I really enjoyed your D'Souza and Dennett debate review. You didn't pull any punches on BOTH sides and that I really appreciated.
Basically, I like that you are trying to point out errors of logic on BOTH sides. So for me personally I would love more posts like that. Let's promote reason and good argument over our respective metaphysical agendas. Anyway, that's my 2cents.
toryninja
· 9 months ago
Also, could you maybe comment on how Christianity thrives under persecution while Islam thrives on violence and whether this should lead us to approach these two religions differently? Everyone seems to lump religion together as a whole but I am not sure that is the best route to go. Thanks!
Geoffrey of Ballard
· 9 months ago
This may be of interest only to me, but I would love to see a post about probability.
Both apologists and everyday Christians often use improbable events as proof of the existence of a god. This could be anything from the fine tuning argument to a chance encounter with a friend or stranger. I have a list of anecdotes that I've heard from people who use (im)probability as a certain proof of divine interaction in their lives.
Why is this so appealing? Does the logic make any sense?
Improbable events happen every day, and highly improbable events have happened in the past (abiogenesis, the American Revolution). In my opinion, improbable events are what history is made of. Yet people still use probability to try to disprove past events or prove divine activity.
lukeprog
· 9 months ago
Actually, I will do many posts on probability, as it is one of my intellectual passions! Thanks for the feedback.
Crux Australis
· 9 months ago
Just found your blog; love it! I'm a physics teacher at a Catholic School in New Zealand, and the amount of inanity I encounter in a typical day would make your head spin as if you were possessed by an imaginary demon.
exrelayman
· 9 months ago
Luke,
Nice new blog. Thanks for the computer safety tips on a separate page.
Your mission, should you choose to accept it (see how old I am): review Wheless - Forgery in Christianity, and Benton - The Origins of Christianity and the Bible. The former is in a style too difficult for many to wade through (especially if they don't want to know anyway), and I think putting forth the gist in simpler language a very commendable enterprise. The latter is a wonderful contemporary book that doesn't get the recognition it should. These review requests stem from your current project on Ridhard Carrier's book.
No offense if these tasks are not undertaken. There would be a lot of work involved, but raw material for tons of posts. From what I have seen so far, you think and write very clearly.
lukeprog
· 9 months ago
I've always wanted to read Benton's book, but haven't yet put out the money for it. Thanks for your feedback.
Ibn Abu Talib
· 9 months ago
Can you post a review of the following debate between William Lane Craig and Shabir Ally on the resurrection of Christ? It took place recently at McGill University.
All Comments
Basically, I like that you are trying to point out errors of logic on BOTH sides. So for me personally I would love more posts like that. Let's promote reason and good argument over our respective metaphysical agendas. Anyway, that's my 2cents.
Both apologists and everyday Christians often use improbable events as proof of the existence of a god. This could be anything from the fine tuning argument to a chance encounter with a friend or stranger. I have a list of anecdotes that I've heard from people who use (im)probability as a certain proof of divine interaction in their lives.
Why is this so appealing? Does the logic make any sense?
Improbable events happen every day, and highly improbable events have happened in the past (abiogenesis, the American Revolution). In my opinion, improbable events are what history is made of. Yet people still use probability to try to disprove past events or prove divine activity.
Nice new blog. Thanks for the computer safety tips on a separate page.
Your mission, should you choose to accept it (see how old I am): review Wheless - Forgery in Christianity, and Benton - The Origins of Christianity and the Bible. The former is in a style too difficult for many to wade through (especially if they don't want to know anyway), and I think putting forth the gist in simpler language a very commendable enterprise. The latter is a wonderful contemporary book that doesn't get the recognition it should. These review requests stem from your current project on Ridhard Carrier's book.
No offense if these tasks are not undertaken. There would be a lot of work involved, but raw material for tons of posts. From what I have seen so far, you think and write very clearly.
http://apologetics315.blogspot.com/2009/03/will...