John Loftus will soon release his new book The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails. As many readers will be aware John Loftus and the authors of this blog are not strangers to one another so it may not be much of a surprise to discover that the blurbs page of Loftus’ new book features very short reviews from a range of international scholars including Matt:
Dr. Matthew Flannagan, Christian philosopher and Adjunct Lecturer in Philosophy for Laidlaw College and Bethlehem Tertiary Institute.
The Christian Delusion is a comprehensive and representative presentation of contemporary skeptical thought. Anyone who wants to understand the position of contemporary free thinkers could not do much better than to read this book.
Matt intends to write a more thorough review which we will submit for publication both nationally and internationally.
Tags: John Loftus9 Comments
A common objection to belief in the God of the Bible is that a good, kind, and loving deity would never command the wholesale slaughter of nations. In the tradition of his popular Is God a Moral Monster?, Paul Copan teams up with Matthew Flannagan to tackle some of the most confusing and uncomfortable passages of Scripture. Together they help the Christian and nonbeliever alike understand the biblical, theological, philosophical, and ethical implications of Old Testament warfare passages.
Thanks Matt. I’m sure people will want to read about it. We’re finishing up the galleys as I speak. Then it’s off to the printer to meet the end of April publication deadline. The contributors have added so much text from what was originally submitted that PB reduced the print size to accommodate it all. It’s better than ever, sure to be discussed quite a bit in future years.
Great! I can’t wait to read it and your reviews. I’ve read most of the authors on their contributed topics before, but here’s to hoping they come up with some new stuff. Either way, it will make a great summary volume for using when teaching apologetics.
How you get away with being so staunchly and stridently conservative yet remain or become buddies with those most diametrically opposed to your own position never ceases to amaze me.
You got elected President and Vice President of the most statist university in the country having become famous on campus for leading the conservative voices on abortion and gay rights issues.
You are the most linked to Christian blog from atheist or secular blogs in New Zealand – even Cactus Kate links to you and according to whaleoil likes you – yet you have the most ardently argued pieces contrary to the positions of these blog holders within your pages.
Gay NZ’s writers, the secular science community and now John Loftus clearly respect you.
Most Christians think they have to tone down their message, “love the sinner hate the sin” to gain the kind of respect and relationships you two seem to hold to with ease.
I’ve heard that you are frequently permitted to share your faith and even get asked why you believe by the staunchest atheists among the kiwi blogs at the bloggers drinks.
How do you do it?
Mr Loftus, perhaps you can shed some light on this, why do you find the Flannagans so palatable that you’d give them space on your book cover when clearly you are at odds with their position?
.-= My last blog-post ..Tiger Woods to Convert to Islam =-.
You obviously do not know Madeleine very well.
Hi Matt and Mad!
In your photo are you posing as The Avengers (original TV series)? One of my favorite TV shows!
I’m one of the contributors to John’s new book. I get along with most people, religious or not. Only on the internet are people most likely to bump heads over different ideas. Even then, there are people who can do so without incurring great wrath toward one another.
An interestnig case is Peter Kirby, Brian Holz, Steve Locks, and J.P. Holding. J.P. Holding is a Christian apologist who attempts (and imagines he always succeeds) in “blowing the doors off” anyone’s arguments, whether that person be a Christain or non-Christian whose views do not jive with his own. The three people I mentioned previous to his name take a relatively calmer approach in dialogue with everyone and anyone thye meet on the web, so calm in fact that they remain to my knowledge about the only three non-Christians with whom J.P. has traded extensive arguments and NOT eventually gotten into a firefight! Three cheers for those three non-Christians!
Another interesting case is that of G. K. Chesterton, a Christian wit and apologist some of whose closest friends were fellow writers and non-Christians, including the atheist H.G. Wells who wrote a book specifically arguing against G.K.’s religion, Catholicism; and George Bernard Shaw, with whom G.K. conducted many verbal debates. Shaw lent G.K. money and gave him advice, getting him to write two plays that earned G.K. more money than many of his columns ever did. A Shaw Wells hybrid character even appears in G.K.s novel, THE BALL AND THE CROSS, a novel about a devout Catholic who tries to duel literally to the death with an atheist publisher but the law keeps chasing them to try and stop it. Great little novel, about having an enemy become a friend. G.K. also said some very kind things about Shaw, “that in another age he would have been a great saint,” and about Wells, suggesting that he would be in heaven. A G.K. does not come around often. And credit must also be given to Wells and Shaw. I think G.K. was more interested in maintaining friendship with fellow intellectuals and writers of his age than into hating people for their beliefs though he might disagree with particular aspects of their beliefs in any manner of witty ways. G.K. also debated the editor, Robert Blatchford on religion, and also praised him while disagreeing.
A third example is the way Hitchens got along with a very conservative Christian debater whom he shared quips with on many podiums, they even made a film about their relationship titled, COLLISION, just out now.
I suspect that people interested in ideas and scholarship and who both applaud the benefits of civilization and education have a lot in common as human beings, perhaps more in common than most religious doctrines or non-religious thoughts can separate.
That’s my theory, at the moment,
Cheers!
Edward T. Babinski
Scalia, I appreciate people who know why they believe what they believe and who can give a clear account of it even if what they believe is not what I believe. I think that respect for such people is not something peculiar to me. All the people you referred to within Matt’s and my circle of friends are people who appear to appreciate and respect the same.
While it is true that I do seek out relationships and that I do seem to be able to easily make friends with all manner of people there are people I am not successful with reaching so I am not the mastermind anonymous suggests. I just get on with being me and sometimes I set my sights on a small goal and go after it. No one can be all things to all people so I don’t bother trying to be, neither does Matt.
The other thing to remember is that Christians, atheists, secularists, agnostics, famous people, everyday people are basically the same – they’re all people – the bridges are not that wide, if you reach out to them like they’re just normal people you’ll usually get a friendly response, it is when you put people in a box (or you allow yourself to be put in a box) that you will fail to connect. So don’t gush over famous people and don’t treat atheists or gay people like you are at war with them and it is surprisingly easy to find things in common or have a good conversation yet still remain true to your own convictions.
Edward the pic was a Mr& Mrs Smith parody (hence why on mouseover you get Dr & Mrs F) which I put up for a joke post about Biblioblog wars but I’ve had the idea for years and it did originally came from the Avengers – a marketing student suggested it as an ad campaign for the student union when we were President and Vice-President but we never went with it. Then when we were in wellington there was this wall in our hotel room….
.-= My last blog-post ..Christian Carnival CCCXII =-.
Scalia
Because M&M in person have never thrown their beliefs down the throats of those diametrically opposed to them.
That is, don’t wind them up.
Both can talk about all range of other subject matter. You simply find something else to talk about.
Not winding anyone up is generally a smart move – us included.
We are capable of counting to 10, and do so more often than any reader is privy to, but we are still human!
Cathy, when are you back in NZ next, we seriously must catch up.
.-= My last blog-post ..Contra Mundum: The Judgmental Jesus =-.
Carl Sagan died from AIDS? TRUE or FALSE?
John Loftus is GAY! TRUE or FALSE?