The "Great Silence" edited his Amazon review. Now it begins with something false:In an attempt to censor me from commenting on Amazon reviews, the "Great Silence" (an anonymous confessing Catholic) showed up. He(?) says it's unprofessional for me to comment on Amazon reviews of my books. Nice try but I'm not biting. Some people actually like discussing a book with the author, and I oblige them sometimes. It offers a chance to learn more by doing so, good or bad. It produces one or two more rounds of counter-argument and counter-counter-argument, which can better help people in their search for the truth. He prefers the professionalism of other authors who don't respond to reviews on Amazon. However, they could be seen in a different light than one of praiseworthy professionalism. They just might view themselves as too good to lower themselves to the rank-in-file commenters on Amazon. Who knows?
Edited to add : if you ever consider writing a review of one of Loftus' books, even a reasonable one like below, first read what Loftus and his cronies will regard as fair comment on such review. See the insecure smear "article" on Loftus' blog in response to this review. So, before you comment on anything Loftus writes, know that not all these paragons of rationality allow criticism or fair comment. I really have no idea why his publisher would allow him to conduct himself like this.You know what? This is one thing that really grates on me. He is anonymous. Get it, anonymous. We don't know how old he is, where he lives, or if he's really a "he". I am a real person. This is my name. You can find out about me if you want to. But look at him, defending his honor and his name by smearing mine. This post below is the only thing I wrote about his review. It's still unchanged. How in the hell can I smear someone if he doesn't have a name? So tell you what, my faithful cronies, one and all, far and wide, vote his review down.. ;-) It's not true. It's the "Great Silence(r)" who wants to silence me from commenting on his review. It was that way from the start. I'm dogged by so many stupid people that sometimes it just makes me ill.
A few years went by and Navabi’s faith began to flounder, regardless of the strong influence of religious teachers at his school. He felt ashamed for doubting Islam, but trusted that his god was a god of reason and would surely deliver. “But it didn’t go that way,” he says. “I went to hunt for evidence, and I didn’t find anything.” He read voraciously, concentrating on his own religion, other religions, and history, and came to the conclusion that all religions are manmade. But he did not arrive at this conclusion painlessly.Hovet writes, "Now, at the age of 31, a lot has changed from his experiences in Iran to his current life in Canada. He is the founder of the Atheist Republic website and the Atheist Republic Facebook page, which alone has over one million likes – making it one of the most popular pages of its kind."
“It got to the point where I was begging God for evidence. I cried. I was like, ‘God, I’m going to lose faith in you. So, if you’re out there, show me something! Anything!’” By the age of 18, Navabi had given up. He knew he was an atheist and that there would be no going back.
The descriptions could well have been about the witch hunts in Europe from about 1450-1750 though. It opens with the brutal murder of a girl accused of witchcraft named Kepari Leniata:
was also a NY Times Bestseller. The book will include his last essay, which he submitted for it before he died. My publisher wanted a smaller book this time around, so it's to be about 380 pages. They just announced it'll be available on July 26, 2016. You can pre-order it online!
Although I'm not done celebrating the release of my recent book, here we go again. Below, for your consideration, are a list and description of the excellent contributors (in alphabetical order).Hi John, I'm a Catholic of the open-minded-lets-see-how-strong-my-faith-is type. I have received your latest book, and will start reading that today. I found your other books to be some of the very best atheist arguments out there, if not (yet) completely convincing. Your own essay on animal suffering is the single most devastating argument that I have ever read against my faith. I still don't have much of an answer against it. Well, let's see how you go with this one. I like the starting premise - an apparent Christian apologetics book that will most likely conclude that it's all a fool's errand.Edit: He later added:
Your chapter on the five schools of evidence / apologetic argumentation is brilliant. That is the type of information that very few people would really get to engage with.This one is from Phil Torres on Facebook:
I've read about half of this book by John W. Loftus so far, and I can tell you that it's fantastic. Exceptionally well-written, very thoughtful, and quite authoritative. I'm looking forward to reading the rest and posting a review on Amazon!
For if the evidence existed then apologists would never have come up with any other method. You know it. I know it. We all know it. So Ken Ham's presuppositional apologetics is a tacit admission he doesn't think the evidence exists to believe!Here are the first and last paragraphs that sandwich the meat of a really nice review:Four years ago I wrote in my first book about what I called The Problem of Apologetics, making the case that the very existence of apologetics--lawyerly defenses of religious faith--is a major strike against the believability of the contents of any faith tradition employing them. In considering and formulating that set of ideas, I rapidly concluded that religious apologetics don't deserve serious consideration, and as a result I thought it wasn't possible for me to take them any less seriously. I was wrong. In his new book, How to Defend the Christian Faith: Advice from an Atheist, John W. Loftus managed to convince me that the amount of respect I should give to religious apologetic arguments isn't zero, as I had concluded; it is less than zero.
Those who wish to defend the Christian faith should read How to Defend the Christian Faith with utmost seriousness, ponder its contents, and ultimately find something better to do with their time as a result. Others should read it to get a full sense of just how bad the case for Christianity really is. As I argue extensively in my newest book, Everybody Is Wrong About God, the time has come to give no serious consideration to the entire theistic enterprise, and How to Defend the Christian Faith shows us exactly why. The case is hopeless; it's time to move on. LINK.
 |
I am always concerned for doctrinal stability. That is my life's work. And this doctrinal stability is always threatened in one way or another. The issue discussed in the article by H. L. Mason is no longer a presence on the CCU campus.
Way back in October of 2013 I sat down and read Randal Rauser’s book The Swedish Atheist the Scuba Diver and Other Apologetic Rabbit Trails and then, as is my habit, wrote a series of brief reviews about my impressions on my philosophy of religion blog The Advocatus Atheist.
Initially, I think the thing that struck a chord with me about Randal was that he didn't seem like he was rehashing all the same old Christian apologetic fanfare. Rather, there seemed to be some genuine thought behind his arguments, and I found that rather refreshing (for a religious apologist). Randal is articulate and approaches perceived problems in Christianity differently than other apologists (heck, he even admits there ARE theological problems in Christianity that need addressing – so kudos to him).
It was not a simple decision...when I left behind my faith.I highly recommend her site. Read this guest post by Shanna Babilonia, who discusses five reasons why organized religion might have problems with educated women.
However, I could no longer ignore the historical and social truths that surrounded me.
For me, the Bible became a book written by men that reinforced a patriarchal view of society. I began to identify as an atheist.
I could have left it as a private decision shared only with friends and family. But I became troubled as I continued to see the reach of religion into women’s private lives. I reached out to other women who had left religion behind and asked them to write about their journeys.
I am currently in the process of getting their 18 stories published in a new book.
This website is intended to continue that discussion with posts not just by my authors and myself, but by others who want a forum to discuss current events on the intersection of women and religion or other topics relevant to “faithless feminists.”
This is a grassroots movement that will attract more and more conservative voters, explains Rick Perlstein of The Washington Spectator. LINK. Sanders explains:Rauser is perhaps not the best (or at least, not the more forceful) advocate for the Christian position that could have been featured; nevertheless, this is a creative, cordial, well-presented exchange of viewpoints, that will be of great interest to anyone (on either “side”) interested in such debates. --Steven H. Prop, LINK
“I’m a progressive, but I’m a progressive who likes to get things done,” Hillary Clinton said at the first Democratic debate, in response to a question from moderator Anderson Cooper about whether she defines herself as a moderate or a progressive.
The implication was that progressive Bernie Sanders is too far to the left to accomplish anything—all of his ideas are pie-in-the-sky. You have to be able to find the bipartisan, “warm, purple space” as Clinton said earlier this year, to get anything done. Slate’s Jamelle Bouie was super-impressed by this rationale, saying Clinton has “skilled use of bureaucratic power.”
The problem with this narrative is that it is completely false. Not only has Sanders gotten a lot more things done than Clinton did in her own short legislative career, he’s actually one of the most effective members of Congress, passing bills, both big and small, that have reshaped American policy on key issues like poverty, the environment and health care. LINK.
