I'm starting to work on another anthology on Science and Christianity. I already have three submitted chapters and nearly ten authors who have agreed to write chapters for it. I'm looking for authors to write chapters on topics like cosmology, evolution, how evolution impacts Christianity, the scientific method, the Bethlehem star, biblical archeology, the genetics of the virgin birth, the shroud of Turin, science and miracles, the tasks of science and theology, the origins of the religious impulse, philology and the texts of the Bible, and other things like that. The late Victor Stenger left me one chapter I'll use describing religious views of the center of the earth. If you think of other areas where science comes into direct conflict with Christianity let me know. What topics are relevant and who should write them? Remember, I cannot get just anyone I want.
Here are three blurbs for my next book to be released in the Fall. It's provocatively titled, "How To Defend The Christian Faith: Advice From an Atheist."
The Hebrew Bible has achieved a remarkable feat; it has justified, in the minds of billions, what is seemingly unjustifiable—genocide. Much of the Old Testament is dedicated to defending the territorial rights of Israel, a right conferred by her deity.
"Religion is not what you believe. It's what you do."
One of the important Bible reading skills to hone is catching the Biblical writers when they are unwittingly revealing an important truth. Since these truths are generally embedded within polemics wrapped in a fabricated story to support that polemic, it is important to read cautiously.
"If this was any other institution, I bet Catholics would denounce it. But since it's not they make excuses. Go figure."
It surprises me the lengths Christians will go to mischaracterize an argument. It takes madness. I argue they should not trust their brain. It's lying to them. It didn't evolve to search for truth. The first step is to know this. The second step is to train it to think like a scientist. The brain seems to find truths inadvertently through trial and error. Science augments the truth finding capabilities already in our brain.
It is one thing to have a warranted belief that we are reading the Bible, so long as we’re reading it with cognitive faculties functioning properly in the right kind of cognitive environment. It is something entirely different to be reading the Bible and claim “God is speaking to me.” That additional claim is miles and miles away from what any rational person can conclude from the actual experience of reading the Bible itself. For that additional claim depends on the rationality of believing that all the ancient documents in the Bible are truly God’s word, that what they say about God, the nature of nature, and its workings are true, and that how one interprets them when reading them is correct. Since the rationality of claiming “God is speaking to me” depends on the rationality of accepting these other claims, it should be shown that it's rational to accept these other claims before one can rationally claim “God is speaking to me.” Until then the rational conclusion from reading the Bible is “I am reading the Bible,” not “God is speaking to me.”