[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]
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.
Just tell me I cannot do something. Tell me I shouldn't even try. Tell me to abandon my goals. Don't people know that one of the reasons I have done so well in putting together some great authors in anthologies with a popular blog is that I am a driven/passionate man? I said so in my book WIBA. Driven people get things done. It may be a fault with our types to get pissed off at naysayers, but then why fault the very thing that makes us who we are? Being a driven man is a double-edged sword. Without the one edge I wouldn't have the other. I have been proving naysayers wrong nearly all of my life. When it comes to my goal of debating William Lane Craig, I will show the naysayers wrong.
At Debunking Christianity I welcome most anyone to comment on what is written. I like the challenge of educated discussions between educated people. I think educated people can disagree agreeably. Only people not fully exposed to alternative ways of thinking will claim their opponents are stupid merely because they disagree. But not all Christians who visit here are educated. I get a lot of utterly ignorant and even some threatening comments from Christians ("You are going to hell Loftus.") These kind of comments will not be tolerated. Nor will I tolerate personal attacks against me coming from my side.
As you read this book keep in mind that Dr. Rauser has by-passed what I consider the proper protocol. He has unfairly placed himself in the so-called final championship game by jumping in line, as it were, bypassing other worthy religious contenders in order to debate me, an atheist.
A Christian friend of mine refuses to buy my book WIBA, as he explained to me in an email: "I do not refuse to read your book, I refuse to support the book and the publishing company by purchasing it. I do not have access to a library because of where I live. But if I could borrow a copy or someone gave me a copy, I would have no problems reading it." I've heard this kind of crap so often I need to respond to this idiocy.
[Written by John W. Loftus]
Let's recap some of Bill Craig's stated reasons for why he refuses to debate me. I think this might be instructive of what might be considered his underlying reason. You be the judge. I'm not asking anyone to respond for him. I'm asking Bill to respond himself should he choose to do so, for no one can really respond but him.
When I was a student of his he told his class something I thought was odd at the time. This was back in 1985 at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He said "the person I fear debating the most is a former student of mine." Keep in mind that Dr. Craig had only been teaching a few years before this to actually know of any student who might want to debate him. But that’s what he said. Again, he said "the person I fear debating the most is a former student of mine." He cannot deny saying this, and I don't think he will. If he does it shouldn't be too hard for me to contact former students in that class to confirm it.
Plantinga's EAAN argument is that "the combination of evolutionary theory and naturalism is self-defeating on the basis of the claim that if both evolution and naturalism are true, then the probability of having reliable cognitive facilities is low." Below you can find professor Stephen Law's critique of the EAAN along with him debating Plantinga on the program Unbelievable.
Okay, Okay, I'm putting some pressure on Bill to debate me. Why not? I've put up a poll question about this to the right. Comment below as you wish. Here are the results:
But take a look at how many times I post something compared to others, below:
When it comes to famous atheists (i.e., those who have been on the cover of Time Magazine as but one example), many Christians will attack their work and them as people. When it comes to atheists who are not so famous, whether or not many Christians attack their work and them as people depends. It depends on whether or not they are considered friendly or unfriendly to Christianity, and it depends on whether or not they are "preaching to the choir." I find that there are several books written by unfriendly non-famous atheists who preach to the choir that get many glowing reviews from other atheists but are ignored by Christians because they don't consider their works to be informed.
I am an unfriendly non-so-famous atheist who is not preaching to the choir. ;-) So my work and person gets attacked more than other non-famous atheists. I would hope atheists would understand this. Many do.
Let's say you were shopping for the best car made. Your father brought you up as a die-hard Chevy lover but now you want to seriously find which car is the best one out there. How would you go about doing it? What are the criteria for what is to be considered the best car? There would be objective criteria but there would also be subjective person-related criteria. Are there any similarities here with choosing the best religion? Dissimilarities? Is choosing the best car analogous to how people search for the one true religion? In what ways? Which religions and sects within them would you seriously consider? Why not consider them all?
Then consider whether everyone could agree on which car is the best car made. Of course they couldn't, even with some agreed upon objective criteria. But let's say everyone who makes the wrong car choice will be cast into hell for an eternity? ;-) Sound unfair? Sure it does. Then why isn't it unfair when it comes to choosing the best religion? Have fun with this.
If you read Christian works you'll see something very interesting that should tell us all they are wrong. Here's what I see. First off, there are more apologists authors than there are skeptics. So they can write five or even twenty essays and books for every one that skeptics write (and produce more YouTube videos too). There are no atheist universities but there are a plethora of Christian colleges and seminaries that support these authors while they do their research. So these apologists and philosophers refer to each other's works. If a skeptic hasn't read a particular philosophical or Biblical work (which are being spit out at an unbelievable rate) the apologist can point to something and say if we read it then our objection would fall to the ground.
It is said that Christianity has been passing the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) from the very beginning, and is still doing so as the gospel penetrates non-Christian cultures. Let me respond briefly.
Long ago in a cave a caveman looked at his friend who then died. He was upset. His friend would not move. He noticed that air no longer came out of his friends mouth. He knew the air had left him.
So he gathered up his friend and some food and a few of his friend’s possessions and buried them all. Perhaps it would all go wherever his air went.
, which I highly recommend. He and I are your hosts here at DC as the #1 ranked Biblioblog, although Hector doesn't post that often.