There are some doubts that Jesus was known as a miracle worker in his day. David Friedrich Strauss (1808- 1874 CE) was the first to systematically argue this case. Against the rationalist approach of explaining them all away naturally, and against the supernaturalist approach which took these claims literally, Strauss argued in what can be considered a book of its own (a chapter containing 121 pages), that these miracle stories were myths.1
October 23, 2011
October 22, 2011
A Helpful Review of My Book WIBA
The author writes:
This was one of the first books I read when I began to doubt. It was extremely comprehensive and I found many of the chapters very helpful. John appeared extremely well-cited and read and I cannot even imagine amassing such a collection on my list of read books as the quantity that fills his footnotes. Link.
I'm Co-Writing a Book With Dr. Randal Rauser
Nine months ago at Randal's initiation we finished a book proposal tentatively titled: God or Godless: One Atheist, One Christian, and Twenty Irreverent, Interesting, and Somewhat Informative Debates. In it we each propose ten topics for debate. This has been a slow process but we finally got a contract from Baker Book House, a major Christian publisher.
October 21, 2011
A New and Better Pascal's Wager: If God Asked You to Wager Before Being Born What Would You Choose?
Why didn't we get a choice in whether or not we would be born on earth? Wouldn't the reasonably good thing to do is to create us and then ask us if we would want to be born knowing the risks involved?
October 20, 2011
Does a Religious Context Increase the Odds of a Miracle?
[Written by John W. Loftus] Christian apologists point out that the probability of a miracle is increased when it occurs in a “religious context” as opposed to one that is a merely an “anomaly.” William Lane Craig states that: “A miracle without a context is inherently ambiguous. But if a purported miracle occurs in a significant religio-historical context, then the chances of its being a genuine miracle are increased. For example, if the miracles occur at a momentous time and do not recur regularly in history, and if the miracles are numerous and various, then the chances of their being the result of some unknown natural cause are reduced.” Then he proceeds to argue that in the case of Jesus his resurrection took place in such a religious context.1
More On The Outsider Test for Faith
All a person has to do is make an interesting argument that provokes debate. If you have done that then you have done well. It furthers the discussion. The Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) is such an argument. Here is a recent email and my answers to the objections.
October 19, 2011
IQ2 Debate: Atheists Are Wrong
Link. Atheist Jane Caro (at 35:15) expresses one of the main reasons I am against religion, the oppression of women. I loved what she said and silently cheered as she spoke! Atheist Russell Blackford (at 54:15) was excellent as well.
The Debunking Christianity Challenges
Is anyone up to these three challenges? Think of it this way: If you're wrong about your Christian faith wouldn't you want to know? Here are three ways to find out. What are you afraid of? Really. What are you afraid of?
October 18, 2011
Quote of the Day, by Tony Campolo
I have three things I’d like to say today. First, while you were sleeping last night, 30,000 kids died of starvation or diseases related to malnutrition. Second, most of you don’t give a shit. What’s worse is that you’re more upset with the fact that I said shit than the fact that 30,000 kids died last night. Link. Hat Tip: James McGrath
I'm Giving Away Some More Books
Well it feels like that anyway, for a donation. I'm moving so I need the money.
Stephen Law's Opening Speech in Debate with William Lane Craig
Link. It's a very good one. I have argued the same things. You can see them here, and in chapter 9 of my book The Christian Delusion.
In Defense of Debates
I understand why some people don't like debates. I really do. Only in an honest dialogue can we get at the truth. In a debate format you'll probably never hear one side admitting the other side has a good point, or retract a statement that was shown to be wrong. No one concedes anything in such a contest because the goal is to win for their side. Just the same, let me offer six reasons in defense of debates.
Does God Exist? A debate between Eddie Tabash & Dr. Peter E. Payne
Eddie is a good debater and should do well. He tells me, "I am prepping day and night. I will spend Saturday with philosopher, Ted Drange." Perhaps that's what it takes. Link.
On Dealing With Apostates.
Some Christians think they have Biblical precedent to scoff, mock and malign those of us who are apostates from the faith because Jesus Paul and Elijah mocked their opponents. Let me try to reason with them.
October 17, 2011
I'm Giving Away Some Books on Jesus
Well it feels like that anyway, for a donation. I'm moving so I need the money. I also have no plans on writing something about the historical Jesus. For anyone interested in that issue these books should help for a donation.
This is How it Works: Getting Mileage Out of Craig's Refusal to Debate Me
An important context here is William Lane Craig's UK tour (starting this week). He is making huge attempts to publicize it through Dawkins' refusal to debate him. People aren't sufficiently aware of HIS refusal to debate John Loftus. When I pointed this out in a comment on one of Craig's video spots, the comment was removed and I was blocked. In so far as Craig has justified his position, his response seems uncannily similar to Dawkins, effectively 'it would look good on his CV not mine!' I agree with those saying 'Why I Became and Atheist' is a good book and contains more than enough to merit the author the kind of debating platform accorded to some other atheist authors. I do believe many of Craig's British supporters are not aware about the Loftus-refusal and they may get embarrassed when Craig gets called on this in debate questions in the UK. LinkNone of Craig's stated reasons for refusing to debate me make any sense. I would hope someone during the Q & A would ask him why he refuses to debate one of his former students, me.
Who Speaks For Atheism?
My publisher has dubbed me "a leading atheist spokesperson." I didn't say this. I don't care if I am. They do it to sell books. So let's explore this. Am I? Let's take the issue of whether or not there is a historical person behind the Jesus cult, okay? Do I speak for you?
October 15, 2011
Assessing The Minimal Facts Approach of Habermas, Licona, and Craig
[Written by John W. Loftus] Christian apologists Gary Habermas and Michael Licona have proposed a "minimal facts approach" to the resurrection of Jesus. Along with William Lane Craig in his debates, they want to stress that which most scholars agree on as facts and then seek the best hypothesis that explains all of these agreed upon facts. They do not want “to be saddled with the task of first showing that the Gospels are, in general, historically reliable,” writes Craig.[20] Instead, Craig wants to establish “that the Gospel accounts of the discovery of Jesus’ empty tomb can be shown to be historically reliable without first showing that the Gospels are, in general, historically trustworthy.”[21] Habermas and Licona tell us about their own “minimal facts approach” in these words: “This approach considers only those data that are strongly attested historically that they are granted by nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones…We present our case using the ‘lowest common denominator’ of agreed-upon facts. This keeps attention on the central issue, instead of sidetracking into matters that are irrelevant.”[22]
Christian Philosopher Victor Reppert on a Craig/Loftus Debate
Dr. Reppert said to me: "He should debate you. But I think he would win the debate." Thanks Vic! He should debate me. I know of no stated criteria of Craig's where he will only debate people who could beat him, otherwise very few people are qualified. So bring it. None of Craig's stated reasons for refusing to debate me make any sense. With the endorsements of Reppert, Jeff Lowder, and Keith Parsons, this debate possibility is gaining momentum despite a few naysayers. In a recent poll here at DC, if we discount the people who don't like these kind of debates at all, 83% want to see it. To anyone who wonders why I would want to debate Craig even if I would probably lose, I say that I don't think I would lose depending on how one defines losing. I think I would offer several doubt producing arguments and that's good enough for me. [Fair Warning: To anyone who presumes to offer unasked for advice about what I should want to do, be careful.] ;-)
In Defense of William Lane Craig
What follows is my four part defense of Bill Craig placed into one long post. I thought I'd put together all of the relevant posts and comments for further reference.
"Exploring Religious Violence" David Eller on Atheists Talk, Sunday
David Eller is a cultural anthropologist who has spent considerable time on the topics of violence and religion. In his recent book, Cruel Creeds, Virtuous Violence: Religious Violence Across Culture and History, he explores the intersection of the two. He examines the various types of religious violence and the interaction between the cultural and religious factors that contribute to that violence. He looks at how religion can shape a culture in ways that make violence more likely, or less. Please join us as we discuss this fascinating--and ever timely--topic. Link
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)