Reason and Research as opposed to Rhetoric on Religious Claims

[Uber Genius]

Recently on this apologetics forum while helping "Seekers," gain knowledge about philosophy of religion, the best atheist apologists, a few examples of good arguments for atheism, far from being "liked" or receiving "Winner," accolades, I was bombarded with mocking comments, fake definitions, straw man fallacies, question begging arguments. Rhetorical flourish and pseudo-intellectual arguments that would hardly fool a 12th-grader were proffered.

It seems that just as there are prerequisites for most college classes, so to for a cogent discussion on the weightier issues of philosophy of religion. I will let WLC make my case.

World-renowned apologist and Philosophy of Religion Professor, William Lane Craig, makes the case for a philosophical foundation when discussing religion:

"By employing the high standards of reasoning characteristic of analytic philosophy we can powerfully formulate apologetic arguments for both commending and defending the Christian worldview. In recent decades, analytic philosophers of religion have shed new light on the rationality and warrant of religious belief, on arguments for the existence of God, on divine attributes such as necessity, eternity, omnipotence, omniscience, and goodness, on the problem of suffering and evil, on the nature of the soul and immortality, on the problem of miracles, and even on peculiarly Christian doctrines like the Trinity, incarnation, atonement, original sin, revelation, hell, and prayer. The wealth of material which is available to the Christian apologist through the labor of analytic philosophers of religion is breath-taking."

Read more: Apologetics Training - Advice to Christian Apologists | Reasonable Faith

Often when encountering both Theistic (Ken Ham, Ray Comfort, Kent Hovind) and atheistic (Richard Dwakins, Larry Krauss, Peter Boghossian, Peter Akins, Jerry Coyne, etc.) apologists, no philosophical training is apparent in their arguments.

Please comment on your favorite apologists and their concomitant contributions to the body of knowledge with regards to our religious understanding of the world.

Example:
Theist - Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology (Kalam)
Atheist - Logic and Theism (one of Sobel's arguments)

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

If this counts: Jesus.

"Woe to you scholars and....." so forth...

In agreement with YHWH'S WORD (SCRIPTURE)
the wisdom of men is futile,
because in man's wisdom and knowledge and education,
they turn away (reject) truth and serve the creation instead of the Creator, leading themselves in darkness to destruction.

 

[quatona]

Recently on this apologetics forum while helping "Seekers," gain knowledge about philosophy of religion, the best atheist apologists, a few examples of good arguments for atheism, far from being "liked" or receiving "Winner," accolades, I was bombarded with mocking comments, fake definitions, straw man fallacies, question begging arguments. Rhetorical flourish and pseudo-intellectual arguments that would hardly fool a 12th-grader were proffered.

You so funny....

 

[Uber Genius]

You so funny....

Here we have a "seeker," who decides to troll and cast a strong vote for continued RHETORICAL FLOURISH, as opposed to research and training and engaging the best arguments for and against both inferences.

Your vote is duly noted!

 

[Uber Genius]

If this counts: Jesus.

"Woe to you scholars and....." so forth...

In agreement with YHWH'S WORD (SCRIPTURE)
the wisdom of men is futile,
because in man's wisdom and knowledge and education,
they turn away (reject) truth and serve the creation instead of the Creator, leading themselves in darkness to destruction.

Sorry, it is self-refuting as Jesus proved himself to be a scholar and engage the scholars of his day in debates based on the premises and arguments of his enemies. Luke 20:27 and following.

Jesus was not telling His followers to eschew study or research or reason. From beginning of his ministry he demonstrated a commitment to knowledge and scholarship but not to sycophantic following of religious culture. Hippocrisy is being discouraged but Paul and Barnabas, and Peter are all recorded in Acts giving great reasons and evidence for why people should believe that Christianity is truemas opposed to polytheism, pantheism, Judaism, etc.

Paul tells Timothy to studymin order to show himself "approved."

Further the intellectual tradition in the Church over the past 2000 years has no equals in history.

 

[Silmarien]

My favorite theistic apologists are Edward Feser and David Bentley Hart, both philosophers, though the former is an analytic Thomist and the latter continental and involved in the Radical Orthdoxy project. Both defend the continued relevancy of the Aristotelian tradition and attack materialism.

I'm also intrigued by agnostic philosophers of religion such as Anthony Kenny and J.L. Schellenberg (well, he identifies as an atheist, but only about certain God concepts). I'm fond of any non-theist who advocates skepticism about naturalism as well. And I adore Thomas Nagel, though he is technically not an atheist apologist and I am not sure how well versed he is in the philosophy or religion.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

You so funny....

When my son was a toddler, he's occasionally get mad at me and try and insult me using the funniest language. And then when I'd laugh at him he'd become furious since my response wasn't what he wanted. Thank god he grew out of that.

I don't know why I just thought of that...

 

[com7fy8]

Rhetorical flourish and pseudo-intellectual arguments that would hardly fool a 12th-grader were proffered.

And how much time are you spending, and your attention, on what amounts to nothing? We can point at how ones are not exactly, or we can share what has really helped us to get more real with God and learn how to love each and every person the way Jesus wants < would this not be the basic purpose for anything we do and study?

I don't need to spend much time dissecting what is dead. But my attention needs to be to Jesus >

"'Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.'" (Matthew 11:29)

So, what philosophy has helped you with this? Why spent attention on what you say amounts to nothing, pointing to that???? If you present what is for real, anyone capable can see how it is superior, with no need for help from or not much help from criticizing what is really inferior. It is not hard to see how superior Jesus is, in comparison with Satan and his stuff. And if we just sample how God's love is, this will easily show up how we have become in our selfish stuff and arguing and word chess games.

So, what apologetic and philosophic stuff has done you the most good?

It seems that just as there are prerequisites for most college classes, so to for a cogent discussion on the weightier issues of philosophy of religion.

Well, it depends on who is setting the standards. Anyone can congratulate oneself on having what is so superior. But how does it compare with Jesus and how Jesus so superior communicated personally with socially and educationally rejected and despised people?? Our Apostle Paul was one of the most highly educated thinkers of the Jews, but with Jesus he made a discovery or two . . . or more . . . including >

"But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty;" (1 Corinthians 1:27)

"the things which are despised God has chosen" (in 1 Corinthians 1:28)

Yes, it is good to use education to help people, but our character can effect if and how much we can really benefit from our education.

World-renowned apologist and Philosophy of Religion Professor, William Lane Craig, makes the case for a philosophical foundation when discussing religion:

"Pure and undefiled religion before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world." (James 1:27)

So, are we talking about God's way of religion . . . or world wisdom stuff which is designed to keep attention elsewhere?

Please comment on your favorite apologists

Jesus, Paul, Peter, Steven (Acts 7), and the Holy Spirit are . . . better than I could comment Oh, I could say how Jesus did not talk in terms with standards out of reach of less educated people, but Jesus communicated clearly with fishermen and tax collectors and prostitutes. So, I do not personally know the apologists you are talking about; I would be interested to know if they follow the example of Jesus or are they self-congratulators elsewhere?

 

[Uber Genius]

And how much time are you spending, and your attention, on what amounts to nothing? We can point at how ones are not exactly, or we can share what has really helped us to get more real with God and learn how to love each and every person the way Jesus wants < would this not be the basic purpose for anything we do and study?

I don't need to spend much time dissecting what is dead. But my attention needs to be to Jesus >

"'Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.'" (Matthew 11:29)

So, what philosophy has helped you with this? Why spent attention on what you say amounts to nothing, pointing to that???? If you present what is for real, anyone capable can see how it is superior, with no need for help from or not much help from criticizing what is really inferior. It is not hard to see how superior Jesus is, in comparison with Satan and his stuff. And if we just sample how God's love is, this will easily show up how we have become in our selfish stuff and arguing and word chess games.

So, what apologetic and philosophic stuff has done you the most good?

Well, it depends on who is setting the standards. Anyone can congratulate oneself on having what is so superior. But how does it compare with Jesus and how Jesus so superior communicated personally with socially and educationally rejected and despised people?? Our Apostle Paul was one of the most highly educated thinkers of the Jews, but with Jesus he made a discovery or two . . . or more . . . including >

"But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty;" (1 Corinthians 1:27)

"the things which are despised God has chosen" (in 1 Corinthians 1:28)

Yes, it is good to use education to help people, but our character can effect if and how much we can really benefit from our education.

"Pure and undefiled religion before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world." (James 1:27)

So, are we talking about God's way of religion . . . or world wisdom stuff which is designed to keep attention elsewhere?

Jesus, Paul, Peter, Steven (Acts 7), and the Holy Spirit are . . . better than I could comment Oh, I could say how Jesus did not talk in terms with standards out of reach of less educated people, but Jesus communicated clearly with fishermen and tax collectors and prostitutes. So, I do not personally know the apologists you are talking about; I would be interested to know if they follow the example of Jesus or are they self-congratulators elsewhere?

Strange, you are trying to misconstrue my arguments?

This bigotry against education is not common to Jesus or Christianity.

My point, which was hard to misconstrue, was we can do research to understand claims and can reason as Christians or non. That further the renewing of our minds is because God intends us to use same.

I have trained high school kids to defend truth-claims about Jesus. And to give evidence of why Jesus provides us with a more coherent worldview than other competing views. Why misrepresent my argument? Why suggest I have a character flaw?

That is an ad hominem.

I get why some atheists parrot the New Atheists approach, fallacy and rhetorical flourish, but why is a Christian resorting to that approach?

Why is a Christian representing the greatest intellect in history as anti-intellectual?

Please do some research before replying.

 

[Uber Genius]

My favorite theistic apologists are Edward Feser and David Bentley Hart, both philosophers, though the former is an analytic Thomist and the latter continental and involved in the Radical Orthdoxy project. Both defend the continued relevancy of the Aristotelian tradition and attack materialism.

I'm also intrigued by agnostic philosophers of religion such as Anthony Kenny and J.L. Schellenberg (well, he identifies as an atheist, but only about certain God concepts). I'm fond of any non-theist who advocates skepticism about naturalism as well. And I adore Thomas Nagel, though he is technically not an atheist apologist and I am not sure how well versed he is in the philosophy or religion.

Big fan of Fessor. His book on philosophy of mind is a great primer and even-handed. I'm not a Thomist but he is one of the strongest attractors to that view. Nagel's, "What it is Like to be a Bat." Is a monumental work. And the most in-depth discussion of the hard problem of consciousness to-date.

Thx for the examples.

 

[com7fy8]

My point, which was hard to misconstrue, was we can do research to understand claims and can reason as Christians or non.

This is clear. Thank you

But I am curious what you mean by what

That further the renewing of our minds is because God intends us to use same.

Do you consider "renewing" to mean getting new ideas and ways of thinking, or do you understand the mind is spiritual and renewing includes how the Holy Spirit transforms the spiritual nature of our minds into having the character and quality and nature of God's love . . . not only thoughts, but His spiritual nature shared with us???

 

[Silmarien]

Big fan of Fessor. His book on philosophy of mind is a great primer and even-handed. I'm not a Thomist but he is one of the strongest attractors to that view. Nagel's, "What it is Like to be a Bat." Is a monumental work. And the most in-depth discussion of the hard problem of consciousness to-date.

Thx for the examples.

Yes, I've read his book on Aquinas, which was quite good, though I am not a Thomist either. I haven't read any of his other works yet, but there are some fantastic rants about philosophy of mind on his blog. Especially when the materialist brigade went after Nagel a few years ago. He's got a new book out, Five Proofs of the Existence of God, which I would like to look into at some point.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

ad simplicitum

was we can do research to understand claims

So did the pharisees and saducees and TORAH teachers.

and can reason as Christians or non.

Likewise scholars can do this without knowing Jesus.
(With no supply of Life from Yahweh though)

That further the renewing of our minds is because God intends us to use same.

Not by the flesh, nor by the natural mind, nor by the carnal means,
but by His Spirit as He shows all through His Word.

I have trained high school kids to defend truth-claims about Jesus. And to give evidence of why Jesus provides us with a more coherent worldview than other competing views.

Many "schools", not with nor in nor leading to life have done 'supposedly' (they say) the same thing.

 

[Uber Genius]

This is clear. Thank you

But I am curious what you mean by what
Do you consider "renewing" to mean getting new ideas and ways of thinking, or do you understand the mind is spiritual and renewing includes how the Holy Spirit transforms the spiritual nature of our minds into having the character and quality and nature of God's love . . . not only thoughts, but His spiritual nature shared with us???

What did your research show?

 

[Uber Genius]

ad simplicitum

So did the pharisees and saducees and TORAH teachers.

Likewise scholars can do this without knowing Jesus.
(With no supply of Life from Yahweh though)

Not by the flesh, nor by the natural mind, nor by the carnal means,
but by His Spirit as He shows all through His Word.

Many "schools", not with nor in nor leading to life have done 'supposedly' (they say) the same thing.

This may help.

Fallacy of the undistributed middle

P1 -All Russians are revolutionaries
P2 - All anarchists are revolutionaries
A - Therefore all anarchists are Russians.

The middle term is 'revolutionaries." While both Russians and anarchists share the common property of being revolutionaries, making both premises true, there may be separate groups of revolutionists, and so we cannot conclude that all anarchists are the same as Russians in every way.

The Religious hippocrits were scholars.
Christians should be scholars.
Christians will be hippocrits.

This is a syllogistic fallacy.

While some scholars are certainly hippocrits not all. Further we are called by scripture to study, and memorize God's word. And consider the viewpoints by authors and their reasons why they argue for them. All of which is study.

If you want to start a new thread regarding the demands of Jesus that we NOT be scholarly, or study world views, or engage as Peter and Paul and Jesus, by all means start that thread.

This thread is asking for research as opposed to rhetoric and fallacy.

"Please comment on your favorite apologists and their concomitant contributions to the body of knowledge with regards to our religious understanding of the world."

If you hold a ahistorical view qua Christian evidences please don't hijack my thread.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Please comment on your favorite apologists and their concomitant contributions to the body of knowledge with regards to our religious understanding of the world.

I don't read a lot of Christian apologists, but I do of Christian philosophers (and there is a difference in the scope and extent to which both of these Christian fields cover various issues, although there is some moderate overlap).

For the most part, I'm fairly eclectic and expansive in the way I approach philosophy and theology, but several figures have a more pronounced place in my thinking, and they are as follows:

Apologists

C.S. Lewis (for the usual reasons...)

David K. Clark (Dialogical Apologetics)

J. Warner Wallace (Apologetics using detective analytics)​

Christian Philosophers

Ralph Baergen (epistemology ) [edit: I don't know that Baergen is a Christian, but he says he references William P. Alston quite a bit, another analytic Christian philosopher ... ]

Basil Mitchell (Analytic philosophy/Theology/Belief)

Langdon Gilkey (Analytic philosophy/Theology/Religious Language/Philosophy of Science)

C. Stephen Evans (Religious Knowledge/Philosophy of Religion)

Mary Healy (Pauline Epistemology)

R.M. Hare (Analytic philosophy/Ethics)

James S. Spiegel (Ethics/Belief)

Merold Westphal (Hermeneutcs/Postmodernism/Kantian studies)​

...and I like to read various treatments on atheism, like those from George M. Smith or James Rachels, among others.

Of course, there's more, but these names provide a basic philosophical snapshot of the trends in my thinking. It's too bad that my familiarity with all of this doesn't necessarily mean I'm a smart guy. I wish it did ... But, it is what it is.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[quatona]

Here we have a "seeker," who decides to troll and cast a strong vote for continued RHETORICAL FLOURISH, as opposed to research and training and engaging the best arguments for and against both inferences.

Your vote is duly noted!

I guess you see yourself as the prosecutor and the judge in personal union?

 

[com7fy8]

Do you consider "renewing" to mean getting new ideas and ways of thinking, or do you understand the mind is spiritual and renewing includes how the Holy Spirit transforms the spiritual nature of our minds into having the character and quality and nature of God's love . . . not only thoughts, but His spiritual nature shared with us???

What did your research show?

Well, for one thing, or Apostle Paul says,

"and be renewed in the spirit of your mind," (Ephesians 4:23)

So, from this I get that our minds are spiritual at their roots. So, our physical brains and brain function are not our deepest level of our minds. And so, we need how the Holy Spirit changes us, spiritually, so our minds work right. Also, we have >

"For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind." (2 Timothy 1:7)

But not all translations say, "sound mind". But this scripture does show that there is "spirit of fear". So, certainly fear has spiritual roots, and fears are understood to effect mental function. And we have >

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love." (1 John 4:18)

So, perfect love has power to cast fear out. I understand this is because God's love . . . in the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5) . . . has power almighty to cast out any fear and its "torment" which people can suffer in their minds and emotions. So, if we are perfected in God's love, we have such immunity almighty against fear. And the Holy Spirit of God's love is the One who renews our minds in God's love so we have the nature of God's love with power almighty to keep us from fear and its torment.

So, I would answer, yes the Holy Spirit does renew our minds, not only by having us change what we think, but by changing the spiritual nature of our minds so we become immune to how fear would mess with us. So, Uber, if people only try to change their thinking and only use methods and medicines which they humanly can control, this can not renew them deeply in the spiritual quality of their minds.

By the way, our Apostle Paul also says, if we obey how scripture tells us to pray >

"the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus" >

see Philippians 4:6-7. And God's peace is spiritual . . . in the Holy Spirit. So, we do need how spiritually God's peace keeps our minds. And I understand then, Uber, that the Holy Spirit renews our minds spiritually so our minds become more and more peaceful in nature. So, being renewed means not how we only control our mental activity, but how the Holy Spirit effects the character of our minds to become naturally loving and peaceful, so it's our nature and not only a choice whenever we are in the mood to choose to act kind and pleasant

So, if this is correct, then a certain amount of philosophy and education is not dealing with this; and so no matter how eloquent and logical it may seem . . . people are missing out if they are not being changed into deeply peaceful and caring people in their minds . . . in sharing with the Holy Spirit in us, who is renewing us to be this way, and stays in union with us > 1 Corinthians 6:17 < in order to keep us this way and grow and mature us more and moreso.

 

[Uber Genius]

I don't read a lot of Christian apologists, but I do of Christian philosophers (and there is a difference in the scope and extent to which both of these Christian fields cover various issues, although there is some moderate overlap).

For the most part, I'm fairly eclectic and expansive in the way I approach philosophy and theology, but several figures have a more pronounced place in my thinking, and they are as follows:

Apologists

C.S. Lewis (for the usual reasons...)

David K. Clark (Dialogical Apologetics)

J. Warner Wallace (Apologetics using detective analytics)​

Christian Philosophers

Ralph Baergen (epistemology ) [edit: I don't know that Baergen is a Christian, but he says he references William P. Alston quite a bit, another analytic Christian philosopher ... ]

Basil Mitchell (Analytic philosophy/Theology/Belief)

Langdon Gilkey (Analytic philosophy/Theology/Religious Language/Philosophy of Science)

C. Stephen Evans (Religious Knowledge/Philosophy of Religion)

Mary Healy (Pauline Epistemology)

R.M. Hare (Analytic philosophy/Ethics)

James S. Spiegel (Ethics/Belief)

Merold Westphal (Hermeneutcs/Postmodernism/Kantian studies)​

...and I like to read various treatments on atheism, like those from George M. Smith or James Rachels, among others.

Of course, there's more, but these names provide a basic philosophical snapshot of the trends in my thinking. It's too bad that my familiarity with all of this doesn't necessarily mean I'm a smart guy. I wish it did ... But, it is what it is.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

Great list. Lots of new authors for me to engage. Thx.

 

[Uber Genius]

Well, for one thing, or Apostle Paul says,

"and be renewed in the spirit of your mind," (Ephesians 4:23)

So, from this I get that our minds are spiritual at their roots. So, our physical brains and brain function are not our deepest level of our minds. And so, we need how the Holy Spirit changes us, spiritually, so our minds work right. Also, we have >

"For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind." (2 Timothy 1:7)

But not all translations say, "sound mind". But this scripture does show that there is "spirit of fear". So, certainly fear has spiritual roots, and fears are understood to effect mental function. And we have >

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love." (1 John 4:18)

So, perfect love has power to cast fear out. I understand this is because God's love . . . in the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5) . . . has power almighty to cast out any fear and its "torment" which people can suffer in their minds and emotions. So, if we are perfected in God's love, we have such immunity almighty against fear. And the Holy Spirit of God's love is the One who renews our minds in God's love so we have the nature of God's love with power almighty to keep us from fear and its torment.

So, I would answer, yes the Holy Spirit does renew our minds, not only by having us change what we think, but by changing the spiritual nature of our minds so we become immune to how fear would mess with us. So, Uber, if people only try to change their thinking and only use methods and medicines which they humanly can control, this can not renew them deeply in the spiritual quality of their minds.

By the way, our Apostle Paul also says, if we obey how scripture tells us to pray >

"the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus" >

see Philippians 4:6-7. And God's peace is spiritual . . . in the Holy Spirit. So, we do need how spiritually God's peace keeps our minds. And I understand then, Uber, that the Holy Spirit renews our minds spiritually so our minds become more and more peaceful in nature. So, being renewed means not how we only control our mental activity, but how the Holy Spirit effects the character of our minds to become naturally loving and peaceful, so it's our nature and not only a choice whenever we are in the mood to choose to act kind and pleasant

So, if this is correct, then a certain amount of philosophy and education is not dealing with this; and so no matter how eloquent and logical it may seem . . . people are missing out if they are not being changed into deeply peaceful and caring people in their minds . . . in sharing with the Holy Spirit in us, who is renewing us to be this way, and stays in union with us > 1 Corinthians 6:17 < in order to keep us this way and grow and mature us more and moreso.

So it seems that God through the work of the HS is involved as well as my own intellect. I can study ideas and gain knowledge. Further knowledge can be gained by non-Christians. So although renewing is a necessary condition to become a disciple, it seems that a non-Christian still has the ability to gain knowledge of what seems right in the world.

The fact that the universe had a beginning and therefore requires a cause sufficient to explain creation of space, time, matter, and energy, from nothing, seems to be scientific knowledge about cosmogony, that Christian and non, have equal access to obtain.

Further it could be the case that by study of physics and the philosophical uses of physics facts as premises in arguments, could be exactly what the HS intends. That just like Paul in Acts (13-19) we need to go and persuade, argue, reason (see 17 for many such examples).

So I would argue that if the question is engaging truth claims and how one moves from non-belief to belief as early converts to Christianity did, the prescription is rationality and training in how to engage rhetorically, and study of logic, and the like.

For growing up into the fullness that is in Christ Jesus... HS renewing. In fact the HS is constantly at work in ways I don't quite perceive. But I am called to love God with all my mind, not just heart.