Hitchens Quote
I Stand in the Gap
I am set for the express purpose of destroying the influence of evangelical Christianity in America and in the world at large. I hope atheists can appreciate this. I'm doing what I think it takes as a former evangelical insider. Whether I can do this is not the question, since I just want to be a part of what many others are doing. I embrace a multifaceted approach to accomplishing this shared goal of ours.
I'm Giving Away Some More Books
Well it feels like that anyway, for a donation. I'm moving so I need the money.
It's Possible That Evangelical Christianity is the True Faith
Okay, I've said it. It's possible Christians are right after all. But then it's possible the Loch Ness Monster exists and is evading our attempts to detect her too! Christians must be convinced that their faith is nearly impossible before they will ever consider it to be improbable, which is an utterly unreasonable standard. There are at least two reasons why they demand such a high standard of disproof. The first is what I call the Omniscience Escape Clause (read all the links in this post!). The other reason is Pascal's Wager, in that unless the Christian faith is shown to be nearly impossible the threat of hell still holds sway over the minds of believers. I would think however, that if their faith is shown to be improbable that should be good enough. Here then are several ways where believers, especially evangelicals (my target audience), try escaping out from underneath the weight of probabilities:
Quote of the Day, From My Wife
As we drove past a church having their service yesterday she made me laugh when she said:
Looks like they can't remember how to be good and need to be reminded every week. Some of us are smarter than that.[First posted 9/6/10]
Did Jesus Do Miracles?
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
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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
Hey, Do You Want To Piss Me Off?
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.
The Cover of "Why I Became An Atheist" 2nd Edition
It's rare when an atheist book makes it into a second edition. I re-wrote it during the months of March through to June. Almost every chapter was extensively re-written. A couple of new chapters were added. It's better said and better argued, with an additional 100 pages by my calculations. It is truly gonna be my magnum opus. It's a massively argued mammoth sized book with 285,000 words. Look for it the beginning of next year. I'm most proud of my new chapter on the resurrection where I break new ground.
My Comment Policy
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.
Jeffery Jay Lowder and Keith Parsons on a Craig/Loftus Debate
They express my sentiments and are asking William Lane Craig to either confirm or deny that in 1985 he had said, "the person I fear debating the most is a former student of mine." Link. I personally would like for Bill to debate Lowder too.
Part of My Introduction to A Debate Book With Dr. Randal Rauser
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.
Christian Anti-intellectualism and Economic Terrorism
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.
William Lane Craig vs Stephen Law On October 17th
Link. Notice in the video how Dr. Craig belittles Richard Dawkins for not debating him. Maybe I should do the same thing he plans on doing to Dawkins in Craig's home town of Atlanta, GA, sometime in the future? Hey Atlanta skeptic societies, care to help me plan for something like this when we know Craig is in town? Why not?
None 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.
None 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.
Let's Recap Why William Lane Craig Refuses to Debate Me
[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.
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.
The OTF and Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN)
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.
Poll: Do You Want to See a Craig/Loftus Debate?
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:
A Debate With Dr. Matthew Flannagan is in the Works
He and his wife Madeleine will be in the states as announced right here. They have a few days open so I asked if he'd want to debate me. It looks like a new campus group at Purdue in South Bend, Indiana, may host it with the tentative topic, "Is Christianity True?" If that doesn't work out we're looking for any group anywhere who wants to sponsor it. He and I have sparred back and forth before as you can see right here. At this late date we'll need people who can come up with some sponsorship money. That will make this event happen and get it taped for YouTube. If you are so inclined please help us out. And check back for more details. It's only a month away. I plan to trash him. ;-)
Why William Lane Craig Refuses to Debate Me
An unnamed friend asked him why he won't debate me via email and a volunteer responded on his behalf saying 1) that I'm not qualified, which is as good of an excuse as any; and 2) *Cough* now get this, he doesn't think it would be good for me spiritually. Bill did tell me that it wouldn't be appropriate to debate me, a former student, and he did tell me that he still has hope for me. Yeah, right, if I have not committed the unforgivable sin then no one has. Christian believers don't even know their own Bible, which tells us that the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is a SPEAKING SIN! *ahem* I deny that Jesus was sent by God, that he's the Son of God, and I deny the Holy Spirit. So how about now Bill, since there's no hope for me. ;-) And why does that even matter? What is Bill afraid of? He's afraid of introducing me to his fan base. This is what I really think. He's scared of me. So the next time Bill challenges Richard Dawkins to a debate just remind him of lil' ol' me.
DC Ranked 2nd Among SBL's Biblical Bloggers
But take a look at how many times I post something compared to others, below:
September Biblical Studies Carnival
I have something in this carnival under Secular Biblical Studies, where you read: Last month’s number one biblioblogger John Loftus provides a link to a debate between Dr. Michael Brown and Dr. Bart Ehrman: Does the Bible Provide an Adequate Answer to the Problem of Suffering? And to an article by Professor Keith Parsons: “Are Supernatural Hypotheses Testable?” Finally, John discusses The Deuteronomist and King Josiah. Professor Hector Avalos has one asserting that ‘True’ religion begats violence. Check it out!
I Am An Unfriendly Not-So-Famous Atheist Who is Not Preaching to the Choir
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.
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.
The Argument From Christian Diversity: There is No Such a Thing as “Mere Christianity”
[Written by John W. Loftus] That Christianity is a diverse phenomena cannot be doubted. But it is diverse not only in the number of denominations but also within each denomination itself (follow the links):
Is this the Best Possible World and does God have Free Will?
Let us assume the triple properties of the classical approach to God: that he is omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent. In terms of the classic Problem of Evil argument, if there is too much evil in the world, God knows what to do about it, is powerful enough to do it, and is loving enough to want to do something about it. This argument has been around since the days of Epicurus and still remains one of the most hotly debated theological issues in modern times, causing many believers to leave the fold due to its evidential power.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)