Major Important Debate! What Better Explains Reality? Naturalism or Theism? (Jeffery Jay Lowder vs Frank Turek)

I just noticed this debate from 2017, having been focused for so long on book and blog writing. See what you think. I'm posting it before watching it because both deabters are very good at debating, and very knowledgeable philosophers(!) What do you think?

Which Atheist Books Do I Recommend?

Having previously linked to some reasons why philosophical apologetics is not changing very many minds, especially the most sophisticated philosophy that every serious philosophical apologist loves to recommend, because it says that they understand it! Congrats to you!! A lot of it is obtuse and obfuscationist though. As it's practiced today, it isn't that helpful if one wants to change minds. After all, the more sophisticated that philosophy is, the more sophisticated the reader is. At that level it doesn't change the minds of sophisticated readers because they are already entrenched in what they think. It also has a way of being turned around as a pat on the back! Just see how William Lane Craig responds to a very detailed and knowledgeable question about philosophical apologetics at his website, Reasonable Faith. Craig wrote:

I include your question here for the instruction and encouragement of our Reasonable Faith readers. You have masterfully surveyed for us the current philosophical landscape with respect to atheism. You give our readers a good idea of who the principal players are today.

I hope that theists, especially Christian theists, who read your account will come away encouraged by the way Christian philosophers are being taken seriously by their secular colleagues today.

The average man in the street may get the impression from social media that Christians are intellectual losers who are not taken seriously by secular thinkers. Your letter explodes that stereotype. It shows that Christians are ready and able to compete with their secular colleagues on the academic playing field.

To see this you need to read my book Unapologetic: Why Philosophy of Religion Must End. This is the first book I'm recommending, with others to follow below. If nothing else, consider the recommendation of atheist philosopher Nick Trakakis, co-editor with Graham Oppy of several important philosophy of religion books, and the author of his own book on The End of Philosophy of Religion, plus The God Beyond Belief: In Defense of William Rowe's Evidential Argument from Evil. He even wrote a chapter in my book, God and Horrendous Suffering. He said this of my book Unapologetic:

I am in wholehearted agreement with you. I actually find it very sad to see a discipline (the philosophy of religion) I have cherished for many years being debased and distorted by so-called Christian philosophers. Like you, I have now finally and happily found my place in the atheist community. I’m slowly making my way through your "Unapologetic book", it’s quite fascinating, loving the Nietzschean hammer style.

God or Godless: One Atheist. One Christian. Twenty Controversial Questions.

I'm done writing and editing books, so I'm highlighting each one of them in thirteen separate posts.

Today I'll tell you about my co-written book with Dr. Randal Rauser, God or Godless?: One Atheist. One Christian. Twenty Controversial Questions, published in April, 2013.

The first thing to say is that Rauser contacted me to co-write the book without first reading my magnum opus Why I Became an Atheist. That's instructive, since he didn't research into how formidable of an opponent I might be.

My Magnum Opus!

I give this book two thumbs way up. In addition to courageously sharing his personal story, Loftus applies his considerable training and expertise into developing a cumulative case against Christianity and for atheism. I cannot think of another book like it on the market. Loftus is clearly familiar with the work of evangelical apologists like Copan, Craig, Geisler, and Moreland, as his book is filled with references to their work and objections to their arguments. In fact, his book might best be described as a “counter-apologetics” textbook.

--Jeffery Jay Lowder. LINK.

Blurbs for My Anthology "Christianity Is Not Great: How Faith Fails"

I'm always very grateful for people willing to read through my books and offer some advanced praise. Here are some blurbs of Christianity Is Not Great:

--------------------

John Loftus knows from the inside what’s wrong with Christianity. Few people are better qualified to explain to those still in its clutches why they’d do well to leave, and he has assembled a fine team of colleagues to assist him in doing so. This book should convert a high proportion of those with the courage to read it.

-- Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion.

Finally my work got the attention of Dawkins! I'm still very grateful! But it was too late to be very significant because of what has come to be known as ElovatorGate.

My publisher asked him to change his blurb by introducing it with the words, "As a Former Minister", which he obliged. Why that was important still escapes me.

Day Five of the Twelve Days of Solstice

We're celebrating the 12 days of Solstice rather than the 12 days of Christmas. I'm done writing and editing books. So I'm highlighting each of my twelve books leading up to the 25th of the month when we party. I'll tell you something about each of them you probably don't know. [See Tag Below]

Today I'll tell you about my co-written book with Dr. Randal Rauser, God or Godless?: One Atheist. One Christian. Twenty Controversial Questions, published in April, 2013.

The first thing to say is that Rauser contacted me to co-write the book without first reading my magnum opus Why I Became an Atheist. I think that's instructive, since he didn't research into how formidable of an opponent I might be. More on that a bit later.

Questioning the Resurrection, Part 1 (of 3)

By Robert Conner, with Interpolations by David Madison

[Note from David Madison: This article was written by Robert Conner, who asked me to review it and add whatever comments I wanted. I contributed about 15 percent of what you’re about to read.]

Chronologically speaking, the first person in history to mention a certain Joshua from Nazareth is Paul of Tarsus. These days Joshua of Nazareth is better know as Jesus—Jesus is the Latinized form of Iēsous, the Greek rendering of Yehoshua, Joshua, meaning “Yahweh delivers.” Joshua, the hero of the conquest of Canaan, embodied the hope that Gentile overlords would be overthrown, so Joshua was understandably a popular name among the Jews in Roman-occupied Palestine. In point of fact, archaeologists have discovered over 70 occurrences of the name Joshua/Jesus in Judean burials.

Here We Go Again with “He Is Risen!”

Wait…just how many resurrections were there?

The supreme killer text in the New Testament—the one that wipes out the story that Jesus rose from the dead—is a gift to us from the author of Matthew’s gospel. This is worth noting as Easter is upon us, but I wonder how many believers notice this text; or, for that matter, how many have done even a little due diligence on the gospel accounts of Easter morning.

My colleague at the Debunking Christianity Blog, Robert Conner, has offered a solid analysis in this book, Apparitions of Jesus: The Resurrection as Ghost Story—and his sharp wit as well:

“I've long suspected that what the majority of people know about Christianity derives from its major holidays. They get their religion from Christmas cards and Easter imagery—thinking the Easter Bunny was one of the twelve apostles and candy eggs were on the menu at the Last Supper.” (Conner, Debunking Christianity Blog, 16 November 2018)

What to Understand about the "Infamous Loftus Ego" and How to Deal With That Rascal ;-)

I think the most often repeated complaint against me is that I'm thin-skinned, that I don't respond to criticism very well. Whew! That's a relief. At least I'm not being accused of jaywalking too! Jaywalking? Ahhh yes, I think I have done that on occasion. The undeniable fact is that we all have personality flaws. What's yours? No, really, WHAT'S YOURS? Biblical advice might be useful here: "How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?" And this: "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone." It would seem as though my critics want me to be more like them. But if I were more like them then I would have their faults rather then mine, since we all have faults. Sorry, I like my faults better than theirs, thank you very much! Despite mine I'm a really good person. Still, let me tell you how to deal with that so-called "infamous Loftus ego." ;-)

Who Is To Be Considered a Philosopher?

Daily Nous is a site maintained by Dr. Justin Weinberg, an associate professor of philosophy at the University of South Carolina. Recently he weighed in on who should be considered a philosopher, and he had some trouble with it. Calling everyone a philosopher (which might technically be true) lowers the standard into oblivion. It would be an injustice to call Joe Sixpack and William L. Rowe both philosophers in the same sentence. However, there are people recognized as philosophers because they truly are philosophers. They have met certain criteria in this highly specialized discipline. Weinberg tells us,

Let's stipulate that someone is a philosopher who as a PhD in philosophy, or working on a graduate degree in philosophy, or having a regular appointment in a philosophy department LINK

In a similar vein, Dr. Hector Avalos recently commented on who should be considered a biblical scholar. Avalos tells us,

In general, a scholar is one who, at minimum, has the equipment needed to verify independently the claims made in the relevant field. Usually, it is standard to have undergone some certification process as reflected in graduate degrees and peer reviewed published work. Self-proclamation as a “scholar” is not standard academic procedure.

The words for "philosopher" and "scholar" must have meaning, so philosophers and scholars working in those fields are best qualified to define them.

Some Recommendations of My Work

Here are some recommendations of my work from The Secular Outpost:

Concerning my book Why I Became an Atheist:

"I give this book two thumbs way up. In addition to courageously sharing his personal story, Loftus applies his considerable training and expertise into developing a cumulative case against Christianity and for atheism. I cannot think of another book like it on the market. Loftus is clearly familiar with the work of evangelical apologists like Copan, Craig, Geisler, and Moreland, as his book is filled with references to their work and objections to their arguments. In fact, his book might best be described as a “counter-apologetics” textbook. Anyone who reads this blog (The Secular Outpost) but has not yet read Why I Became an Atheist should do so." -- Jeff Lowder.

"WIBA is a serious book that deals with serious arguments. It may not be as sophisticated as, say, Graham Oppy's Arguing About Gods (not much is; certainly nothing I have ever written), but it is two or three cuts above most of the "new atheist" polemic." -- Dr. Keith Parsons."

----------------

Concerning my anthology The Christian Delusion:

"For nearly two thousand years apologists have striven mightily to show that the dogmas of Christianity are rationally defensible. For much of the Christian era critics have sought to debunk those apologetic claims. In that long tradition of criticism, there have been few works as effective as The Christian Delusion. The essays are incisive, rigorous, and original, shedding new light on old issues and boldly exploring new paths of argument. The selection of topics is outstanding--at once both comprehensive and innovative. For fresh insights into an old debate, The Christian Delusion is strongly recommended." -- Dr. Keith Parsons.

-----------------

Concerning my book The Outsider Test for Faith:

"I have no doubt it’s a book everyone—theists, agnostics, atheists—interested in the “big questions” should read. So, if you haven’t yet read it, I encourage you to check it out!" -- Jeff Lowder.

"John Loftus has written a bold book based on a simple premise: The unexamined faith is not worth believing. Of course, every Christian apologist gives lip service to this premise and claims to have given the tenets of faith a full and fair hearing. Loftus shows just how cheap and hollow such talk usually is. He demands that believers examine their own faith with all of the rigor and skepticism that they direct towards other faiths. To those who condemn the beliefs of others while elevating their own dogmas, Loftus’ message could come straight from the Gospel: Remove the beam from your own eye before you seek to remove the speck from another’s." -- Dr. Keith Parsons.

----------------

Dr. Keith Parsons wrote a chapter for my anthology The End of Christianity.

----------------

Concerning my anthology Christianity is not Great:

“Philosophers of religion tend to focus on whether religious claims are true and, if so, how beliefs in such claims can be justified. They tend to spend much less time on whether such beliefs are good, harmful, or a combination of both. In Christianity Is Not Great, John Loftus and his contributors defend a modest claim: Christianity causes real harm. What makes this book so valuable is its catalog of the numerous ways in which Christianity can be (and has been) harmful. Anyone who wants to learn more about the harms of religion needs to read this book.” -- Jeff Lowder.

"You can show that Christianity is almost certainly untrue, and this was accomplished in previous volumes edited by John Loftus. However, such a critique, however cogent, is necessary but not sufficient. Apologists have justified the existence of Christianity not merely on the grounds that it is true, but because it is allegedly the fountain of all that is good in a world of sin. The message that Christianity is the Light of the World has been repeated so often and so effectively that it is now politically incorrect to take exception and say that Christianity has been, and is, the source of much abiding evil. Anyone with the temerity to say so is castigated as intolerant—by secular pundits as much as by religious apologists. Yet the truth must be told, however much it rankles, and this is what Loftus and the other authors do in Christianity is not Great." -- Dr. Keith Parsons.

Tristan Vick's New Book Exposes Randal Rauser As a Rhetorician Without Much Substance

Tristan Vick is the Advocatus Atheist and has interacted with Randal Rauser for a few years. This past weekend Vick released a new book dealing with the rhetoric of Rauser, titled The Swedish Fish, Deflating the Scuba Diver and Working the Rabbit's Foot, which Edward Babinski and Robert M. Price helped him on.I've seen an advanced copy and I recommended it in these words:

Randal Rauser prides himself on reaching out to atheists. But if Tristan Vick’s book is any indication, he’s failing. He’s failing precisely because he’s not really interested in searching for truth but in defending what he already believes is truth. Although Vick doesn’t have the credentials Rauser has, it doesn’t take much to find fault with the rhetoric that Rauser substitutes in place of good arguments. Tristan Vick effectively demonstrates he will say just about anything in defense of his faith. Well done Tristan!

I'm going recap how Rauser has done so far, and give my predictions of upcoming projects.

Lowder-Vandergriff Debate On God’s Existence Now Available

Jeff Lowder provides a nice write-up about his debate with Mr. Kevin Vandergriff, along with instructions for listening to it right here. I haven't listened to it yet, but I suspect Jeff did very well since that's his forte, so kudos to him! The issues they address are all important.

I just have one criticism. There is no such thing as Theism or Christian Theism or Mere Christianity. Until I find a group of "mere theists" who worship together at the same Basilica or Cathedral or Chapel or Church or Hall or Home or Altar or Tent or Temple or Synagogue or Mosque or Shrine then I'll see value in public debates over "mere theism." In the same manner, until I find a group of "mere Christian theists" who worship together at the same Basilica or Cathedral or Chapel or Church or Hall or Home or Altar or Temple then I'll see value in public debates over "mere Christian theism." As one who majored in the philosophy of religion discipline, I see greater value in debunking the basis for all Christian theisms found in the Bible and the theologies based on it, along with the history of various Christianities and the harms they have caused. While we need all voices and arguments in our common cause, I think my particular focus is best if we want to disabuse Christians of their faith.

More Praise From Jeff Lowder About "Christianity is Not Great"

He already wrote a nice blurb for the book. On his blog, The Secular Outpost, he additionally said: "I know of no other book which argues in such comprehensive detail that Christianity has caused so much harm in the world." I agree but then you'd expect me to. ;-)

On Ending the Philosophy of Religion Discipline

[First published 7/31/14] I intend to do a series of posts on my call to end the philosophy of religion (PoR) discipline in secular universities, by answering the following questions: 1) Why do I propose ending PoR as a subdiscipline of Philosophy proper in the secular universities?; 2) What should we know when it comes to ending the PoR?; 3) What exactly is my proposal?; 4) What are the best ways to examine the claims of religion?; 5) What are some practical steps to help facilitate this proposal?; and 6) Why do secular philosophers of religion object to this proposal? In this post I intend to answer question #1. To read further posts in this series click on the tag below, "Ending Philosophy of Religion."

Quote of the Day, By Jeffery Jay Lowder

[T]he philosophy of religion is not “dead,” but it is in serious condition, if not on life support. This can be shown by counting the number of philosophy departments at secular colleges and universities which have faculty lines for philosophy of religion. (They are very rare.) Why is this? I think that one contributing factor to this state of affairs is the blatant partisanship which is very much the norm in the philosophy of religion. Many philosophers of religion, including both atheists and theists, function as natural theologians (if theists) or natural atheologians (if atheists). In other words, they act as if their job description says, “If you’re a theist, defend theism; if you’re an atheist, defend atheism.” It’s rare for philosophers of religion to engage in genuine inquiry and to spend equal amounts of time defending theism and defending atheism. But, if a philosopher of religion is going to act like a philosopher, not an apologist, they should be engaging in inquiry. LINK.

Below is my response, which I guarantee will be worth a click of your time. ;-)

Three More Blurbs for "Christianity is Not Great"

I've previously mentioned that Richard Dawkins and David Mills wrote blurbs for my new anthology, Christianity Is Not Great: How Faith Fails.Here are three more in the order I received them:

The Evolution of Venom: This is How Science Works

All believers denigrate science in at least a few areas. The more fundamentalist the believer then the more that person denigrates science. Methinks they just don't understand how it works. Below is a video showing an example with regard to venom in some animals. Notice that science makes predictions. In this case the prediction was based on evolution that venom must have existed before there were fangs, and further that snake venom was inherited from an earlier ancestor. This prediction went against common wisdom. But the evidence was found. Notice the scientist does experiments looking for evidence rather than believing any authorities. Notice also that this science is helping make our lives healthier by the development of medicines, something you will not find in the Bible, God's supposed wisdom. Seriously, do you see a mad scientist here, someone seeking to destroy people's faith?

Jeff Lowder: "Two Thumbs Way Up" for My Book WIBA

I give this book two thumbs way up. In addition to courageously sharing his personal story, Loftus applies his considerable training and expertise into developing a cumulative case against Christianity and for atheism. I cannot think of another book like it on the market. Loftus is clearly familiar with the work of evangelical apologists like Copan, Craig, Geisler, and Moreland, as his book is filled with references to their work and objections to their arguments. In fact, his book might best be described as a “counter-apologetics” textbook. Anyone who reads this blog (The Secular Outpost) but has not yet read Why I Became an Atheist should do so. LINK.

Christian/Theistic Critiques of the Kalam Cosmological Argument

Jeffery Jay Lowder recently linked to two Christian, yes Christian critiques of William Lane Craig's Kalam Cosmological Argument. One is by Calum Miller and the other by Danny Faulkner. They join Wes Morriston, a theist, in arguing against it. Looks like the Kalam cannot survive the progress of science and the reasoning based on it. I thereby declare it to be dead.