my deconversion, the sad state of Christian apologetics, my issues with the skeptic community, free will, the afterlife, agnosticism, and a few other topics.
Fubilosophy
Linktree
What would convince you of God’s existence? Specifically, the Christian God. What would change your mind and cause you to convert?
I name three things: Christian aliens, miracles, and religious experience. That’s not an exhaustive list, but those things would dramatically raise my credence in Christian theism.
I spend the most time talking about religious experiences, mainly for two reasons. First, their epistemic significance is not always appreciated by nonbelievers. Second, I’ve noticed that some Christian apologists really hate it when nonbelievers say the experience of God would convince them of theism and thought that was worth examining.
/ Videos referenced in the episode /
Jimmy Akin & Emerson Green – Debunking the Skeptics on UFOs
The Argument from Miracles (Panel)
Countering the Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus
What would make atheists accept a miracle claim? | C.M. Lorkowski & Real Atheology
5 Mistakes Atheists Make About Epistemology
4 Things I Learned About Epistemology
Phenomenal Conservatism with Michael Huemer
Linktree
The world is religiously ambiguous: It can be interpreted in various incompatible ways, and the interpreters are not necessarily violating any standards of rationality in doing so. As for me, I don’t feel any position being forced on me by the evidence. My best efforts to judge the total balance of evidence weighing for and against theism leave me thinking that no one has a decisive case; and the main way to give the impression of having a decisive case is to ignore the total evidence, focusing solely or primarily on the facts that support your position. Put a spotlight on the things that favor your view, and minimize or cast aside the things that don’t fit.
Over time, I’ve come to appreciate the force of some of the evidence against the hypothesis of indifference and in favor of a “value selection hypothesis“, e.g. psychophysical harmony, fine-tuning, and the axiological trajectory of the universe. These, along with a few other considerations that favor theism more directly, have gradually moved me to more of a middle position on theism vs. atheism. (Today, I don’t dive into a full-fledged defense of those arguments.)
There are plenty of sources of epistemic uncertainty that have increasingly led me to hold on to my beliefs more loosely. How am I supposed to alter my confidence in light of peer disagreement? How should I set my priors? How am I supposed to reckon with the inescapable contingency of my beliefs? Richard Rorty often spoke about a certain kind of philosopher with “radical and continuing doubts about the final vocabulary she currently uses, because she has been impressed by other vocabularies, vocabularies taken as final by people or books she has encountered” (1989). Rorty goes much further, in ways that I can’t get behind. But what can I say? I’m impressed by many of you. The problem is that you have mutually exclusive, incommensurable worldviews. At least for me, at this point, agnosticism seems like the most honest reaction to my epistemic situation. (Of course, God can settle this whenever he likes.)
Linktree
Returning guest John Buck joins me to debate universalism, eternal conscious torment, and other topics related to hell and the afterlife.
My Playlist on Hell
Linktree
I respond to the wildly popular Redeemed Zoomer video about proving God’s existence with math.To see the open hangout that took place afterwards, you can watch the original livestream (unedited with no postscript) on YouTubeLinktree
We wrap up our series on the moral argument for theism, summarize several problems with the argument famously associated with William Lane Craig, and discuss two other moral arguments for God that are not abysmal failures like the standard moral argument.
Linktree
Today, we continue our series on the moral argument for theism. We discuss the Euthyphro dilemma, Hume’s Law, and explore a back-and-forth between William Lane Craig and Michael Huemer on the question, “Why obey God?”Common Mistakes about the Moral Argument | Majesty of ReasonMajesty of Reason – Moral Arguments for God: An AnalysisMichael Huemer – Groundless Morals (this chapter is within the volume of Erik Wielenberg vs. William Lane Craig on the moral argument)Metaethics w/ Michael Huemer | Emerson GreenIs God Necessary for Morality? | William Lane Craig & Shelly KaganMoral Objectivity Without God | Russ Shafer-LandauPost-Debate Interview with Justin Schieber of Real Atheology Linktree
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And morality.
The standard moral argument popularized by William Lane Craig and others goes as follows:
(1) If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.
(2) Objective moral values do exist.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
Today, we cast some doubt on the idea that morality is objective only if God exists. We also define some crucial terms, refute a few apologetic canards, and discuss a few ways in which apologists have misrepresented the field of metaethics and failed the audiences that rely on them.
Here’s the overview of the whole moral argument series. Today, in part one, we’ll be covering sections (1)-(5).
(1) Introduction
(2) Defining Terms
(3) Apologetics vs. Metaethics
(4) “Humans are just animals” (Moral agents vs. patients)
(5) The Moral Law Giver
(6) Euthyphro & Intrinsic Value
(7) Hume’s Law
(8) Why Obey God?
(9) Groundless Morals
(10) Two Classes of Moral Realism
(11) God Cannot Provide the Basis for Objective Morality
(12) Good Moral Arguments
(13) What’s wrong with the moral argument?
A few resources mentioned in this episode:
Majesty of Reason – Moral Realism | Dr. Michael Huemer & Dr. Don Loeb
Is God Necessary for Morality? | William Lane Craig & Shelly Kagan
Moral Objectivity Without God | Russ Shafer-Landau
Support the Show
Linktree
Ayaan Hirsi Ali recently announced her conversion to Christianity. But has she only adopted a form of cultural Christianity? I examine her reasons for becoming a Christian and draw some parallels between Ayaan and another political convert: Andrew Tate.
I think her reasons for adopting Christianity are quite clearly explicated, even though some Christians have been trying very hard to ignore them. She argues that Christianity can sustain the liberal values of the Enlightenment that she cherishes so deeply. Those values are under attack, she says, from Islam, Russia, China, and woke ideology. Every purely secular strategy tried in response has been insufficient. Christianity, on the other hand, could function as a far more effective weapon against her political enemies in this existential clash. But why does it matter that the west prevails over its cultural and geopolitical foes? Christianity can help with that, too – not just on a civilizational level, but individually as well. It’s the antidote to nihilism, the heart of liberalism, a panacea for wokeness and illiberalism. These considerations together lead her to adopt Christianity, even if she doesn’t think it’s actually true.
Maybe in the future, she’ll affirm something more than cultural Christianity. Until then, I’m honestly inclined to see Ayaan’s “conversion” as further vindication of the death of God: even the converts don’t really believe anymore. A good deal of true believers are apparently so desperate for a morale boost, they’re willing to look past that.
Ayaan’s guiding light is liberalism, the Enlightenment, and western civilization. She is a positively zealous believer in what the west represents to her, and this is absolutely crucial to understanding her conversion to Christianity. She may not believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus, but she believes in western civilization. She believes this is the best way – perhaps the only way – to save it from withering.
Watch this episode on YouTube
Linktree
I recently asked for your questions, and I posted my responses on YouTube here. We touch on compatibilism, NDEs, aliens, euthanasia, abortion, death anxiety as an atheist, idealism, incest, Islam, Mormonism, subjectivism, psychophysical harmony, and more. (For those listening via podcast, I left the introduction in to preserve the timestamps for those who want to skip around to different sections.)
00:00 Intro
00:46 Atheistic platonism?
01:22 Why are you gay?
01:30 Are you still a naturalist?
05:47 What kind of compatibilist are you?
09:41 If I settle your debt with PragerU, will you become a libertarian?
10:12 What’s your biggest gripe with physicalism?
12:42 On the abortion debate, when do you think personhood / full moral status begins?
17:22 Do twinks make better philosophers?
17:56 Are you agnostic about anything in philosophy?
19:37 Why are you such a sucker for spooky stuff?
30:49 Who makes those guitar transitions?
32:34 Favorite music?
34:30 Who are some of your favorite Eastern philosophers?
35:03 Which religion would you choose to be true?
40:54 Who are your favorite theist and atheist philosophers?
42:18 Arguing for dualism from mereological nihilism?
45:48 Euthanasia?
48:43 What are your thoughts on each general era of philosophy?
55:00 Thoughts on Jordan Peterson?
58:55 Have you looked into Islam?
1:03:57 Does your mother know you spend so much time talking to strangers on the internet?
1:04:04 What is your opinion on the resurrection?
1:08:23 The best argument against veganism?
1:21:18 What is the primary goal of adopting panpsychism?
1:23:20 Best defenses of objective morality?
1:24:34 How would aliens affect theism and atheism?
1:30:53 Are you a dualist or a physicalist?
1:31:31 Isn’t solipsism simpler than panpsychism?
1:33:37 Thoughts on idealism?
1:35:41 Which political system do you think is right?
1:39:34 Thoughts on metaethical naturalism?
1:41:52 Is incest wrong?
1:45:27 When will you have some Mormons back on your show?
1:46:34 Why atheist and not agnostic? Where can I find good philrel content?
1:49:54 Would necessitarianism defeat fine-tuning and psychophysical harmony?
1:57:38 Do you accept physical causal closure?
2:00:00 How do you explain psychophysical harmony?
2:02:34 Kant’s transcendental idealism and free will?
2:07:56 Are we obligated to refute false beliefs even if they’re meaningful?
2:13:01 Is there any profound nugget of wisdom that Christianity has first or exclusive ownership of?
2:15:17 Analytic/Continental divide?
2:18:05 “Emmerson”
2:19:03 Does the phenomenal powers view weaken psychophysical harmony?
2:22:04 Is time necessary for consciousness?
2:28:49 If you did reconvert, would you be a Christian or a generic theist?
2:32:20 Finite theism?
2:36:22 Top three philosophers who are wrong about everything?
2:37:57 Moral subjectivism with normally functioning humans as the (collective) observer(s) morality is stance-dependent upon?
2:48:52 Are you afraid of death? How do you cope with death anxiety as an atheist?
Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
I’m joined by Andrew Hronich, author of Once Loved, Always Loved: The Logic of Apokatastasis. We discuss universal reconciliation, eternal conscious torment, annihilationism, and much else!
Watch the interview here
Linktree
Here’s my appearance on Adherent Apologetics to talk about the recent series of Counter Apologetics episodes on epistemology.
Where New Atheist Epistemology Goes (Very) Wrong | @EmersonGreen | Ep. #259
5 Mistakes Atheists Make About Epistemology
4 Things I Learned About Epistemology
Epistemology playlist on YouTube
Linktree
Alex Strasser (Protestant) and John Buck (Catholic) debate the merits of finite theism, the view that God is limited in power. Theistic finitism is less vulnerable to the problem of evil than perfect being theism, but are there other trade-offs that make the notion of a finite God less defensible overall?
John is defending the view that strong versions of omnipotence avoid problems of vagueness, arbitrariness, ad hocness, lack of predictive power, and complexity that limited models of God suffer from. John also thinks that a new problem of evil arises that is particular only to limited views of God.
Alex will give a cosmological argument and fine-tuning argument for finite theism, and further argue that omni-theism is not a fruitful research program due to serious issues with coherence and the analysis of omni-properties. Theistic finitism is rarely discussed in the philosophy of religion, and Alex wants to invite us to take finite theism more seriously and to investigate it carefully.
Debate: Is God Finite?
Previous limited god debate
Linktree
Dr. Michael Huemer joins me to defend interactionist substance dualism, the view that the mind and body are composed of different substances and can exert causal influence over each other. Knowledge, Reality, and Value: A Mostly Common Sense Guide to Philosophy Linktree
Today I’m speaking with Dr. Dale Allison, historian and author of many books, including The Resurrection of Jesus, The Historical Christ and the Theological Jesus, and our subject today, Encountering Mystery: Religious Experience in a Secular Age. The subtitle of the book notwithstanding, the unusual experiences we discuss are not explicitly religious. They’re usually interpreted … Continue reading CA121 Encountering Mystery w/ Dale Allison →
Today, I defend the controversial idea that ordinary and extraordinary claims don’t require the same evidence. Linktree
LDS Philosophy and Dry Apologist join me for a debate on the nature of God. We compare the virtues of a limited model of God versus a model on which God is unlimited in power, as well as simple, impassible, etc. Are the classical models of God too impersonal and abstract, incapable of sustaining a … Continue reading CA120 Debate: Limited vs. Unlimited God →
We close out our series on atheism and epistemology with the epistemic value of intuition, the issue of lacktheism, and whether or not I’ve been charitable to my fellow atheists throughout these episodes. Linktree
Can we really trust the testimony of others? Does testimony provide any evidence or justification for a claim? I defend the idea that we should trust testimony, and that the epistemic value of testimonial evidence is supported by induction, the principle of charity in interpretation, and coherence. Linktree
This is part two of a five-part series. For even more on epistemology, check out Walden Pod for a completely different epistemology series. Understanding Knowledge – Michael Huemer Linktree
There are a number of slogans one hears in the online atheist community, some of them purporting to be epistemic principles or rules of thumb. Unfortunately, many of them are only correct if we interpret them very narrowly and often not in the way they were intended, while others are just plain wrong. Today, we’ll … Continue reading CA116 Mistakes Atheists Make About Epistemology: “There is no evidence for God.” →
Justin Schieber joins me for a lighthearted breakdown of his debate with Eric Hernandez on the existence of God. We critique the arguments put forward by Eric, discuss the evidence presented by Justin, and talk about a few of our favorite moments from the debate.Huge shoutout to Capturing Christianity for organizing the debate, and to the beautiful Lanier Theological Library for hosting the event.Does God Exist? Justin Schieber vs. Eric Hernandez (CC Exchange 2023)Real Atheology’s channelPatreon | Counter Apologetics Linktree
Is the kind, degree, and distribution of animal suffering evidence against theism? We discuss why teleological evil, the scale of suffering in evolutionary history, and the moral randomness of animal pain is strong evidence against the existence of God.
Transcript
YouTube
Tip Jar
Linktree
Perspective Philosophy and I recently had a friendly debate about the problem of evil, metaethics, the contingency argument, and how he maintains his worldview as a catholic and vegan.
The Conversation
Post-debate debrief – Patreon
Linktree
Two Catholics (Dry Apologist & John Buck) and two atheists (Emerson Green & Chris Rhodes) talk about lesser-known arguments for theism and against theism. Chris joins us a little later, but he makes it in time to rack up several casualties on the battlefield of ideas. Originally hosted on Dry Apologist’s channel.00:00 Introduction04:00 Evidential Complementarity08:20 Common Consent Argument27:00 Argument from Desire35:35 Argument from Unjust Distribution of Propensities to Sin1:12:30 Meager Moral Fruits ArgumentAnimal Suffering is Evidence Against Theism (Patron-only bonus episode) Linktree
Is there any moral clash between the depiction of Yahweh and Jesus Christ?
Catholic Answers recently responded to a question I had originally asked when I was 19. On Twitter, I’d recounted an experience I had with Frank Turek when I was struggling to hold onto my faith:
“I remember asking Frank Turek in person during a Q&A how he reconciled the portrayals of God in the OT & NT, since it seemed like there was a personality change. He said, “There wasn’t one. Next question.” Anyway, I deconverted a week later.”
Joe Heschmeyer, writing for catholic.com, made a much more respectable and empathetic attempt to answer the question, which we’ll be taking a (critical) look at today.
God’s Personality Change? – Catholic Answers
Good God? – David Bentley Hart
Slavery in the Bible – Counter Apologetics
Transcript of this episode
Subscribe on YouTube here
Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here
Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here
Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod
For those who are curious, I asked Frank Turek the question in August 2014 in Manitou Springs, Colorado. I attended a two-week apologetics camp called Summit.
linktr.ee/emersongreen
I was recently invited on Thoughtful Faith’s channel to share my thoughts about why LDS theology may have a few philosophical advantages over more mainstream versions of Christianity. For example, Mormons reject perfect being theism in favor of a limited god, which opens up new avenues in responding to arguments from evil that are not available to other Christians. Rather than forwarding creation ex nihilo, Mormons believe the universe is eternal. God is a part of nature rather than outside it; he organized our universe from pre-existing material. Latter-day Saints also reject the standard, logically incoherent view of the trinity. Strikingly, they reject the notion of eternal conscious torment for the vast majority of non-Christians. Universalism (or something like it) is the default view in the LDS Church.
This is not “Christianity plus implausible stuff” – this is Christianity minus implausible stuff. Unless, that is, you consider eternal conscious torment, creation ex nihilo, and the baffling notion that our world was created by a perfect being to be valuable aspects of Christianity that somehow increase its plausibility.
The original clip on Thoughtful Faith’s channel
Why would a loving God create a place of ETERNAL torment? (feat. Emerson Green)
Full conversation with LDS Philosophy and Thoughtful Faith
My Linktree
Philip Goff and Dustin Crummett debate psychophysical harmony, God, axiarchism, pan-agentialism, natural teleology, and explore some neglected terrain between theism and the hypothesis of indifference. What are our options in explaining the fine-tuning of consciousness?
Subscribe on YouTube
Twitter @waldenpod @Philip_Goff @dustin_crummett
Dustin’s Channel
Mind Chat
Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here
Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here
Music by ichika Nito & Whalers. Used with permission.
linktr.ee/emersongreen
I’m joined by Dr. Randal Rauser to discuss his new book, The Doubter’s Creed: How to Be a Christian When You Don’t Believe It’s True. We discuss the uniquely creedal character of Christianity, the credibility of doxastic voluntarism (the view that we can choose our beliefs at will), prudential reasons to hope Christianity is true, the dispute between William James and W.K. Clifford over belief without sufficient evidence, universalism, eternal conscious torment, religious disagreement, and whether non-Christians can be saved.
The Doubter’s Creed (currently $8.99 on Amazon)
Randalrauser.com
linktr.ee/emersongreen
Should we address popular versions of theism? Or should we address the best, most defensible versions of theism?
To pursue the question of God’s existence, we must engage with the best forms of theism, not the worst. As Michael Huemer put it, “Who cares if you can refute the craziest version of a view? … The way to learn is to address the most interesting defensible views, not to spend our time discussing trivially false ideas.” Even if those trivially false ideas are widespread, wield lots of influence in the world, and are positively dangerous, they’re still trivially false. At worst, it’s deeply dishonest to refute the worst version of an idea, stop there, and act as if the entire idea has been refuted.
Depending on one’s goals, however, addressing the strongest forms of theism might seem like a waste of time. If you’re primarily concerned with atheist activism, helping others, and reducing the harm brought about by religion, why spend any time on things that have no significant influence in the world? The activists are generally more concerned with attacking the truth of influential beliefs that make the world worse. Philosophers are generally more concerned with addressing the best versions of each side, since that’s the best way of figuring out whether we should be theists, atheists, or agnostics. Though both are valuable and worthwhile projects, the main issue with the activist crowd is that they seem to think they’re the best at both, despite never engaging with the strongest versions of the view they reject.
Subscribe on YouTube
Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here
Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here
Music by ichika Nito & Whalers. Used with permission.
Transcript
Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod
linktr.ee/emersongreen
linktr.ee/emersongreen
Subscribe on YouTube
Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here
Music by ichika Nito & Whalers. Used with permission.
Follow on Twitter @waldenpod
Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here
Ben Watkins of Real Atheology joins me to discuss the meager moral fruits argument, a few objections to the argument, and why we’re interested in it in the first place.Subscribe to Real Atheology on YouTube and on iTunes Follow us on Twitter @waldenpod @RealAtheology @SpeedWatkins Subscribe on YouTubeListen to our sister show, Walden Pod hereSupport the podcast at Patreon.com/counterlinktr.ee/emersongreen/ Timestamps /00:00 Housekeeping1:41 To the Christians in my life3:43 Introducing Ben from RA6:06 Why I’m interested in the MMFA9:49 The Meager Moral Fruits Argument42:51 Open Hangout
Dr. Brian Cutter joins me to discuss his paper, ‘Psychophysical Harmony: A New Argument for Theism‘, coauthored with Dr. Dustin Crummett.
After talking about epiphenomenalism and why William James’ argument against it works against all views in philosophy of mind (with the lone exception of Type-A materialism), we explain why psychophysical harmony seems so improbable. We also discuss what I consider to be one of the weirder features of physicalism – the metaphysical impossibility of inverts, zombies, disharmony, and so on – and why one’s views about metaphysical modality won’t help you escape the argument from psychophysical harmony. In addition to touching on a few objections, we also talk about the underdetermination of the data, and why psychophysical harmony may be equally good evidence for some hypotheses of those who exist in The Nagel Zone.
Subscribe on YouTube
Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here
Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here
Music by ichika Nito & Whalers. Used with permission.
Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod
linktr.ee/emersongreen
The participation theodicy holds, reasonably enough, that it would be good to create an ideal world. Since it would be good for God to do so, it would also be good for us to do so (as well as any other beings). The goodness would only be multiplied through our participation and contribution to the … Continue reading CA107 The Participation Theodicy — w/ John Buck →
I’m joined by Counter Apologist and Ryan from Real Atheology to discuss eternal conscious torment. First, we take a closer look at the views of William Lane Craig, who famously denies the possibility of an actual infinite in the context of the kalam, yet seems to argue that the guilt of those who reject God … Continue reading CA106 One Hell of a Problem – w/ Real Atheology & Counter Apologist →
Dr. Michael Huemer joins me to discuss moral realism vs. antirealism, ethical intuitionism, phenomenal conservatism, moral disagreement, and much else in moral philosophy. (This aired originally on YouTube and Walden Pod.) Ethical Intuitionism Knowledge, Reality, and Value: A Mostly Common Sense Guide to Philosophy William Lane Craig vs. Erik Wielenberg Linktree / The Five … Continue reading Metaethics & Moral Realism w/ Michael Huemer →
This is my response to Catholic apologist Trent Horn’s recent video entitled “5 Atheist Double Standards.” (The first minute is a cold open. It makes more sense if you’re watching the video version.) Watch on YouTube Interview on the Sentientism podcast The Meager Moral Fruits Argument My devil’s advocate debate Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod … Continue reading CA105 Responding to Trent Horn’s “5 Atheist Double Standards” →
This is my appearance on Ben Burgis’s channel. Ben and I listen to and comment on a debate between Christopher Hitchens and David Berlinkski over the motion “Atheism poisons everything. The video Linktree
Naturalism Next joins me to discuss “the cognitive science argument against theism.” We talk about the psychology of religion, hyperactive agency detection, signaling theory, and more on the evolutionary origins of religious belief. Crucially, theories from modern cognitive science of religion are antecedently more likely on naturalism than on theism, and so provide good evidence … Continue reading CA104 How did religion evolve? w/ Naturalism Next →
I’m joined by Christian Idealism and Invoking Theism to discuss how they see the Fall as non-young earth creationists. This was an impromptu recording in my hotel room at the Capturing Christianity conference in Houston. (You also might recognize the introductions from the previous episode.) Subscribe on YouTube Consider supporting the show on Patreon here … Continue reading Bonus: The Fall – w/ Christian Idealism & Invoking Theism →
I’m joined by Christian Idealism and Invoking Theism to discuss the problem of evil, the defeat condition, eternal conscious torment, alternative models of the afterlife, and whether we can have sex in hell. We’re also joined on mic by John Buck for a few minutes. This was an impromptu recording in my hotel room at … Continue reading CA103 Defeat, Evil, & Hell – w/ Christian Idealism & Invoking Theism →
I outline a version of Christianity that doesn’t suffer from some of the problems that I find the most troubling. Universalism, in conjunction with a handful of other views, seems capable of smoothing over some of my biggest reasons for rejecting theism. This is a clip from a longer interview on Adherent Apologetics. We didn’t … Continue reading CA102 The Most Plausible Form of Christianity →
I’m joined by the author of “30 Arguments Against The Existence of ‘God’: Heaven, Hell, Satan, and Divine Design” to discuss five arguments raised in his new book. Watch the interview on YouTube here Jonathan’s column on OnlySky Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here linktr.ee/emersongreen
Emerson Green defends the motion “God probably does not exist” against John Buck. Moderated by the Non-Alchemist. YouTube: A Catholic and an Atheism Debate God and Religion Transcript of Emerson’s opening statement Follow John on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/WriterJohnBuck & Emerson here: https://twitter.com/waldenpod Support the podcast at patreon.com/counter linktr.ee/emersongreen Roadmap: Introduction (2 min) John’s Opening Statement … Continue reading CA100 A Catholic and an Atheist Debate God →
There are many famous examples of unintelligent design in nature, but what about malevolent design? Some natural systems are aimed at producing suffering: they cause suffering by acting in accordance with their natural purpose, function, or design plan. Why would we infer a benevolent, omnipotent designer from malevolent design? The fact that predation – a … Continue reading CA99 – Teleological Evil →
Here’s my appearance on Dry Apologist’s channel. We discuss arguments from evil, theodicies, and answer questions from the audience. The interview: https://youtu.be/WEBSV1HF9sE Linktree
We conclude our Devil’s Advocate series with religious experience, a summary of the arguments we’ve discussed, and why I’m still an atheist. I also offer a few thoughts on the debate between atheists and theists. The Full Series Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here Subscribe on YouTube Listen to our sister show, … Continue reading CA98 Religious Experience & Conclusion (Devil’s Advocate pt. 3) →
We conclude our Devil’s Advocate series with religious experience, a summary of the arguments we’ve discussed, and why I’m still an atheist. I also offer a few thoughts on the debate between atheists and theists. The Full Series Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here Subscribe on YouTube Listen to our … Continue reading CA98 Religious Experience & Conclusion (Devil’s Advocate pt. 3) →
I recently participated in a “devil’s advocate” debate on God’s existence. Today, we continue to take a closer look at the arguments I raised. We discuss the common consent argument, epistemic authorities, soteriology, universalism, eternal conscious torment, religious diversity, and divine hiddenness. This is part two of a three-part series. The full series is available … Continue reading CA97 Widespread Theistic Belief & Religious Disagreement (Devil’s Advocate pt. 2) →
I recently participated in a “devil’s advocate” debate on God’s existence. Today, we take a closer look at the arguments I raised. We talk about the general approach of building a cumulative case for naturalism and theism, the argument from the existence of consciousness, and the argument from psychophysical harmony. This is part one of … Continue reading CA96 Debunking Myself on God (pt. 1) →
I recently participated in a “devil’s advocate” debate on God’s existence. I defended theism, and my opponent, a Catholic, defended atheism. Emerson Green vs. Kyle Alander (Christian Idealism) Transcript of Opening Statement Linktree
Dr. Dustin Crummett joins me to discuss a new argument from consciousness for theism. Though psychophysical harmony is evidence for theism, it may be equally good evidence for non-theistic hypotheses that I find interesting, like axiarchism and natural teleology. **In the initial presentation of the argument (the first ten minutes or so), we assume that … Continue reading CA95 The Argument from Psychophysical Harmony w/ Dustin Crummett →
Take a look at nearly any book on critical thinking and you’ll come across a list of fallacies: ad hominem, argument from ignorance, appeal to emotion, appeal to authority, post hoc ergo propter hoc, god of the gaps, and so on. The problem is that many of these “fallacies” closely resemble good lines of reasoning. … Continue reading CA94 Logical Fallacies? →
Jonathan MS Pearce is an author, speaker, and columnist who recently wrote an article on the meager moral fruits argument. Jonathan invited me on his YouTube channel, A Tippling Philosopher, to speak about the argument and a few common criticisms offered in response to it. We also discuss state atheism, liberalism, favorite books, and open … Continue reading Meager Moral Fruits Discussion – Guest Appearance on Jonathan MS Pearce’s Show →
Tarik D. LaCour is a Ph.D. student in philosophy and an M.S. student in psychology. He is a philosopher and cognitive scientist whose primary research interests are in the philosophy of psychology, cognitive science, and bioethics. He also writes about politics “from a conservative point of view,” and also on religion, from his perspective as … Continue reading CA93 Is Mormonism the Best Version of Christianity? — with Tarik D. LaCour →
Does Christianity bear the kind of fruit one might expect if it were true? Does naturalism or Christian theism better predict the moral fruits and lack thereof that we actually observe? Naturalists would expect Christianity to produce a mixed bag, like any other man-made institution. Christianity leads one to form loftier expectations. There’s much more … Continue reading CA92 The Meager Moral Fruits Argument →
I’m joined by Scott Clifton (Theoretical Bullshit) to discuss free will skepticism, compatibilism, moral responsibility, revenge, and killing coyotes. Video version – Is free will an illusion? Scott’s channel Follow me @waldenpod and TBS @TheoreticalBS Consider supporting Counter Apologetics here or Walden Pod here linktr.ee/emersongreen
For the believer who advances the argument from miracles, the question of why God won’t heal amputees can be a thorn in the side. If God is willing to perform healing miracles – miracles that should convince anyone – why hasn’t God restored the lost limbs of amputees? Consider supporting the show YouTube Follow me … Continue reading CA91 Why won’t God heal amputees? →
Original video on YouTube – From YEC to Atheist My Channel Twitter @waldenpod linktr.ee/emersongreen
I argue that the notion of eternal conscious torment (ECT) leads to absurdities, and that theists can easily avoid these absurdities by abandoning ECT. For example, a believer in ECT must defend the following proposition: “A perfectly good, merciful, just, and loving God superintends the eternal conscious torment of human beings.” This proposition is incoherent … Continue reading CA90 Hell: Eternal Conscious Torment →
Arguments from contingency are widely considered to be among the strongest offered in defense of God. The results of the 2020 PhilPapers Survey have cosmological arguments ranked as the strongest family of arguments for theism. So why don’t I spend more time worrying about cosmological and contingency arguments? Even those unfamiliar with cosmological arguments will … Continue reading CA89 Why I don’t spend more time on contingency arguments →
Naturalists, according to David Papinau, author of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on naturalism, urge “that reality is exhausted by nature, containing nothing ‘supernatural’.” Naturalism “has no very precise meaning in contemporary philosophy” beyond this, along with an emphasis on science as a means to understand the natural world. Naturalism is the view that … Continue reading What is Naturalism? – Walden Pod →
The Discovery Institute, an ID thinktank, has a list of “Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design.” On this list is an article authored by Michael Behe, alleging to prove the irreducible complexity of certain protein binding sites. However, his experiment demonstrated the exact opposite point as intended. He had to … Continue reading CA88 ID Theorist Accidentally Produces Evidence Against Intelligent Design →
watch the video version here Support at patreon.com/counter or /waldenpod Follow on Twitter @waldenpod Transcript Linktree Answers in Reason – Ten Questions for Theists Braxton Hunter – Ten Questions for Atheists my responses to Braxton and here are links to a few of the arguments I mentioned in Question 7: Schellenberg’s argument from hiddenness Rowe’s … Continue reading 7 Questions for Christians →
We’ll be exploring what the discovery of evolution potentially means for religion. Is evolution evidence against theism? If so, why? Is it incompatible with Christianity, as some Christians maintain? What is the conceptual landscape vis-à-vis evolution and theism—as in, what is the range of potential options available to a religious believer when it comes to … Continue reading CA87 God & Evolution →
Human beings seem cosmically unimportant. Though certainly from God’s perspective, we are more important than stars, rocks, vast stretches of empty space and time, and other things that don’t seem to possess any value in and of themselves, the latter group seems to have been afforded the lion’s share of the cosmos. Human beings, presumably … Continue reading CA86 The Argument from Scale →
Today, I’m speaking with The Non-Alchemist about the trials and tribulations of deconversion, reasons for being an atheist, lacktheism, Calvinism, Christian double-standards regarding testimonial evidence, the state of apologetics, what stuff is real, and more. Here’s this interview on YouTube with video (this episode was recorded on Streamyard and originally posted on YouTube). NA’s channel … Continue reading CA85 Conversation with The Non-Alchemist: Deconversion, Atheism, and Apologetics →
Here’s my debate with Zac of Adherent Apologetics on the problem of evil, hosted by the Non–Alchemist. I focus on the problem of animal suffering and defend an argument called the teleological argument from evil. Video of the debate here linktr.ee/emersongreen Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Rate the show on iTunes here … Continue reading Debate: Is evil strong evidence against God? →
There are five reasons, broadly, why I’m an atheist: I. We don’t need God to explain anything. II. There are few phenomena that are better explained by theistic models than by atheistic models. III. There are many phenomena that are better explained by atheistic models than by theistic models. IV. Theism is more metaphysically profligate … Continue reading CA84 Why I Am An Atheist →
Today we discuss the evergreen critique of the design argument from David Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. Hume’s skepticism is aimed at the inference to a designer on the basis of our observations of natural objects and their analogy to human artifacts. When two objects are similar effects – say a house and another house … Continue reading CA83 Hume on the Argument from Design →
Happy birthday, David Hume! I thought I’d share Hume (or more accurately, Philo) casually destroying skeptical theism in Part XI of Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. His analogy of an architect and a poorly constructed house arose in a discussion of the problem of evil between Philo and Cleanthes, two of Hume’s fictional characters in the … Continue reading Condemn the Architect: Hume’s Answer to Skeptical Theists (Bonus Episode) →
Can you be an “agnostic atheist,” or are those terms mutually exclusive? I try to explain how the famous four quadrant graph misunderstands the nature of belief, knowledge, and agnosticism. the chart in question Joe Schmid on Agnosticism and Justification [YouTube] Gettier and knowledge with Kane B and Cole Nasrallah [YouTube] What is knowledge? [SEP] … Continue reading CA82 What the ‘agnostic atheist’ graph gets wrong →
Here’s the audio from my recent debate hosted by Adherent Apologetics on the problem of evil. I argue that with respect to suffering, the world looks about as we’d expect it to look if god did not exist. Atheists can do a much better job explaining the kinds, degree, and distribution of suffering we observe … Continue reading Debate: Is evil evidence against God? Emerson Green vs. Dr. Khaldoun Aziz Sweis →
We discuss several reasons to doubt skeptical theism, including Paul Draper’s objection, phenomenal conservatism, divine silence during tragedies, Pandora’s box, and moral paralysis. linktr.ee/emersongreen Subscribe to CA and Walden Pod on YouTube here Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Rate the show on iTunes here Support on Patreon here Transcripts available at emersongreenblog.wordpress.com … Continue reading CA81 Skeptical Theism →
Non-believing Christian Philip Goff joins us to discuss religious fictionalism, literalism, religious language, Jordan Peterson, the resurrection, the spread of Christianity, the transcendent, and Christianity without theism. After the interview, I try to work through my thoughts on secular Christianity. I reflect on antitheism, fundamentalism, and what replaces religion after the death of god. Philip … Continue reading CA80 Secular Christianity with Philip Goff →
In his 1997 debate with William Lane Craig, Paul Draper considers seven lines of evidence and asks if they are more expected on theism or on naturalism. He argues that the meager moral fruits of theism, mind-brain dependence, evolution, the biological role of pain and pleasure, tragedies, divine silence during tragedies, and religious confusion are … Continue reading CA79 Paul Draper’s Case for Naturalism →
This Halloween, we’ll be discussing the life and work of the great horror author, H.P. Lovecraft. Lovecraft’s atheism 00:00 – 07:38 Biographical details 07:39 – 12:50 Lovecraft’s reanimation and influence on culture 12:51 – 18:02 Lovecraft and the unknown 18:03 – 20:22 Forbidden knowledge and a New Dark Age 20:23 – 26:14 Fast zombies 26:15 … Continue reading The Atheism & Mythos of H.P. Lovecraft →
This is the audio from my appearance on The Empathetic Atheist YouTube show. Justin & Andy ask me what I take to be the best argument against god and what I take to be the worst argument for god. I apologize for the audio (as well as the video) quality. I don’t know how to … Continue reading Bonus: The EA Show – Interview with Emerson Green →
Young earth creationists believe that the earth, humankind, and the universe are approximately six-thousand years old. Scientifically, this is a fringe view, not taken seriously by anyone outside religious circles. However, the majority of Christians in the United States are young earthers. Today, we discuss one particular problem for young earth cosmologies: the distant starlight … Continue reading CA78 Young Earth Creationism & the Distant Starlight Problem →
Abiogenesis is the process by which life arises from non-living matter. Though life’s origin is an open question, abiogenesis research is a thriving interdisciplinary enterprise. In spite of this, many apologists have argued that it’s unlikely we will ever have a scientific explanation of abiogenesis. Abiogenesis is so improbable on naturalism, they say, that we … Continue reading CA77 Since Matter First Writhed: The Mystery of Abiogenesis →
We complete our trilogy on igtheism and discuss epistemic questions about god’s attributes, the historical development of god’s nature, the experience of god, god’s relationship with logical truths, absence of evidence, and address the inevitable retreat into transcendence. Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Rate the show on … Continue reading CA76 The Incoherence of God (pt. III) →
We define our terms, address Graham Oppy’s claim that igtheism is self-defeating, discuss logical positivism and its relationship with igtheism, and present an igtheist divine hiddenness argument. Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Rate the show on iTunes here Support on Patreon here Subscribe to CA and Walden Pod on YouTube here Transcripts … Continue reading CA75 The Incoherence of God (pt. II) →
Can we make any sense of the idea of god? God is supposed to be an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, timeless, spaceless, immutable, disembodied conscious mind. We begin our series on igtheism by discussing several problems with these divine attributes. Is god unintelligible? Is this episode unintelligible? You’ll have to be the judge. Listen to our … Continue reading CA74 The Incoherence of God (pt. I) →
Why did the Romans kill Jesus? When I was a Christian, I was taught that the Jews were primarily responsible for the death of Jesus. The Romans may have carried it out, but it was ultimately motivated by Jesus’s conflict with Jewish authorities over his transgressions of Jewish law (calling himself god, blasphemy, etc.). Crucifixion, … Continue reading CA73 Why Was Jesus Killed? →
I’m joined by Aaron Rabinowitz of Embrace the Void and Philosophers in Space to discuss moral luck, moral judgement, and whether it’s ever justified to hate a person. Our first discussion on The Right to Reason Podcast: https://therighttoreason.podbean.com/e/panpsychism-debate/ Thomas Nagel – Moral Luck [PDF] Galen Strawson – Things That Bother Me [Amazon] Moral Luck [Stanford … Continue reading CA72 Moral Luck and Free Will Skepticism with Aaron Rabinowitz →
We discuss Occam’s Razor and simplicity, the principle of sufficient reason, and brute facts. Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR): The principle that everything must have an explanation, reason, cause, or ground. Brute fact: Something with no further explanation. Edit I used “brute fact” to simply mean “explanatory termination” in this episode. A brute fact, however, … Continue reading CA71 Leibniz’s Argument from Contingency →
In 1927, Bertrand Russell delivered a now-famous address entitled ‘Why I Am Not A Christian’. We examine Russell’s contribution to one of the most important questions you can ask yourself: should I be a Christian? Today we discuss the argument from design, the fine-tuning argument, the problem of evil, and the Euthyphro dilemma. “Three passions, … Continue reading CA70 Why I Am Not A Christian (pt. II) →
In 1927, Bertrand Russell delivered a now-famous address entitled ‘Why I Am Not A Christian’. We examine Russell’s contribution to one of the most important questions you can ask yourself: should I be a Christian? Today we discuss who counts as a Christian, the first cause argument (as well as a couple other arguments in … Continue reading CA69 Why I Am Not A Christian (pt. I) →
Ozy and I discuss whether atheists have faith, and whether it’s naive for atheists to hold a reflexively anti-faith position. We also discuss Hume’s problem of induction, external world skepticism, solipsism, properly basic beliefs, certainty, Alvin Plantinga’s Reformed foundationalism, reliabilism and our belief-forming mechanisms, presuppositionalism, movement atheism, and other various issues in epistemology. You can … Continue reading CA68 Do Atheists Need Faith? with Ozymandias Ramses II →
We discuss the A and B theories of time and how they relate to the kalam cosmological argument. Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Rate the show on iTunes here Support on Patreon here or give a one-time donation through Venmo (@emersongreenpodcast) Subscribe to CA and Walden Pod on YouTube here Contact me … Continue reading CA67 Kalam Cosmological Argument: The Nature of Time →
We discuss the relationship between atheism, consciousness, and materialism after debunking arguments from consciousness formulated by Peter Kreeft and William Lane Craig. We also discuss why it’s important for naturalists to think carefully about these issues. I suspect that seemingly unrelated problems arise from our lack of a convincing story about consciousness. Consciousness and related … Continue reading CA66 Materialism, Consciousness, and Atheism →
Ben Watkins joins me to discuss the moral argument for god’s existence, objective moral truth, the is/ought gap, meta-ethics, and other related topics. You can listen to Ben’s podcast, Real Atheology, here Moral Non-Naturalism [Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy] Listen to The Bible Says What!? here Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Rate the … Continue reading CA65 God and Objective Morality — with Ben Watkins of Real Atheology →
This Halloween, we’ll be discussing the life and work of the great horror author, H.P. Lovecraft. Lovecraft’s atheism 00:00 – 07:38 Biography 07:39 – 12:50 Lovecraft’s reanimation and influence on culture 12:51 – 18:02 Lovecraft and the unknown 18:03 – 20:22 Forbidden knowledge and a New Dark Age 20:23 – 26:14 Fast zombies 26:15 – … Continue reading H.P. Lovecraft – Halloween Special →
Why is the demand for exorcism on the rise? We discuss the belief in demonic possession, the concurrent rise of anti-science attitudes, the cultural role of religious psychology, and the evolutionary origins of demons. Tracie Harris of The Atheist Experience – Exorcisms and Anthropology [YouTube] Vatican to hold exorcist training course after ‘rise in possessions’ … Continue reading CA64 Exorcism and the Rise in Demonic Possession →
Slavery, the practice of owning people as property, is never condemned in the Holy Bible. In fact, it’s endorsed by God personally in Leviticus 25. We discuss the character of Biblical slavery, and respond to seven common apologetics in defense of the slavery in the Bible. Nonstampcollector – Context [YouTube] Matt Dillahunty – Biblical Slavery … Continue reading CA63 Slavery in the Bible →
We discuss relativism, Kierkegaard’s “leap of faith,” the argument from personal experience, certainty, and how it all relates to Plantinga’s Reformed epistemology. To those of you who may be wondering why we’re covering Reformed epistemology: Alvin Plantinga is one of the most respected Christian philosophers alive. He once served as the president of the American … Continue reading CA62 Reformed Epistemology, the Sequel →
We discuss Alvin Plantinga’s reformed epistemology, and ask whether belief in god is “properly basic.” We also discuss Cartesian skepticism, the notion of a divine sense or “sensus divinitatis,” and which beliefs should be considered properly basic. We also spend some time on the age-old question of “What is the difference between god and trees?” … Continue reading CA61 Reformed Epistemology →
Does Christianity, and religion generally, naturally lead to skepticism and apathy towards climate change? We discuss the apocalypticism, otherworldliness, and the just-world belief of Christianity, and their effects on our priorities and beliefs. Blinded by Eschatological Light – William Bradford Nichols [Humanist] Climate Change and Religion (Special Issue) – Journal for the Study of Religion, … Continue reading CA60 Christianity vs. Climate Change →
We discuss Michael Behe’s persistent misunderstanding of exaptation and natural selection, and read a defense of the notion of irreducible complexity. Michael Behe “addresses” exaptation [Evolution News] Philosophy of Biology – Anthology [Amazon] Some resources on natural selection: Richard Dawkins on Natural Selection [YouTube] Dawkins – Natural Selection [YouTube] Dawkins – Natural Selection II [YouTube] … Continue reading CA59 Irreducible Complexity Revisited →
Today we continue our discussion of near-death experiences. The debate over how to interpret NDEs, on some level, is an argument over substance dualism. As best we can tell, you do not have a brain — you are a brain. The way believers want to interpret these experiences hinges on a particular understanding of mind … Continue reading CA58 NDEs pt. II →
Near-Death Experiences (NDEs) have received much attention in recent years. Are they evidence of an afterlife or merely evidence of our fear of death? UPDATE A version of the out-of-body experiment I mentioned around 13:00 has been run. The results were negative. Unique photos were placed on high shelves, and not a single person was … Continue reading CA57 NDEs (Near-Death Experiences) pt. I →
Walden Pod [iTunes] YouTube channel for Walden and CA [YouTube] Walden Pod Patreon or give a one-time donation through Venmo (@emersongreenpodcast) You can find me on Facebook or email me at emersongreen@protonmail.com
There seems to be significant overlap between the flat earth and young earth communities. One explanation for this is that those with poor judgement and critical faculties are drawn into multiple conspiracies, hoaxes, and pseudo-scientific beliefs. However, the connection between flat-eartherism and young-eartherism runs much deeper than that. The history reveals the Biblical roots of … Continue reading CA56 The Flat Earth and Creationism →
We discuss secularism, liberalism, and the wall of separation between church and state. Secularism, in a political context, is the principle of separating religious institutions and government, and it’s the best way – maybe the only way – to guarantee freedom of belief. Secularism is the only serious game in town for anyone trying to … Continue reading CA55 Separation of Church and State →
“You were never a true Christian.” “Love the sinner, hate the sin.” “It’s not a religion, it’s a relationship.” Atheists Before Darwin [AtheistRepublic] No True Scotsman [YourLogicalFallacyIs] Michael Gungor Interview [Nomad] (I can’t find the one I heard a year or two ago, which was just Michael without his wife. You can read more about him on … Continue reading CA54 Three Things Christians Should Stop Saying →
We continue our discussion of Michael Behe’s latest case for intelligent design. Not only does his “First Rule of Adaptive Evolution” betray his lack of understanding of natural selection, it also conflicts with empirical data. In his attempt to respond to these empirical difficulties, he creates even more problems for himself. We also discuss the … Continue reading CA53 Darwin Devolves (pt. II) →
Michael Behe recently published his latest case against naturalistic evolution and in favor of intelligent design: Darwin Devolves. Behe also authored Darwin’s Black Box, a creationist favorite, coined the term “irreducible complexity,” and was a key part of the famous Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in Pennsylvania. He’s also a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, … Continue reading CA52 Darwin Devolves: Michael Behe’s Case for Intelligent Design (pt. I) →
Irreducible complexity (IC) has become one of the most popular arguments in favor of intelligent design, if not the most popular. The biochemist and ID proponent Michael Behe coined the term in his book Darwin’s Black Box, bringing the notion of IC to prominence. Certain biological systems, the argument goes, cannot have evolved by small … Continue reading CA51 Irreducible Complexity →
We discuss the moral argument for god’s existence, religious fictionalism, anti-theism, 20th century atrocities, and being good without god. The discussion of Craig’s moral argument isn’t a comprehensive treatment, but I had to get him in there if we were going to address the question posed in the title. Craig has stated that on naturalism, … Continue reading CA50 “If there’s no god, why not rape and murder?” →
The biologist Stephen J. Gould proposed a solution to the apparent friction between religion and science: rather than being in outright conflict, science and religion each preside over distinct, non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA). Science can tell us nothing of the supernatural, and religion can only give us values, meaning, morality, and purpose. We discuss the utter … Continue reading CA49 Science vs. the Supernatural: the Failure of NOMA and the Triumph of Naturalism →
“Any responsible historian, then, who seeks to give an account of the matter, must deal with these four independently established facts.” William Lane Craig has four non-negotiable, “established facts” that we apparently need to explain as non-believers. (1) Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arimathea in the tomb. (2) On the Sunday following his crucifixion, … Continue reading CA48 William Lane Craig’s Four Facts about the Resurrection →
If god cannot err, and the Bible is the word of god, shouldn’t we expect the Bible to be inerrant? And yet, we can find plenty of examples of the Bible making mistakes and even contradicting itself, and this would seem to imply that the Bible is not the word of god. Apologists have answered … Continue reading CA47 Ten Contradictions in the Bible →
“[Religion] is the opium of the people,” said Karl Marx. This remark has been widely quoted and often misunderstood. While religion is an illusion that provides escape from the real world, it emerges from conditions that require illusions. There’s a well-established inverse correlation between societal health and religiosity, lending some credence to Marx’s view. But … Continue reading CA46 Is Religion the Opium of the People? — Marx and Religion →
What is Evangelical Christianity? Why is anyone surprised that Evangelicals love the president? We discuss the characteristics of Evangelical Christianity, speculate about its future, and wonder how everyone isn’t an anti-theist at this point. Eviction – Whalers [YouTube] Secular Talk – Franklin Graham [YouTube] Robert Wright Show – Sarah Posner [YouTube] Chapo Trap House [iTunes] … Continue reading Evangelical Christianity — Bonus →
We discuss how we’re supposed to get to heaven in the first place, substance dualism, emergence, the population demographics of heaven, religious epistemology, and dying as a naturalist. Contact me at emersongreen@protonmail.com or on Facebook Support on Patreon Read transcripts of the podcast at the Counter Apologetics Blog Rate the show on iTunes! Listen to … Continue reading CA45 Heaven, pt. II →
We discuss the possibility of god tinkering with our natures after death, free will in heaven, Satan, and god’s bizarre sense of justice. Contact me at emersongreen@protonmail.com or on Facebook Support on Patreon Rate the show on iTunes! Listen to Magic Tricks by Whalers
The Christmas narratives in Matthew and Luke are supposed to contain fulfilled prophecies. However, these two Gospel accounts of Jesus’ birth are not only discrepant, but conflict with our historical knowledge. Biblical prophecies are commonly invoked as compelling evidence for us to consider, so we examine the Christmas story and the prophecies believers claim were … Continue reading CA43 Biblical Prophecy and the Birth of Christ →
We examine a concept vital to the project of being a skeptic. We’re not perfectly rational beings, and we have to learn about our cognitive biases if we want to overcome them. This was originally released as Patron bonus episode #8. Russell Conjugation [Edge.org]
One of the weakest and most common arguments encountered, the argument from personal experience comes to us in many forms. Near death experiences, “feeling that there’s something more,” feeling god in worship or prayer, “just knowing,” and dozens of other commonplace mantras from believers all employ the argument from personal experience. Recognizing this kind of … Continue reading CA42 Argument From Personal Experience →
The existence of Biblical, Koranic, or Talmudic confusion is not easy to square with an omni-god who inspired, dictated, or otherwise controlled the contents of a holy book. The Bible is long, vague, contradictory, ambiguous, and has no obvious message. There are about as many interpretations of the Bible as there are readers of the … Continue reading CA41 Argument From Biblical Confusion →
Glossolalia [Wiki] Heather Kavan — Linguistics of Glossolalia [PDF] William Samarin — Linguistics of Glossolalia [Amazon] Andrew Newberg — Glossolalia Neuroimaging Study [PDF] Wired — Glossolalia Neuroimaging Study [Wired] Glossolalia – OWN [YouTube] Dan Barker – Tongue Speaking [YouTube] Anti-Glossolalia Christian Writer [GotQuestions] Patheos — Non-Christian Glossolalia [Patheos] Bart Ehrman — Tongue Speaking and Snake … Continue reading CA40 Speaking in Tongues / Glossolalia →
Chris Matheson is a screenwriter and author whose credits include Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, Rapture-palooza, The Story of God, and The Trouble with God. You can buy The Story of God here and The Trouble with God here [Amazon] Contact me at emersongreen@protonmail.com or on Facebook Support on Patreon Read transcripts of the podcast … Continue reading CA39 The Story of God — Conversation with Chris Matheson →
Stephen Law’s Evil God presents a challenge to theists: Explain why the hypothesis that there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and omni-benevolent god should be considered significantly more reasonable than an omnipotent, omniscient, and omni-malevolent god. Many of the most popular arguments for god’s existence (first cause, intelligent design, fine-tuning) don’t give us any indication of … Continue reading CA38 The Evil God Challenge →
We discuss the utility of fiction, the future of Christianity, and psychonautic Shaman biologists. I’m still getting over a cold, hopefully it didn’t come through that much. Contact me at emersongreen@protonmail.com or on Facebook Support on Patreon Read transcripts of the podcast and discuss other issues at the Counter Apologetics Blog Rate the show on … Continue reading CA37 The God of Jordan Peterson, Pt. II →
Jordan Peterson is an unusual Christian apologist. Beyond a few of the standard apologetic tropes he spouts (we need god to be moral, atheists aren’t really atheists, Judeo-Christian values created Western civilization, atheism leads to communism), he defends god by adopting a pragmatic conception of truth that allows him to circumvent traditional arguments surrounding god’s … Continue reading CA36 The God of Jordan Peterson, Pt. I →
Christianity has a long and romantic relationship with torture. The primary symbol of the religion is a torture device, God’s chosen method of providing salvation was a grisly act of public torture, and hell has been an object of fascination for Christian artists, writers, and church fathers since the beginning. As the religious scholar Karen … Continue reading CA35 The Gruesome History of Christian Torture →
Author Karen Garst joins me to discuss a range of topics, including the high level of religiosity among women, the influence of mythology, abortion, and her upcoming debate at Mythcon. She has recently released a book entitled Women v. Religion: The Case Against Faith and for Freedom, which is the primary subject of our conversation … Continue reading CA34 Women v. Religion — Conversation with Karen Garst →
The discovery of evolution by natural selection arguably did more to reinforce naturalism than any other single discovery in science. However, not everyone agrees that Darwinian evolution was a blow against god. In fact, Alvin Plantinga, a Christian apologist, thinks that you can’t believe both in Darwinism and naturalism simultaneously — they’re incompatible. We discuss … Continue reading CA33 Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN) →
Author Evan Davids joins me to discuss why there is something rather than nothing, evolution, biblical literalism, whether Evan is really an atheist, the Fall, hell, abortion, and other topics. Christianity No Longer Makes Sense – Evan Davids [Amazon] EvanDavids.com … Contact me at emersongreen@protonmail.com or on Facebook Support on Patreon Read transcripts of the … Continue reading CA32 Does Christianity Make Sense? — Conversation with Evan Davids →
Can abortion be morally justified? We know that Christians generally think it’s abhorrent. But once we’ve left religion behind, how should we draw a conclusion about such a contentious moral issue? Independent moral reasoning is something atheists, naturalists, and skeptics can’t avoid, so we shouldn’t shy away from intra-group discussion about one of the most … Continue reading CA31 The Ethics of Abortion →
Is western civilization a product of Judeo-Christian values? Apologists claim that Judeo-Christian values influenced the thinkers of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment so greatly as to deserve credit as the foundation of western values. So even if Christian beliefs are entirely untrue, could the mythology still be a useful fiction that created the west as … Continue reading CA30 “Western Values Are Based on Judeo-Christian Values” →
Are we just electrified meat, or is there a ghost in the machine? Believers claim that naturalism cannot account for the phenomenal properties of consciousness, and tend to hold the position that the mind is more than the biological activity of the brain. We examine the conventional idea of the soul and how it conflicts … Continue reading CA29 Science vs. The Soul →
Christian apologists, citing a few twentieth-century regimes, often try to conflate atheism and authoritarianism. They ignore the fact that most atheists are secularists and don’t advocate for any form of state atheism. They also ignore the fact that the policies of the atheist states they cite, most frequently North Korea and the Soviet Union, were … Continue reading CA28 State Atheism →
Can consciousness only be explained on a theistic worldview? Christians often appeal to the phenomenon of consciousness and argue that it’s unlikely or impossible on naturalism. We discuss substance dualism, the hard problem of consciousness, identity, intentionality, and the unclear role the material realm plays in theism. CA Facebook CA Patreon Contact: emersongreen@protonmail.com Counter Apologetics … Continue reading CA27 Argument from Consciousness →
A forbidden religion, originally composed of only a few devoted followers, eventually swept the western world. Believers think that the rise of Christianity was so unusual to suggest it was miraculous, and they argue that the stunning growth and eventual size of their religion is evidence that God really is on their side. We explore … Continue reading CA26 The Spread of Christianity →
Christians claim that the majority of the disciples were martyred for their belief in the resurrection. They were tortured and killed in horrible ways, supposedly for their beliefs. And who would go through that for a lie? CA Patreon Follow me on Facebook Contact: emersongreen@protonmail.com Emerson’s Blog Rate the show on iTunes! Magic Tricks by … Continue reading CA25 “Who Would Die for a Lie?” →
Liar, lunatic, or lord? C.S. Lewis says we have to make our choice. Jesus must have been one of these three things, and there are definitely no other options. We also discuss the historical Jesus and clarify a detail from last week’s Easter episode regarding the women’s discovery of the empty tomb. I hope none … Continue reading The Trilemma: Lunatic, Liar, or Lord? — Easter Bonus →
Today, we discuss the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, the evidence for the Gospel stories, and what it’s all supposed to mean. CA Patreon Follow CA on Facebook Contact: emersongreen@protonmail.com Emerson’s Blog Rate the show on iTunes! Magic Tricks by Whalers … Oldest Manuscript of 1 Corinthians 15:6 [Wiki] The Ending of Mark [wiki] Bart … Continue reading CA24 Easter — The Resurrection of Jesus →
Once we get past the bloody and bizarre Old Testament, it’s all “Love thy neighbor” and “Help the poor” from there, isn’t it? We’re expected to accept that Jesus was a wise moral teacher and that the New Testament is a valuable document of morals, even if we aren’t believers ourselves. But the goodness of … Continue reading CA23 “The New Testament is Better” →
If naturalism is true, why do so many people believe in god? What is it about human psychology that has made belief in god, in one form or another, the default position for the overwhelming majority of human beings that have ever lived? The theory of religion as a byproduct provides a potential answer. It’s … Continue reading CA22 Why We Believe in Gods: The Byproduct Theory of Religion →
Why would God hide? If God wants us to know he exists, he’s not off to a great start. Being invisible, silent, and undetectable in every way isn’t exactly what one would expect from a god who wants you to know the truth. The Bible says, “Seek, and ye shall find,” but not everyone who … Continue reading CA21 Divine Hiddenness →
What if you’re wrong? Aren’t you afraid of going to hell? Many Christians claim that their belief is the safe bet — they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. We examine Pascal’s Wager and decide if one of the most popular arguments in favor of belief should make us lose as much sleep … Continue reading CA20 Pascal’s Wager →
Are good actions commanded by God because they are good? Or are good actions good because God commands them? We discuss Euthyphro’s Dilemma, the apologists’ favored “third horn” solution, and revisit the Problem of Holiness. … CA Patreon Follow us on Facebook and Twitter Contact: emersongreen@protonmail.com Emerson’s Blog Rate the show on iTunes; it’s objectively … Continue reading CA19 The Euthyphro Dilemma →
If humans have no free will, can we assign praise or blame? Is it reasonable to condemn someone as immoral in a deterministic universe? We explore the concept of moral responsibility in a naturalistic world and distinguish between causal and moral responsibility. We also examine the problem of moral luck, which makes a case for … Continue reading CA18 Moral Luck and Responsibility (Free Will pt. II) →
Do we really have free will, or are we determined to think and behave as we do? Most Christian worldviews take it on as an assumption, but their conception of free will can’t be justified. CA Facebook CA Patreon emersongreen@protonmail.com Emerson’s Blog Rate the show on iTunes or Facebook (you have no choice). Magic Tricks by … Continue reading CA17 Free Will and Determinism (pt. I) →
There seems to be genuine disagreement within the atheist community over religion and child abuse. We’ll explore the nuances and examine the instances where religion appears to be responsible for child abuse. We’ll also discuss whether the intellectual roots of religious child abuse can be traced back to the Bible and justified therein. CA Facebook … Continue reading CA16 Is Religion Child Abuse? →
We discuss whether faith is a reliable foundation for belief. When arguments fail, believers often say that we just need to have faith. But is faith a valid way of knowing something? CA Facebook and Twitter CA Patreon emersongreen@protonmail.com Emerson’s Blog Rate the show on iTunes! Magic Tricks by Whalers … Matt Dillahunty on Faith … Continue reading CA15 Faith →
We address 20 common objections to evolution, give some evidence supporting the theory, and try to figure out why some Christians have a problem with evolution in the first place. CA Facebook and Twitter CA Patreon emersongreen@protonmail.com Emerson’s Blog Magic Tricks by Whalers … Objections (in chronological order) Evolution is just a theory Why are … Continue reading CA14 Creationism’s Greatest Hits — Defending Evolution →
Nothing fails like prayer! We examine prayer studies, try to figure out how prayer is supposed to work, and wonder why God is so shy now that everyone has video cameras in their pockets. CA Facebook and Twitter CA Patreon emersongreen@protonmail.com Emerson’s Blog Magic Tricks by Whalers … Sean Carroll: From Particles to People
Believers often point to miracle claims as validations of their religious beliefs. This argument is the basis for other popular apologetics regarding the resurrection of Jesus, the power of prayer, and famous anecdotes of miraculous events, so let’s examine the bare bones of the argument from miracles. Thank you to everyone who’s been leaving reviews … Continue reading CA12 Argument From Miracles →
Get your pentagrams ready, because today we’re talking about the Satanic Panic, recovered memory, and the spirited debate in the Christian community over whether Jesus approves of Halloween. CA Facebook and Twitter CA Patreon emersongreen@protonmail.com Emerson’s Blog Rate the show on iTunes! … 8bit Theme Music for this episode Elizabeth Loftus on False Memory Remembering … Continue reading The Satanic Panic – CA Halloween Special →
We discuss the Christian concept of Satan and wonder why he exists in the first place. Why would God make a perfect plan and then create someone whose primary purpose is ruining it? His ways are indeed inscrutable.
Hail Satan!
CA Facebook and Twitter
CA Patreon
emersongreen@protonmail.com
Emerson’s Blog
Rate the show on iTunes!
…
Noah Lugeons interviews Chris Matheson
The Scathing Atheist
The Story of God by Chris Matheson
Atheist Experience
Barna Poll on Satan
Christian Apologist on Satan
Magic Tricks by Whalers
Hail Satan!
Christians spend a lot of energy distancing themselves from the horrors of the Old Testament. Apologists often try to justify their diminishing or dismissing of the Old Testament’s authority by employing Covenant theology. We explore that idea along with other common arguments Christians use to ignore the bad parts of the Old Testament.
CA Patreon
emersongreen@protonmail.com
Emerson’s Blog
Rate the show on iTunes!
Magic Tricks by Whalers
…
Matt Dillahunty on the Old Testament
Does atheism inevitably lead to social Darwinism? Are atheists implicated in Nazi eugenics? We continue our discussion from last week’s episode into the territory of Darwinism, eugenics, Hitler, and whether atheists are able to morally condemn the events of the 20th century.
[Part II of II]
Facebook and Twitter
CA Patreon
emersongreen@protonmail.com
Emerson’s Blog
Rate the show on iTunes!
Magic Tricks by Whalers
Hitler! Stalin! Mao! Any lengthy debate with a Christian apologist seems to lead to those names. The idea, either stated explicitly or implicitly, is that atheism inevitably leads to war, genocide, and the crumbling of society. So were the bloody atrocities of the 20th century the logical result of the spread of atheism? Many Christian apologists seem to think that the death of God lead to the cruelties of the last century, but this idea doesn’t hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.
[Part I of II]
CA Facebook and Twitter
CA Patreon
emersongreen@protonmail.com
Emerson’s Blog
Rate the show on iTunes!
Magic Tricks by Whalers
Mother Teresa’s work greatly increased the amount of poverty and suffering in the world and her reputation deserves to be exposed for what it is: a myth. She was not, by her own admission, a humanitarian who worked to alleviate poverty. She thought suffering was good for people and had no interest in alleviating poverty — pain brings one closer to Jesus. She worked tirelessly to impose misogynistic laws banning divorce, contraceptives, and abortions everywhere she could. She had warm relations with genocidal maniacs like the Duvalier family in Haiti, she took money stolen from the elderly and didn’t return it, she sold modern versions of indulgences, and she took donations meant to help the poor and used it to build convents instead.
CA Facebook and Twitter
CA Patreon
emersongreen@protonmail.com
Emerson’s Blog
Rate the show on iTunes!
Magic Tricks by Whalers
What does it mean when we say that God is holy or morally good? Does it mean anything at all? We take a look at Jeremy Beahan’s Problem of Holiness and consider the possibility that God’s goodness may actually be meaningless.
CA Facebook and Twitter
CA Patreon
emersongreen@protonmail.com
Emerson’s Blog
Rate the show on iTunes!
Magic Tricks by Whalers
Jeremy Beahan on the Problem of Holiness
Many believers argue that Biblical prophecies have been fulfilled and that this fact needs to be explained. But how persuasive are these Biblical prophecies? And what should we expect an authentic prophecy from an omniscient being to look like? We take a look at the celebrated Ezekiel 26 prophecy, as well as prophecies regarding Jesus.
I also want to thank Noah Lugeons of the Scathing Atheist for giving me a shout out on their show, which lead to an influx of new listeners to Counter Apologetics. Hi new listeners! Unfortunately, I’m recording ahead of schedule and I won’t be able to give a proper thanks until next week. Until then, please support the incredible multipodcasting efforts of Noah, Heath, Eli, and Lucinda. They’re amazing.
linktr.ee/emersongreen
Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here
Rate the show on iTunes here
Support on Patreon here
Subscribe to CA and Walden Pod on YouTube here
Transcripts at emersongreenblog.wordpress.com
Contact me at emersongreen@protonmail.com or on Facebook
Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod
According to Pew data, 82% of America’s Evangelicals believe in Hell. However, the traditional conception of Hell falls apart under any amount of scrutiny and reveals the haphazard, man-made nature of the idea.
CA Facebook and Twitter
CA Patreon
emersongreen@protonmail.com
Emerson’s Blog
Rate the show on iTunes!
Magic Tricks by Whalers
The Problem of Evil! I discuss the most common defense, free will. Also, is heaven is full of lobotomized robots? I also discuss hell, animal suffering, eye burrowing insects, and why the logical POE maybe isn’t so bad after all.
CA Facebook and Twitter
CA Patreon
emersongreen@protonmail.com
Emerson’s Blog
Rate the show on iTunes!
Magic Tricks by Whalers