William Lane Craig to Co-Edit a Book Response to the New Atheists.
Link. He said:
No doubt many of you have been troubled, as I have, by the rise of the so-called "New Atheism" in our day, represented by people like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. When I read Dawkins' broadsides against Christianity in his book The God Delusion, I thought, "Wouldn't it be great if a group of Christian scholars, including philosophers, scientists, ethicists, historians, and biblical scholars, would team up to write a response to this tirade, each writing in his area of specialization?" Well, I'm pleased to say that it's going to happen! Chad Meister of Bethel College and I have been given a contract by Inter-Varsity Press to edit just such a book, and we've put together a terrific team of scholars to refute the New Atheist attacks, each in his area of expertise. We hope the book will be finished by the summer's end.
11 comments:
...Because, you know, we certainly need another "Hard Hitting Response" to those brash, polemic, abrasive "New Atheists" (around five or so authors! oh dear!)...
Writing a "courageous response" to "New Atheism" takes as much courage as shouting antisemetic rhetoric at a Klan meeting.
Because 29 (on Amazon alone) certainly isn't enough! Go get 'em Craig!
“God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens” by John F. Haught
“The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions” by David Berlinski
“Atheism Remix: A Christian Confronts the New Atheists” by Albert Mohler Jr.
“The Delusions of Disbelief: Answering the Arguments of Atheism” by David Aikman
“The Truth Behind the New Atheism: Responding to the Emerging Challenges to God and Christianity” by David Marshall
“The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine” by Alister and Joanna C. McGrath
“What's So Great About Christianity” by Dinesh D'Souza
“The New Atheist Crusaders and Their Unholy Grail: The Misguided Quest to Destroy Your Faith” by Becky Garrison
“Knowing Christ: A Guide for Today's Disciples” by Dallas Willard
“Answering the New Atheism: Dismantling Dawkins' Case Against God” by Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker
“Why Faith Matters: God and the New Atheism” by David J. Wolpe
“The Richard Dawkins Delusion” by Daniel Keeran
“The End of Reason: A Response to the New Atheists” by Ravi K. Zacharias, forward by Lee Strobel.
“Letter to an Atheist” by Michael Patrick Leahy
“I Don't Believe in Atheists” by Chris Hedges
“Letter to a Christian Nation: Counter Point” by R. C. Metcalf
“No One Sees God: The Dark Night of Atheists and Believers” by Michael Novak
“Conversations With An Atheist: The Good News of God's Plan of Salvation For Mankind” by Janina Balabat
“There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind” by Roy Abraham Varghese and Bob Hostetler
“God is No Delusion: A Refutation of Richard Dawkins” by Thomas Crean
“Atheism Is False: Richard Dawkins And The Improbability Of God Delusion” by David Reuben Stone
“The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism” by Timothy Keller
“The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens” by Vox Day
“A Catholic Replies to Professor Dawkins” by Thomas Crean
“The Dawkins Letters: Challenging Atheist Myths” by David Robertson
“The Case for the Real Jesus: A Journalist Investigates Current Attacks on the Identity of Christ” by Lee Strobel
“God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?” John Lennox
“The Ipod Tutor: The Argument Against Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion’” by “The Intelligent Community”
...ad nauseam...
Yes, and I am sure that Dr. Craig's new book will include explosive new evidence for the existence of a God that he has up to now been hiding ...
i passed a truck on the interstate the other day. It was St. Michael Truckline or somesuch and it said "St. Michael protects our drivers". Oh, really? Made me wonder about all those patron saints and all those medals people carry. It should be a pretty simple study to follow some medal and non-medal carriers to see if they work or to survey accicent and injury victims to see if they were carrying medals.
I have not read any of these books, but someone out there must be reading them and I would like to hear about some example of a point or two they claim to refute. I bet they all make Nazi/Darwin connections. And I bet they leave some things to faith. At least a book can't resort to offering to pray for me when it begins to lose the logical argument - or do these books do that too somehow?
I would be great if they could manage to write new arguments that have not been refuted yet. Doesn't mean they have to be right, but it gets a little tiring when all the arguments start looking the same.
Past experience doesn't give me much hope, though.
I can't wait for the book!
When, oh when will the senseless slaughter stop!
Won't someone PLEASE think of the trees!?!
Goprairie,
Perhaps if you read some of those books you might receive some answers.
Other than most of the so-called skeptics who simply label them as "fleas" (intellectual laziness at its finest) you might do well to read how others view these issues.
BTW, I have no idea who that other M is.
To the "other" m:
Some of us have read these books. I doubt any of us have read them all. But you never know. Mayhaps some of them have.
The thing is, after a while, all these books are essentially the same: meaningless. They all make the same arguments, the same way, and avoid the same essential question (Your deity exists? Okay, show me). How many times do you have to get burned to quit putting your hand on the stove burner?
I have my own criteria for whether or not I need to read any of these wastes of perfectly decent and innocent trees: Every newspaper, radio and TV will go bonkers if a supreme being makes an actual, verifiable, falsifiable appearance. We'll know. We can't help but know. It would just be too big a story for the media to ignore.
And then we'll all have a lot of fun going through to see which of you was right--and how very many of you were wrong, wrong, wrong. Better hope Shiva doesn't appear in a forest and start dancing. I don't think that will be a happy day for non-Hindus. Or maybe Zeus will tire of frolicking with all those babes at his disposal (good thing he's immortal, or he'd be d-e-a-d from exhaustion about now!), and show his face again. That might be kinda interesting.
By the way, it's insulting and demeaning to presume that non-believers can't understand a faith. Understanding doesn't necessarily require belief. One can know plenty about something and chose not to believe in it or experience it. For instance, I read lots of mystery books, so I know a lot about murder; however, I have zero desire to commit the act myself, much less worship it. Likewise, I know what I need to know about any religion on earth: Is there any valid evidence for the existence of this faith's deity? So far, the answer is no. Of course, like with murder mysteries, I still like to read about the world's religious, learn about them, understand them, even. I find them as interesting as I find, oh, books about the mythologies of a variety of cultures. But I'm still not a believer in any of them.
By the way: It's incredibly rude, arrogant, and insulting to remotely imply that non-believers can't read, can't read with comprehension, or that we have never studied your faith.
You presume far too much.
m said: Perhaps if you read some of those books you might receive some answers.
Other than most of the so-called skeptics who simply label them as "fleas" (intellectual laziness at its finest) you might do well to read how others view these issues.
Not only have most of us read one or more apologetics books, but we also hang out here to take on all comers armed with apologetics greatest hits. So far, I've seen little new, and what little was new was REALLY bad. So, at what point do I become a fool for continuing to waste my time on a literary genre that has historically given such poor yields?
The only solid critical comments I have seen on Dawkins have been not from Christians but from philosophers such as Ruse, Midgeley and Stove. Which isn't really surprising, because it is painfully obvious that Dawkins has not the slightest grounding in philosophical argument or he wouldn't come out with such muddles over the misuse of the word "selfish" - he was at it again on TV with the "Genius of Charles Darwin" - saying such rot as "we can overcome our selfish genes".
Post a Comment