Refuting John Loftus (and Hector Avalos)

  • Thread starter Thread starter vjtorley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

vjtorley

Guest
Hi,

Can anyone recommend some good Web sites for debunking the arguments made by John Loftus against Christianity? Ditto for Hector Avalos. I think these guys are far more dangerous than Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.

I’ve had a look at the Tektonics Web site, and I don’t think its arguments are rigorous enough to knock Loftus off his perch. J.P.Holding seems to think he’s discredited Loftus because he caught him giving himself a flattering book review and then passing it off as someone else’s (a silly thing to do, but hardly a hanging offence). However, I think we need to take Loftus very seriously, because he understands Christian apologetics from the inside. He studied under William Lane Craig. Avalos is not to be under-estimated either. He knows Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. Most Christian apologists don’t. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Vincent Torley
 
My suggestion is to take it one argument at a time. 🙂

It’s difficult to offer a comprehensive critique of the entire body of work of two people within one post (or even one thread). If there’s a particular point you want to discuss, that would be much easier to respond to.
 
There actually are several critiques of Loftus on-line. Christian apologist David Wood’s answeringinfidels.com has several articles on Loftus here:
answeringinfidels.com/answering-skeptics/edward-tabash/

Wood debated Loftus back in 2007 on the problem of evil. Here is the video: problemofevil.org/2007/07/first-loftus-wood-debate-is-now.html

There is a blog devoted to debunking Loftus that is run by a non-Christian here: debunkingloftus.blogspot.com/

William Lane Craig debated Hector Avalos on the resurrection in Iowa several years ago: youtube.com/view_play_list?p=B60DA93D1185EFE3&search_query=william+lane+craig+hector+avalos

J.P. Holding has an article on Avalos as well: tektonics.org/af/avalos01.html

Gene Cook Jr. interviewed/debated John Loftus here blip.tv/file/982358 and here blip.tv/file/984721
 
vjtorley said:
Hi,

Can anyone recommend some good Web sites for debunking the arguments made by John Loftus against Christianity? Ditto for Hector Avalos. I think these guys are far more dangerous than Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.

I’ve had a look at the Tektonics Web site, and I don’t think its arguments are rigorous enough to knock Loftus off his perch. J.P.Holding seems to think he’s discredited Loftus because he caught him giving himself a flattering book review and then passing it off as someone else’s (a silly thing to do, but hardly a hanging offence). However, I think we need to take Loftus very seriously, because he understands Christian apologetics from the inside. He studied under William Lane Craig. Avalos is not to be under-estimated either. He knows Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. Most Christian apologists don’t. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Vincent Torley
Click to expand...
Really? I heard Avalos debate and I didn’t find his arguements the least convincing. He sometimes seems to use ‘Ad-hominum’ attacks.
 
Hello! I’ve been debating Dr. Avalos over the past few months. See my review of The Christian Delusion on Amazon, Avalos’ snippy response, and the ensuing 18-round debate.

Smarting from that debate, Avalos then posted a “review” of my book, The Truth Behind the New Atheism on the Debunking Christianity web site. He made no mention of our previous debate (for what reason, I leave you to guess!), but tried to smear me as a semi-literate, “poorly-read,” “hack writer,” by debunking my claim that Christianity led to an end to slavery twice.

Apparently these are his usual tactics.

I’ve now written a three–part response, which will soon be posted on my web site, christthetao.com, (1) Responding to his personal attacks; (2) Raising questions (18 of them) about his substantive arguments about Christianity and slavery; and (3) Showing why his argument that attempts to blame Christianity for the Holocaust is bogus. These will probably all be on-line the first week of August, 2010.

I also appreciate the helpful resources other people have posted.
 
David << I also appreciate the helpful resources other people have posted. >>

Thanks for your efforts. Avalos is a tough cookie to crack. I do think Craig did well against him in their resurrection debate (mp3).

Phil P
 
David_Marshall said:
Hello! I’ve been debating Dr. Avalos over the past few months.
Click to expand...
Hi David.

That was emphatically NOT a debate. Who presided? What were the word limitations? Did anyone ever say it was a debate? Who voted on it afterward? As one who read it Dr. Avalos handed you your butt.

For people to see what Dr. Avalos wrote on just a few pages of David Marshall’s book here is the link:

debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2010/07/slave-to-incompetence-truth-behind.html

I doubt very much your objections will do much to disabuse him of this argument.

In any case, nice to hear people struggling to deal with our arguments. I have seen nothing yet that effectively critiques them.

And we are responding to “The Infidel Delusion” in several posts right here (in reverse chronological order):

debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/search/label/%22The%20Infidel%20Delusion%22

Cheers everyone.

John W. Loftus
 
vjtorley said:
Thanks very much for the links, Uranage and Kasey1. I’ll check them out.

Does anyone know a scholar who can pick these articles to pieces?

Best wishes,

Vincent
Click to expand...
Vincent, here’s the problem. You already know we’re wrong. Why? A reasonable person would at least consider our arguments. And rather than asking who can refute us a reasonable person would rather ask something like this: “What do you make of their arguments?”

You see the difference? It’s clear as day to me.

There is something else for you to consider. Maybe we are wrong and you are too. Maybe there is a middle ground somewhere between us like Deism. Ever thought of that? So in order to see if a Hegelian Synthesis is possible between us you must duly consider our arguments as the antithesis of your thesis.

Of course I don’t think so at all, but then you need to show you are honest with everything you learn and read, everything.

Cheers.
 
Whoa!! Is this really John loftus? That’s so weird! I was just watching a debate between him and dinesh dsouza! That’s really weird.
 
John << In any case, nice to hear people struggling to deal with our arguments. I have seen nothing yet that effectively critiques them. >>

Thanks for the challenge. Not really struggling, just trying to understand the arguments. I’ve been doing this a long time (20 years of amateur apologetics under my belt) and do read your blog, and the “Common Sense” LukeProg one. And I have my reading list to finish, but I think I’m getting behind. :o I shall try to catch up.

Phil P
 
John << There is something else for you to consider. Maybe we are wrong and you are too. Maybe there is a middle ground somewhere between us like Deism. >>

The middle ground is Catholicism.

Evangelical Fundymentalism (EF) is on the far right, while New Atheism (NA) is on the far left, and Orthodox Catholicism right in the middle of the two extremes. 😛

NA ] ------------------------------ OC ] --------------------------- EF ].

Deism would be between NA and OC. And Agnosticism between Deism and New Atheism. 👍 Between OC and EF are any number of Christianities.

Phil P
 
PhilVaz said:
John << In any case, nice to hear people struggling to deal with our arguments. I have seen nothing yet that effectively critiques them. >>

Thanks for the challenge. Not really struggling, just trying to understand the arguments. I’ve been doing this a long time (20 years of amateur apologetics under my belt) and do read your blog, and the “Common Sense” LukeProg one. And I have my reading list to finish, but I think I’m getting behind. :o I shall try to catch up.

Phil P
Click to expand...
Phil, I admire you. I remember when you first posted that audacious list of reading material and thought to myself there was no way you could get through it in a year. I see you won’t, but you’re doing much better than I thought. Congrats to you.

I think when you’re done everyone would be interested to hear your conclusions. Learning is its own reward, that’s for sure.

And I’m very interested in what you think of my books.

To save you some time my book, Why I Rejected Christianity is a previously self-published book that was the basis for my book Why I Became an Atheist.

Cheers.
 
John: The debate was on the Amazon web site – 18 rounds. I don’t think any honest person, and few dishonest people, can deny that Avalos failed in his attempt to refute my criticisms of his chapter, and came off looking bad besides. Aside from the fact that observers said as much, there’s also the telling fact that being debunked so enraged Hector that he posted his 24-page hit piece against me on your site, but didn’t have the nerve to tell readers about our debate, or refer them to it.

Apparently lack of guts its catching, eh, John? You slander someone who has been friendly to you, then refuse to post a rebuttal to that slander?

More than a little disappointing.

So no, of course Avalos’ one-sided attack on me wasn’t a debate. But it wasn’t much of an argument, either, though I don’t expect the average (fair-minded) reader to recognize that until they’ve seen my response.
 
Mr. Loftus,

I would like to compliment you on your career move. Very enterprising. 😉

Using modern values to criticize Old Testament biblical values is like shooting ducks in a barrel. Doesn’t an intelligent person like you have better things to do?
 
John << I think when you’re done everyone would be interested to hear your conclusions. Learning is its own reward, that’s for sure. And I’m very interested in what you think of my books. To save you some time my book, Why I Rejected Christianity is a previously self-published book that was the basis for my book Why I Became an Atheist. >>

Oh, I’m aware they are similar books. I guess I wanted to compare them, plus I had read much of Why I Rejected when it first became available. Needs a bit of editing in places. Why I Became I will get to. They are challenging books, but not sure I fully understand the arguments.

The same with Barker’s Losing Faith vs. Godless, one is an expansion of the other with similar material. Wanted to compare them so I included both.

Many of these books I have read in the past, or at least parts, and trying to re-read. All of them on my list I now own, except for Arguing About Gods by Oppy, and the D’Souza book on Life After Death. All else I do own, since I’ve been collecting these kinds of books a long time. I tend to buy many books, but slow in reading them. Two new ones I just bought:

Evidence for God: 50 Arguments for Faith from the Bible, History, Philosophy, and Science (2010) edited by Dembski / Licona, with many contributors

Modern Physics and Ancient Faith (2003) by Stephen Barr (Catholic physicist)

There are many such anthology books dealing with atheism / materialism, etc. You’ll need a lot more The Christian Delusion type books to match these.

I’ve never really been interested in the theism vs. atheism debate, being a strong believer in God, and mainly involved in the debates within Christianity (Catholic vs. Protestant, etc). But I’m trying to learn and catch up. I became very interested in this debate when The God Delusion came out. I wasn’t all that impressed with the Dawkins book, although he does explain evolution very well.

Anyway, surprised you posted here. Don’t get banned. 😛

Phil P
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top