Posts Tagged ‘Richard Carrier’

A question from Richard Carrier

May 10, 2014

May 10, 2014 at 12:05 pm (comment awaiting moderation)

@Richard Carrier: May 7, 2014 at 10:40 am

You were in Taoism. What was in Taoism that you were a Taoist?
For what positive arguments in Atheism you converted to it from Taoism?


Does everybody get converted to another religion irrationally without a proper principled approach?

April 30, 2014

Richard Carrier a world renowned, author of several books as well as numerous articles online and in print with a Ph.D. in ancient history from Columbia University, he specializes in the modern philosophy of naturalism and humanism, the origins of Christianity, and the intellectual history of Greece and Rome, with particular expertise in ancient philosophy, science and technology. His parents were freethinking Methodists (mother was church secretary). He went to Sunday School and to church on holy days. He got converted to Philosophical Taoist at the tender age of 15 and then got converted Atheist (Secular Humanist) at the age of 21. He is reported to have done Extensive study of philosophy and world religions, formal and informal.

I wanted to inquire about this phenomenon and hence asked him the following question:

“I understand that you were born a Methodist Christian and decided to convert to Taoism at a very tender age of 15 years and then converted to Atheism at the age of 21 years.Under what principled approach you did that on both occasions?”

He replied and I quote from him:

“Taoism, I was converted the same irrational way all religious people are. Leaving Taoism? Reading, study, experience, and application of scientific knowledge and logical reasoning.”
A discussion ensued which could be viewed by accessing the following link.

April 30, 2014 at 2:36 pm (awaiting moderation)

@Richard Carrier : April 30, 2014 at 8:45 am

I don’t agree with you that everybody gets converted to another religion without a proper principled approach, irrationally.

I understand your observation, “There are thousands of false beliefs. We cannot read all their holy books nor should we.”
One could be born in any religion or even without a religion. It is beyond one to decide where to be born. Wherever one is born; that starts one’s journey towards truth.

The tools make easy for one to do a job. It is therefore important for one first to find a tool that gives equal opportunity to every religion to search.

Using a tool and then making a comparative study of religions to find which one, at a given period of time, is the most truthful religion is therefore most reasonable and rational.

I give here one such principle of comparative study of religions which was suggested by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad- the Promised Messiah 1835-1908 in the beginning of an essay that was read in a Conference of Great Religions held at Lahore in 1896; and was later published in a book form titled “The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam” translated in many languages of the world.

I give below the principle in precisely his words:

“It is necessary that a claim and the reasons in support of it must be set forth from a revealed book”.
“I consider it essential that everyone who follows a book, believing it to be revealed, should base his exposition upon that book and should not so extend the scope of his advocacy of his faith as if he is compiling a new book.”

Since one changed one’s religion two times without a principled approach; I think one should check again the truthfulness of one’s worldview from the start.


Converted from a Christian to Taoism and then to Atheism; under what principled approach?

April 29, 2014

I have asked this question from Richard Carrier:

April 29, 2014 at 4:09 am (under moderation)

@Richard Carrier: April 28, 2014 at 9:36 am

I understand that you were born a Methodist Christian and decided to convert to Taoism at a very tender age of 15 years and then converted to Atheism at the age of 21 years.

Under what principled approach you did that on both occasions?



I received a response from Richard Carrier that could be viewed at the following link:


Christians need to reform Christianity

April 23, 2014

I have written following comments on Richard Carrier’s “Freethought Blogs”.

paarsurrey says:
April 23, 2014 at 1:28 pm (awaiting moderation)

“The good thing is that Evangelical Christians tend to be very passionate people and want to believe in something. If they would only put aside the lies, omissions, and distortions promulgated by their own well-paid con-men for a moment and reexamine their worldview in light of what the actual philosophical, scientific, and historical evidence is today, then they, too, would find Christmas worth celebrating…as what it actually is: a once pagan and now secular holiday invented by human beings for their own enjoyment and good. Then they can maybe go one step further and exit their dangerous delusion, and stop hating people and voting to take away their rights or to perpetuate injustices against the disadvantaged, and instead start actually caring about their fellow human beings, and the truth, for a change. Wouldn’t that be a wonderful Christmas present for us all?” Unquote

I agree with you.

The Christians need to reform their religion.

They should disprove the mythical creed invented by Paul, scribes and the Church and follow Jesus and Mary in their true and core teachings and acts.

William Lane Craig is wrong: The One-True-God did speak to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

April 23, 2014

I have written following comments on Richard Carrier’s “Freethought Blogs”.

April 23, 2014 at 12:57 pm (awaiting moderation).

“Craig’s fifth and last item of “evidence” is the claim that God (we’re to assume) talks to Christians…but (we’re to assume) all the people of all the other religions throughout history (paganism, Islam, Hinduism, Mormonism) who claim God is speaking to them are wrong–yet when Craig says God speaks to him, he alone is right. Because reasons.
Craig says, “down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives,” but that is a classic example of his deceitfully misleading method of argument, selectively omitting all the evidence against him, and smoothing over all the serious problems even with the evidence he is singling out (see the first four chapters of The Christian Delusion, as well as the seventh, and eighth). Because an honest statement would be, “Down through history many people have found a thousand different god-beliefs, from paganism to Hinduism to Islam to Mormonism to Kao Dai, and even atheistic philosophical worldviews, from Humanism to Taoism to Marxism, that have transformed their lives, and this was even happening for tens of thousands of years before anyone had ever heard from any god claiming to be Jesus.” Unquote

Craig must be a very biased person for Christianity and against other religions.

The One-True-God ( definitely not Jesus who never died on the Cross and never resurrected from the physical dead and never ascended to heaven); did talk to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 and I quote from him:

“The Speaker (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) is Honored with Divine Converse”

“I would be guilty of doing great wrong to my fellow beings if I were not to declare at this stage that divine bounty has bestowed upon me the status which I have just defined and has honored me with the kind of converse the features of which I have just set out in detail, so that I should bestow sight upon the blind and should guide the seekers of the One Who has been so far lost, and should give to those who accept the truth the good news of that holy fountain of which many speak but which few find.

I wish to assure the listeners that the God, meeting with Whom is the salvation and eternal welfare of man, cannot be found without following the Holy Quran.

Would that the people were to see that which I have seen, and were to hear that which I have heard, and should lay aside mere tales and should run to the truth! The cleansing water which removes all doubt, that mirror through which that Supreme Being can be seen, is converse with the Divine that I have just mentioned. Let him whose soul seeks the truth arise and search.

I tell you truly that if souls are charged with true seeking and hearts develop true thirst; people would search for that way and would seek that path. How can that way be discovered, and how can the intervening veil be removed? I assure all seekers that it is Islam alone which conveys the good news of that path. All other people have since long sealed up divine revelation. Be sure, however, that this seal is not imposed by God, but is an excuse that is put forward by man on account of his privation.

Be sure that as it is not possible that we should be able to see without eyes, or should be able to hear without ears, or should be able to speak without a tongue, in the same way it is not possible that without the help of the Quran we should be able to behold the countenance of the True Beloved. I was young and am now old but I have not encountered anyone who has quaffed the cup of this visible understanding except out of this holy fountain.
Page 206-207

Thanks and regards

Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris, falsely being treated representative of New Atheism: Richard Carrier

April 23, 2014

I have written following comments on Richard Carrier’s “Freethought Blogs”.
Topic: “Minor Corrections to Crossley’s Jesus in an Age of Neoliberalism” by Richard Carrier

April 23, 2014 at 9:22 am (awaiting moderation)

“Similarly, Crossley rightly takes to task the reactionary Islamophobia of Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris, but falsely treats that as representative of New Atheism, when in fact the bulk of the New Atheist movement has been consistently criticizing them for precisely these views.” Unquote

I read Hitchens book “God is not great”; and noticed that he had no in-depth study of Quran/Islam/Muhammad and generalized things from his experience with Christianity and had a biased view of Quran/Islam/Muhammad.

In the entire book Hitchens could not quote even a single verse from Quran in support of his views about Quran/Islam/Muhammad; though the title of the book suggests that his intention was to write the book against Islam.

I appreciate Atheists’ approach of being reason-oriented and hence drawing the attention of the Revealed Religions for reformation of the peripheral, mythical and superstitious creeds. They could go into the process of reformation while keeping the core teachings intact.

Thanks and regards