I liked Zealot. It didn't definitively answer the questions about this improbable occurrence--an anti-Roman preacher among a large group of the same, becoming the germ for a religion that took over the western world--however, I don't think anyone can do that, just provoke us into thought. Aslan did this in the book. It's obvious he is no mythicist, while believing much of the story in the Gospels is myth.

I've come to accept that there are atheists from hard to soft. I'm of the soft, mushy variety, just part of my personality. I'd rather not think too negatively of anyone, just part of my upbringing. But I find value in listening to the more passionate, polemical, even strident voices such as those already named in this thread. I'm glad they're out there, usually. And whatever qualms I might have about the "Big Four" and others, damn they're good writers. It might be as simple as it's more exciting to read these take-no-prisoners guys (still waiting for the woman). It wouldn't even surprise me too much if Hitchens, for example, cultivated his bulldog persona while person-to-person being not such a hardcore type.

By the way, you go to any town or city in the U.S. and you may find one atheist or skeptic group. Indeed, there's a skeptic group in our town that meets every Wednesday night. I would expect that you might see 50 people in attendance. But how many churches will you find in my town? There are hundreds. And you will find a lot more than 50 people in attendance at any ONE church on both Wednesday nights and Sundays. (Baptists typically meet twice a week). 

I live in a very large city on the west coast. Some of you may remember which city.
Ive been to more than several skeptics meetings. The Skeptics Society hosts some outstanding lectures at the world renowned university Cal Tech. Michael Shermer is a very gracious host. He is always cheery, pleasant, and humorous. He seems like a great guy.

Depending on the lecture topic, the type of audience varies. If its pure science (the lectures i attend) the audience is an older bunch, mostly Caucasian, retirement age. Ive talked to a few before to sample the temperament. Considering the small sample size, they all have been very pleasant.

I have attended lectures at Ca Tech that were geared toward a new atheism theme. The audience was younger on average. The atmosphere had the feel of a sporting event. One person had the word "atheist" tattooed on their body.

I had an experience with on skeptic club that is much much smaller than The Skeptics Society.
I shall not name them here. I attended one meeting and that was it. My experience was, shall I say, a weird one.

It was a very small group. The age range was from early 30's to late 60s.
I have to say I was very uncomfortable. No one said hi, or even looked at me. It wasnt a very welcoming atmosphere. The peculiar thing was that the oldest of the group (a man) was someone that I recognized but couldnt place. He looked really cranky and was glancing at me several times throughout the evening. I was certain he had remembered where he had seen me before.

at the very end I remembered:
i had served as a juror on a criminal case years ago. He was a professor at a local college back then.

I remember he was very overbearing and tried to dominate our deliberations. At one point he yelled at me for disagreeing on a an aspect of testimony. A librarian (who i later became friends with) had to keep him in check. The guy was a total arrogant and overbearing asshole. Several jurors were glad when our deliberations ended.
He's a perfect example of a weird, pompous, cranky, know it all militant atheist.

Reza on Sam Harris and his zealots..

https://youtu.be/PwpwEFmkZCc

Bad for true atheism.

Reza utterly destroys Sam Harris's understanding of religion.
(Lengthy debate)

https://youtu.be/2JJf2qC6TTg

ant wrote:Reza on Sam Harris and his zealots..

https://youtu.be/PwpwEFmkZCc

Bad for true atheism.

So let's see, he admits that he doesn't read Sam Harris, he saw a tweet about him, but then goes on to say,

"When you combine an absolute sense of certainty with the kind of literalism that I have already described, with an utter sense of siege... that's called fundamentalism"

Did you learn how to strawman from this Reza guy?

Blah blah fundamentalism!

He's debated him before and is familiar with his shoddy theological scholarship.

In a nutshell:
Reza slices up Sam and exposes his illogical and contradictory reasoning about religion.
For example: Sammy claims to acknowledge, admire, and support certain moral and ethical tenets from scripture but then ends discussion with oversimplifications and broad generalizations while ignoring the positive socio political impact religion has had and continues to have on culture.

Conclusion: Sam and his followers are unsophisticated, cherry bombing, rabid atheists that create strawmen to condemn.

I agree.
Do you?



Edited:

Not all atheists of course.

ant wrote: For example: Sammy claims to acknowledge, admire, and support certain moral and ethical tenets from scripture but then ends discussion with oversimplifications and broad generalizations while ignoring the positive socio political impact religion has had and continues to have on culture.

Conclusion: Sam and his followers are unsophisticated, cherry bombing, rabid atheists that create strawmen to condemn.

I agree.
Do you?

No.

Has Sam Harris ever said that religion has had no positive effects on society throughout history? Or does he have to mention it every time he talks about someone chopping someone's head off in the name of religion?

Apparently this is Aslan's position on Islam from Wikipedia:

Aslan described Islam as "a man-made institution. It’s a set of symbols and metaphors that provides a language for which to express what is inexpressible, and that is faith. It’s symbols and metaphors that I prefer, but it’s not more right or more wrong than any other symbols and metaphors. It’s a language, that’s all it is."

This is wishy-washy Deepak Chopra-type stuff, with maybe a little less mystical nonsense. Does he think people are mistaken about religious claims, or not? Most people don't think of their religion as a metaphor.

That quote is interesting.
Ill have to do some some more digging on his views on Islam.

Here is the full interview where that quote originated. Reza on The Young Turks:

https://youtu.be/7F-SiZt0amg

About half way in he says what youve reproduced.
Not quite sure what youre implying by plucking it out of context, Dexter.

It's a pretty good interview done in 2014.
Late 2014 he did another one with Krista Tippet on the podcast "On Being"
I finished up that one. It was very good.

Im going to finish up The Young Turks.
Im really starting to like Reza even more. His views on ANTI -theists masquerading as Atheists (or wanting to be identified as such) are some of the best I've heard. He too picked up on the No True Scottsman fallacy.
I am in great company.

ant wrote:Here is the full interview where that quote originated. Reza on The Young Turks:

https://youtu.be/7F-SiZt0amg

About half way in he says what youve reproduced.
Not quite sure what youre implying by plucking it out of context, Dexter..

I'm not implying anything other than what's there, as I said I plucked it from his Wikipedia entry. Perhaps you want to defend his wishy washy bullshit by adding context.

I went about half way as you suggested, here's another quote:

"The Buddha said it perfectly: if you want to strike water you don't dig six one-foot wells, you dig one six-foot well. Religion is that six-foot well. But faith is the water. The water is the same regardless of what well you are drinking from."

So all that matters is faith in something, anything? In the real world outside of academia and making general comments about religion, people believe in specific claims about the world and the nature of the universe. Does he (or you) ever talk about the truth of those claims? Or are they just symbols and metaphors for communication?

Then he says if you're going to reject one of the languages (religion) because some of it is ugly, you have to reject all ideologies, including atheism which led to Maoism.

I'm supposed to be impressed with this?