One of my favourite prayers

May I be no man's enemy, and may I be the friend of that which is eternal and abides.
May I never devise evil against any man; if any devise evil against me,may I escape without the need of hurting him.
May I love, seek, and attain only that which is good.
May I wish for all men's happiness and envy none.
When I have done or said what is wrong, may I never wait for the rebuke of others, but always rebuke myself until I make amends.
May I win no victory that harms either me or my opponent.
May I reconcile friends who are wroth with one another.
May I, to the extent of my power, give all needful help to all who are inwant.
May I never fail a friend in danger.
May I respect myself.
May I always keep tame that which rages within me.
May I never discuss who is wicked and what wicked things he has done, butknow good men and follow in their footsteps.

- The Prayer of Eusebius (a pagan who lived some two thousand years ago,as quoted in Gilbert Murray, Five Stages of Greek Religion)

What does it mean to be sceptical?

How many of us dismiss ideas and claims simply on the basis of them sounding absurd or ridiculous? If were being honest, id say most, if not all of us. I suppose one could even say it’s natural to judge incoming information with our current understanding of reality. But is this what it truly means to be sceptical? To stand from the sidelines knocking down anything that we may have a pre conceived idea as being implausible or false?

We are all sceptical of something, whether it’s an area of religion, politics or science. But how many of us dare go to the trouble of actually putting in the effort of genuine research into what we are so sceptical of? How many of us actually know what we’re talking about when we say were “sceptical” of something?

Critical thinking is not the same as cynical thinking. This quote from philosopher Massimo Pigliucci explains this nicely:

“I think that a crucial aspect of being skeptical, of engaging in critical thinking, is not the idea that you reject claims because they seem absurd. That’s not being a skeptic, that’s just being a cynic. It’s just denying things for the sake of denying it. The idea of skepticism is that you inquire — that you do the work.”

I think we all owe it to ourselves to be a little more sceptical of the world around us.

If you’re sceptical of a political idea, then do the research from both sides. Look into the pros and cons. Equip yourself with a little background knowledge of politics and some of the mistakes made in the past.

If you’re sceptical of an area of science, such as evolution, then read books and journals from scientists in the field, watch scientific documentaries and lectures. Educate yourself on the arguments for and against.

If you’re sceptical of religion, read books from religious perspectives, research the history from both sides of the spectrum. Read the bible, read the Quran and if they say the only way to know truth is to ask God (Allah), then try it! Test out the claims. That’s what it truly means to be sceptical.

Don’t fall prey to the laziness of cynicism. Truth won’t be found by shouting blindly from the sidelines. Truth, if it can be found at all, will be found by honest, genuine inquiry.

Jason

A Brief History of Time

Stephen Hawking has always been one of my favourite scientists. I’ve always admired him for what he’s accomplished despite his illness. His documentaries and interviews always grab my attention and he never seises to amaze me with his vast knowledge and ability to simplify complex elements of the universe into something a lay person such as myself can understand. This book was originally written for just that lay person who doesn’t know much about theoretical physics or quantum mechanics (basically 99% of the population). I opted to go for the audio book version in this case; I find it much easier to listen at work this way. I own a hard copy but it’s a little tricky, and if I must say a bit mischievous, to read at work.

A brief history of time is not a new book; in fact it was first published in 1988 (the year I was born). Some major advances in technology and theoretical physics have been made since then, but it still remains a monumental book for its transition from a life’s work in understanding the cosmos into simple terms that everyday people like myself can grasp. It has sold more than 10 million copies worldwide and was on the London Sunday Times best seller list for over four years.

However If you think this book is going to be a walk in the park, you will be horrifically mistaken. Be prepared to have your brain pushed to its limits. I lost count how many times I had to rewind some parts and stop all other activities I was doing to focus my full attention on the subject at hand. I still don’t really understand the general theory of relativity, but I’ll be dammed if I let it beat me! In saying that there were moments when Stephen laid out complex concepts to which he would explain in the simplest terms. These were my favourite parts of the book, were after listening to an explanation, it felt as if light bulb went off in my head and I just got it. His explanations of the big bang and gravity were simply beautiful and very helpful for a simpleton like me to try and visualise and understand the crucial role gravity plays in our universe.

A friend of mine has brought to my attention that there is another lighter version of this book called “A briefer history of time” which is a little easier to understand. This might be a better option for those of us who don’t have much of scientific background. After reading this book thou I’m contemplating waiting around for the “briefest history of time”! Stephen Hawking remains one of my all time favourite scientist and I look forward to reading his new book “The grand Design”, which from what I’ve heard about it so far seems to be a bit controversial... excellent! If you want to try to understand the universe, if you want to know what science reveals about the big questions, this is the book for you!

Jason

The Case for Christ

Book: The Case for Christ
Author: Lee Strobel

I’ve been meaning to read this book for a while, actually so long I think I was a Christian when it was on my to read list, (I need not spell out the irony of me finally reading it as an agnostic). Many Christians hold Lee Strobel as one of their champions of reason. He is a very smart guy, and from what I can tell he seems like a pretty genuine guy too. I love watching his faith under fire series in which he gets speakers from all across the board to battle it out. I also think he makes for a pretty fair moderator. As a Christian I used to love hearing his testimony of how he came to faith through this long journey of weighing up the facts and deep investigation. He sounded so convincing!

The book starts out in this fashion. Lee begins with his own personal journey of faith and how he became a Christian. Lee, having experience as a journalist is a very persuasive writer. Lee made some statements at the beginning of this book that set things up to be quite promising. It was shaping out to be a good read! I actually had a lot of fun at the beginning of this book, I was enjoying reading some of the answers from top Christian scholars and I thought Lee was asking some really good questions, sometimes even surprising me with a question I didn’t even think to ask myself!

However at about the half way mark, I began to find the book quite dry. I liked it, I was having fun with it, but the answers from the evangelical Christian scholars were all beginning to sound like broken records. Some of the arguments being put forth by some scholars have already been refuted by other prominent scholars. It was also around this point I had realised Lee had only interviewed Christian scholars with an apologetic purpose. I was after a fresh perspective, an argument from a different side, maybe a more liberal Christian perspective or even a secular scholar, someone with a little less theological and emotional baggage that could possibly get in the way of deciphering truth from the gospels and other historical sources. But so far Lee seemed to be avoiding the opposition which made me wonder.

It was when I got to chapter 6 “The rebuttal evidence” I thought things might start to heat up. He begins the chapter with his usual real life court case story and then proceeds to talk a little bit about the Jesus seminar; a mixed group of scholars who don’t agree with the conservative literal interpretation of the gospels that Lee is so desperately trying to prove is true. Here is how Lee starts this chapter:

“Now that I had heard powerfully convincing and well-reasoned evidence from the scholars I questioned for this book, I needed to turn my attention to the decidedly contrary opinions of a small group of academics (the Jesus seminar) who have been the subject of a whirlwind of news coverage... ” Page 111

“But I wanted to go beyond the headlines and to unearth, as commentator Paul Harvey likes to say, “the rest of the story”...” Page 112

I remember thinking to myself “awesome”! Now we finally get to hear from scholars that have different opinions. Who might he interview I wonder, seeing how he’s talking about the Jesus seminar, I wonder if it’s going to be John Dominic Crossan? Or maybe even Robert Price? I’ll tell you who it was... neither! Lee in his built up speech about hearing from those who oppose the conservative Christian view of biblical scholarship goes to interview yet ANOTHER evangelical Christian scholar who is well known for defending scholarship from the “heretical” Jesus seminar.

It was at this point the book began to go downhill from me. All the promises of genuine journalistic enquiry into what we know about Jesus were beginning to sink lower and lower. I think I realised at this point this book wasn’t indented for sceptics who have done a little research on both sides. This book sole purpose is to convince those who have already been convinced. Sorry Lee, I think you’re a top bloke but if your idea of genuine enquiry into truth is too interview one side’s proponents one after the other, you’ve lost me.

Although I found the book very one sided, let’s remember that Lee is an author. Authors don’t write books that no will buy. They are usually aimed at a specific targeted audience. But the problem I have with this book is it’s presented as an honest, open journey for truth when it shows clear signs it isn’t. The obvious being his lack of interest in alternative views, but more subtly the language he chooses to use. On many occasions I caught Lee phrasing a sentence that seemed quite odd for someone who is supposedly on a search for genuine truth. For example, at the beginning of chapter 6, he refers to the Jesus seminars views as “troubling and wildly publicised”. Why would someone on “a quest for truth” who according to page 14 is “setting aside my self-interest and prejudices” find an alternative view “troubling”?

Lee has extensive knowledge of the legal system and how court cases work, knowledge he acquired through his years as a journalistic investigator. He often refers to real life stories that have taken place in a court to use as a type of metaphor to set up his interviews:

“In this quest for truth, I’ve used my experience as a legal affairs journalist to look at numerous categories of proof...These are the same classifications that you’d encounter in a courtroom. And maybe taking a legal perspective is the best way to envision this process – with you in the role of a juror.” Page 15

Well the most obvious problem I see with the analogy of a court case is that Lee fails to interview any scholars or sceptics that have different points of view to the ‘experts’ he’s interviewing. This is rather like having a court case in which we only hear from the defence and not the prosecution (or vice versa). Does that sound fair? Does that sound like someone who is genuinely after truth?

But I refuse to fall prey to the same crime of ignoring information I’m accusing Lee of, so here is a response I’ve found from Lee on why he didn’t interview any liberal scholars with alternative views in his book, make of it what you will. (I recommend reading the comments too):

Lee-strobel-answers-your-questions-part-2

Overall I recommend this book to anyone who is interested in biblical scholarship. It’s at best a good collection of the arguments from one particular side of the spectrum. But don’t be swayed by Lee’s provocative writing style, one only needs to take a step back and look at the book as a whole too see this wasn’t a genuine search for truth. There is always another side to the story. If you’re going to read this book than I recommend you follow it up with Misquotting Jesus by Bart D Ehrman, Jesus: A revolutionary biography by John Dominic Crossan, Jesus for the non religious by John Shelby Spong or for a direct response point by point, The case against 'the case for Christ' by Robert M Price. This will give you a far broader perspective of biblical scholarship and open your mind to a number of different possibilities. Then you will truly be able to, in the words of Lee, “reach your own verdict”.

The Ancient Roots of Our Judeo-Christian Sexual Prohibitions

An interesting article I found on a little history of sex and religion.

http://www.cybercollege.com/history.htm

Michael Schermer lays out our top 10 best answers to the biggest question of all, "why is there something instead of nothing". Great read.

http://www.bigquestionsonline.com/columns/michael-shermer/the-biggest-big-question-of-all

Rabbi Schmuley

A really great post by Rabbi Schmuley Boteach,

http://blog.beliefnet.com/rabbishmuleyunleashed/2010/09/my-purpose-in-debating-christopher-hitchens-on-the-afterlife.html