Last weeks Atheist Experience was an absolutely fabulous show. If you'd like to see the whole thing go to Google video and type in Atheist Experience 579.
I love the YouTube clips that fans put up of the best callers, and this is a great one. In this one the caller appears to be trying the same thing that MFT tries with his '5 Proofs', at least it sounded pretty familiar.
Here it is, check it out:
Part 1
Part 2
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No true atheist/skeptic(TM)
ReplyDeleteLee Strobel/Kirk Cameron converted so they weren't true atheists. I get how it goes now.
I've read Lee Strobel. He is ok for an introduction but he doesn't go into depth like NT Wright or Habermas.
And no historian would use Matt D.'s criteria.We would have to throw out a great deal of ancient history.
I hate how he straw-mans Lee Strobel piece about the apostles not recanting.Strobel was addressing the claim that the apostles made up the resurrection as a lie. It is very unlikely that they would die for something that they made up.That was completely out of context.
I don't get the female host's objection. If Jesus did resurrect the most parsimonious explanation is his own divinity.
We would have to throw out a great deal of ancient history
ReplyDeleteHow so? Obsidian tried this exact same thing yesterday, but now let's hear how you substantiate that claim. Seriously, I'm interested.
I hate how he straw-mans Lee Strobel piece about the apostles not recanting.
Why is it unlikely that people would die for something they made up?
People even in today's world kill other people over stories they made up. People even kill their own kids over stories they made up. Doubt me? Google Susan Smith.
If you don't get Tracie's objection, maybe you should listen again. It's not that hard.
There isn't any proof that Jesus did resurrect, and even if he did the most likely explanation is that he was never dead in the first place, not that he was divine.
Oh, and no, it has nothing to do with someone not being a 'true atheist' if they converted to any religion. It has to do with people being atheists without having reasoned out why they are so in the first place.
ReplyDeleteKirk Cameron was an atheist by default. He wasn't raised with much, if any religious background, so he didn't reason himself into atheism, he just simply had no real religious beliefs to speak of. Not the same thing.
@ Free
ReplyDeleteIn regards to people dying for a non-literal truth...ever heard of the gnostics?
Gnostics were a diverse group but many of them [not all] believed that Jesus never lived. They were rounded up in the persecutions & died just as bravely as any other christian. BUT they didn't believe that the Jesus stories were literally true!
@ Free
ReplyDeleteI've also read Strobel's work. He is a wanker of the first order.
1) He claims to be merely investigating the case for and against a position. He NEVER does so.
2) He presents extremely conservative scholars as though they are the mainstream. Indeed as though they are the ONLY christian viewpoint. Liberal scholars are, if mentioned, laughingly disparaged.
3) He NEVER asks any sceptic to counter any of the arguments given.
His book 'the case for Christ' was supposed to have arisen out of his attempt to DISPROVE christianity.
Pray tell how do you disprove something by only listening to the pro side of an argument?
"I've read Lee Strobel. He is ok for an introduction but he doesn't go into depth like NT Wright or Habermas."
ReplyDeleteJust out of curiosity, Mr. Freethinker, what did you think of Christopher Hitchen's book, "God is Not Great"?
I only ask because I'm thinking of picking it up, and you seem well read in this area.
If you didn't read it, let me know.
Why is it unlikely that people would die for something they made up?
ReplyDeleteIt's also quite possible that the idea developed gradually among them, then they came to believe it had actually happened. Denial, selective memory. It's the way the mind works.
@ Free
ReplyDeleteAs regards Strobel try reading this review of his book:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/strobel.html
Chris,
ReplyDeleteYou think infidels dot org is going to give a fair critique of a Christian apologetic work?
I don't. I'm not saying they are wrong, but it's easy to dismiss. Given that they have an axe to grind with works like these, someone like Mr FreeThinker would be wise to take everything written there with a grain of salt.
@ Kaitlyn
ReplyDeleteFair enough. I think that every written work, on the web or off, should be taken with a grain of salt.
The point is does thier evidence agree with reality. Free, who I presume has a copy of Strobel's work, can check out a few things for himself.
E.g. Strobel NEVER gives the argument of any sceptic.
Strobel mentions the Jesus Seminar, and although he never gives even a summary of their arguments he proves a counter to them.
That is hardly an ethical way to investigate something. And Srobel pulls this time & again.
Now since the critique provides page numbers when they reference something then the author's critique can easily be checked against Strobel's work itself.
So bias or not the question becomes is the critique accurate. According to my readng of strobel's book yes the critique is accurate.
Everyone here, I will be the first to admit that Lee Strobel's book is very biased. That is why it is called ,"The Case For Christianity" and not "The Case For and against Christianity".
ReplyDeleteWhen I looked at the title of the book I knew what I was getting.
However Lee Strobel does tackle many common arguments from skeptics. For example he tackled many of the arguments Kaitlyn gave in the other thread where I was presenting my argument for the resurrection of Jesus(about the resurrection of Jesus and whether there were any pre-Christian saviour figures)
MFT,
ReplyDeleteFantastic. That still doesn't answer my question.
Well then, I guess my arguments are be default... a dud. *shrug*
ReplyDeleteWhere do I sign up to become a Christian?
Kaitlyn -
ReplyDeleteIf you want to sign up, I can get you a discount on the membership fees.
Kaitlyn-
ReplyDeleteI know a Rabbi who can get it for you wholesale.
[Why is it unlikely that people would die for something they made up?]
ReplyDeleteWould you die for something you made up? would you make up a story about someone rising from the dead and then die spreading it?I think it is unlikely.
[People even kill their own kids over stories they made up. ]
But do people willingly lay down their own lives for something that they know to be false? No
[Just out of curiosity, Mr. Freethinker, what did you think of Christopher Hitchen's book, "God is Not Great"?]
ReplyDeleteI don't know. I've seen Hitchens in debates though and he tends to be more rhetoric and emotion that actual points.
I like the Cambridge companions series though.I think they have on atheism.
@Kaitlyn
ReplyDeleteYou want to have another go at the cosmological argument?
Recently I was reading about the whole causality thing.
it's more of a metaphysical claim though.(being does not come from non-being).
The quantum mechanics thing would be irrelevant.
@ Free
ReplyDeleteSorry Free but wrong again.
You wrote "Would you die for something you made up? would you make up a story about someone rising from the dead and then die spreading it?I think it is unlikely."
Three points.
1) No one knows what happened to most of the apostles. They could have repented of the lie later on for all we know. All we have are folk tales and NOTHING else.
2) You are assuming that the apostles told conscious lies. Ever heard of the Elvis Lives phenomena? That is an example of self-deception. The sightings of Jesus [just like the sightings of Elvis] could well be another
3) You are also assuming that there is only literal truth and a lie. Not so. The gnostics were a diverse group but some of them believed that Jesus had never existed physically. They died for their faith just as bravely as the orthodox believers.
Where's kaitlyn?
ReplyDelete