We’re going to be heading back to God’s Not Dead next week, but before we do that, I wanted to finish up something we were talking about last time we covered the Handbook for the Recently Deconverted: one of Christians’ very favorite apologetics tactics, the Argument from X. A while ago, Read more
Today we’re talking about wishful apologetics: those arguments that ache and yearn for an idealized form of Christianity. Special Guest: C.S. Lewis.
We’re about to plunge into actual apologetics works and examine their authors’ major ideas and claims. Before we do that, let’s just real quick-like run through the field as a whole so we’re all on the same page. I’m sure it didn’t take long at all for the earliest Christians Read more
Last time we talked about apologists, we talked about their first big mistake: that they start with a conclusion and find some kind of logic that will get them to that conclusion. That’s called arguing top-down. In bottom-up arguing, one starts with observations and measurements and builds the argument around Read more
The first fundamental mistake apologists make is that they don’t actually refer to any facts to make their various arguments, making their conclusions highly suspect. Indeed, apologists really can’t do that. It’s almost unfair even to make the request that they do so. After all: There is not one single demonstrable bit of objective evidence about the supernatural to which they actually could refer.
I’ve compared the efforts of Christian apologists to watching a Roomba repeatedly hit a wall, and nowhere do we see that analogy in action better than with a circular argument. That was one of the early topics I tackled here here on this blog like a year and a half ago, but I want to discuss circular arguments because since then I’ve noticed even more that Christians like circular arguments–almost as much as this tuxedo cat likes riding its Roomba.
Way too many Christians talk a very big game about having a monopoly on morality. They even frequently claim that non-Christians either lack the capacity for morality or are aping Christianity’s monopoly on it. But they’re wrong. The worst moral failings aren’t found in the Bible. No, for that dubious honor we must look to the people who use the Bible to excuse their own moral failings.
Hi folks! Hope your weekend is going swimmingly so far. We’ve been looking at a new apologetics book by Shane Hayes, The End of Unbelief, which bills itself as “a new approach to the question of God.” Today we’re actually going to get into the argument he thinks is the Read more
Hi again! We’ve been discussing a new apologetics book by Shane Hayes and today we’ll be starting to get into the meat of his argument–the one he thinks is “a new approach to the question of God.” Here is the link to the Amazon preview of his book, The End Read more
Hey, y’all! We’ve been talking this week about newly-published author Shane Hayes’ new apologetics masterpiece, The End of Unbelief, wherein he outlines what his book cover calls “a new approach to the question of God.” Last time, we talked about his bizarre conceptualization of atheism versus Christianity, and today we’ll Read more