Subject: Re: tough questions Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:47:55 -0800 From: Brian Holtz Organization: Sun Microsystems To: glenn miller Hi Glenn, as you just saw, I've finished my critique of your essay about dualism defeating physicalism. I'm impressed with your familiarity with the fascinating literature on consciousness, which is why I found it all the more surprising that you seem to have a basic misunderstanding of physicalism. It's very interesting that, while apparently a creationist and an Old Testament literalist (if not inerrantist), you reject the conventional notion of hell as torment. That's pretty wise. To my mind, and apart from all the problems with sources, contradictions, and alternative explanations, the two towering defeaters for Christianity are its ties to the (obviously mythical) Old Testament and its policy of infinite torment for finite imperfection. The conventional notion of hell is indeed easier to shed than the OT ties, so I'm surprised this move is not more common. (It is strange, however, that your discussion of hell seems to scrupulously avoid mention of Mat 18:8's "eternal fire".) Still, I wonder why you don't attempt to dump the OT as well. I'm not saying it would be easy, but many (most?) Christians have done it, and it seems easier than defending the OT. Without hell and the OT, Christianity would be able to make a half-decent case arguing from the historical facts around the gospels and the Jesus movement... :-) I have one quick question for you: What do you think is the most impressively true biblical prophecy? I.e. which one would be hardest to refute, and has the most skeptic-convincing potential?