The following is the text of a portion of their 1999 Ohio State University debate on the question “Did Jesus of Nazareth Rise from the Dead?” the audio of which was published on October 17, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1vaqsnhgJY. This text was published as an Appendix in my book, Unapologetic: Why Philosophy of Religion Must End.
[Republished post from 3/03/ 2012]
In a very well-written comment EricRC, a Ph.D. student in philosophy with promise, sums up what he calls the fundamental objection to the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF). Before sharing and then critiquing what he wrote let me refresh my readers on what it is:
[This post of mine in this series accidently got deleted, so I'm posting it again] We're celebrating the 12 days of Solstice rather than the 12 days of Christmas, so I'm highlighting each one of them leading up to the 25th of the month. [See Tag Below].
This anthology was named after Sam Harris's book The End of Faith like some others of mine. The so-called New Atheists took aim at God. My books took aim at Christianity in specific, because I knew the most about that religious faith.
After my first anthology, The Christian Delusion, I started telling authors the due date for their submissions was one month earlier than the actual deadline, to avoid last minute submissions. If I was concerned how the chapter was going I would ask for an outline, or rough draft along the way.
The Fallibility of First Principles, by Gunther Laird (gunther.laird@gmail.com)
The late Norman Geisler was one of the most popular
proponents of Evangelical Christianity, wedding Calvinistic argumentation with
technical concepts drawn from the Catholic philosopher Thomas Aquinas.
His son David Geisler continues his work, and recently contacted John W. Loftus
with a syllogism for God’s existence Norman had made in the Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics.
David asked my editor if he had “any atheistic friends that would be willing to
critique this more comprehensive argument for God’s existence and explain what’s wrong with it,” and I was one such friend, so John contacted me.
What follows is a brief critique of the entry “First
Principles” in the Encyclopedia,
which David copied verbatim in his email to John. The entry is quite
substantive, as Norman Geisler provided very detailed descriptions of a variety
of first principles, such as the Principle of Noncontradiction, the Principle
of Causality, and the Principle of Contingency, and explains why they cannot be
coherently denied under any circumstances.
I'm posthumously posting six chapters from an unfinished book sent to me for comment in 2008 by the late John Beversluis (see Tag below). This is chapter 6, his last chapter on John the Baptist.
I'm posthumously posting six chapters from an unfinished book sent to me for comment in 2008 by the late John Beversluis (see Tag below). In this fifth chapter Beversluis writes about the birth of Jesus. This is part 1 of 2 parts. I've highlighted a few gems from him.
CHAPTER FOUR: A PREGNANT VIRGIN:
Matthew and Luke are the only Gospels that record the birth of Jesus (Matthew 2:1-23 and Luke 2:1-19). Mark says nothing about it and starts his Gospel thirty years later with the appearance of John the Baptist on the scene. The Gospel of John is, as always, a case unto itself. It starts with a famous (and Hellenistically flavored) passage about “the Word” (logos) that existed “in the beginning” and goes on to say that this Word was not only with God, but was God (John 1:1). The only allusion to the birth of Jesus is the subsequent remark that this Word “was made flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:11)—a remark that is so oblique that anybody unfamiliar with Matthew and Luke would never guess John was talking about the same person whose birth they record in their Gospels. John has no interest in the so-called “baby Jesus.” He sees his birth in cosmic metaphysical terms—as the incarnation of a pre-existing celestial Logos who not only was God, but who also the Creator of universe (“All things were made by him; and without him was not made anything that was made” (1:3). This heavy-duty (and stoically-influenced philosophical) terminology is completely foreign to Matthew and Luke who are comparative lowbrows concerned only with various factual details about the story.
[See the Tag below for my introduction to these series of posts]. When I looked again at the book files that the late John Beversluis sent me in 2008, he included a Preface, an Introduction, and not six but seven chapters. Here for the first time are his Preface and Introduction. What he wrote is as good as I remembered! It's also more timely today than it was thirteen years ago.
