I have no more desire to engage Christians. They are deluded, all of them. I have never been more convinced of this than I am now. I have better things to do. I spent 39+ years of my adult life on a delusion. If I add the years of my childhood that's almost my entire life. Yet this is the only life I will ever have. It's time to move on, or at a minimum take a very long hiatus. I just finished what may be my last book, on The Outsider Test for Faith, to be published by Prometheus Books early next year. How many times do I need to kick the dead horse of Christianity? I don't think I need to say anything more. If what I have written isn't good enough then nothing is good enough for some Christians. What I intend to do is turn this blog over to a few qualified people. I'll still be a part of it and I suppose I'll post something from time to time. But I see no reason to waste large chunks of my time on this delusion anymore.
Why is he so frustrated? He has said in several posts that Atheism is winning and Christianity is loosing ground. If this is true, then why quit? I am detecting crocodile tears. If you are really winning why quit or take a hiatus, why not press the attack? Simple...he is not winning. Personally, I'm disappointed. I mean the more Loftus tries to debunk Christianity, the more he helps us. The more he opines, the more the gospel is preached.
7 Now
we pray to God that you will not do anything wrong—not so that people
will see that we have stood the test but so that you will do what is
right even though we may seem to have failed. 8 For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth. 9 We are glad whenever we are weak but you are strong; and our prayer is that you may be fully restored. - 2 Corinthians 13:7-9
Thanks, John Loftus. Say it ain't so?!!! We'd miss you! One comment on the post that I thought was telling was this one:
Calling? By whom? For what? How does a non-Christian even begin to answer questions like this one.
Debunking Christianity: Okay, The Time Has Come, I'm Done
Why is he so frustrated? He has said in several posts that Atheism is winning and Christianity is loosing ground.
ReplyDeleteDemographically, he's 100% correct about "winning", however that doesn't mean it's not frustrating to engage with people who are willfully ignorant, TRUST ME on this one...
Calling? By whom? For what? How does a Christian even begin to answer questions like this one.
Have to imagine you meant "non-christian" or "atheist" when you said "Christian". In any case, it's entirely possible to have a passion one has personally cultivated (i.e. a calling) without a need for divine intervention.
Demographically, he's 100% correct about "winning", however that doesn't mean it's not frustrating to engage with people who are willfully ignorant, TRUST ME on this one...
ReplyDeleteYou cannot have it both ways. Either Atheists are a minority or they are "winning". Which is it? I have no doubt that you know a lot about willful ignorance.
Have to imagine you meant "non-christian" or "atheist" when you said "Christian". In any case, it's entirely possible to have a passion one has personally cultivated (i.e. a calling) without a need for divine intervention.
Thanks for the catching the mistake. I think you need to rethink that thought about what a
"calling" is. You can't call yourself. Personally cultivated passion is not equivalent to a "calling". There is no "calling" without a caller.
Either Atheists are a minority or they are "winning". Which is it?
ReplyDeleteDepends on how you define "win" and "atheist", but yes, but all demographic trends on both sides indicate we will "win".
Personally cultivated passion is not equivalent to a "calling".
Sure it is. "Caller" = whatever it is that calls.
How are you defining "win" and "atheist"? Betcha it's different than the way Loftus defines them!
ReplyDeleteSure it is. "Caller" = whatever it is that calls.
You have a strange conception of what an "it" is. What else can "Personally cultivated passion" do that a person can do?
call·ing [kaw-ling]
ReplyDeletenoun
1.
the act of a person or thing that calls.
2.
vocation, profession, or trade: What is your calling?
3.
a call or summons: He had a calling to join the church.
4.
a strong impulse or inclination: She did it in response to an inner calling.
World English Dictionary
calling (ˈkɔːlɪŋ)
— n
1. a strong inner urge to follow an occupation, etc; vocation
2. an occupation, profession, or trade
So where does such an inclination or desire come from?
ReplyDeleteI believe John is defining “winning” in terms of arguments, atheist arguments are winning against theistic arguments. I’m believe that’s true (obviously) but 1) and argument “winning” really has more to do with the audience than the argument and 2) since most of the arguments on the theistic side are carefully crafted to be unfalsifiable, argumentation will only get you so far. However, I believe that John is right and it’s reflected in what I meant by “winning”, which is in terms of demographic trends. The “arguments” are having a popular impact and are likely contributing to the demographic trends in some way.
ReplyDelete“Atheist” is a tricky term, and we’ve been over that, but I think it can justifiably be used in a way that encompasses all the “nones” on any of the appropriate surveys, which is not how John is using it.
Why, what did you mean by winning and atheists?
What else can “Personally cultivated passion” do that a person can do?
No idea what you are actually asking here.
So where does such an inclination or desire come from?
ReplyDeleteFrom the person. Ultimately from upbringing, environment, biology, etc...
I believe John is defining “winning” in terms of arguments, atheist arguments are winning against theistic arguments. I’m believe that’s true (obviously) but 1) and argument “winning” really has more to do with the audience than the argument and 2) since most of the arguments on the theistic side are carefully crafted to be unfalsifiable, argumentation will only get you so far. However, I believe that John is right and it’s reflected in what I meant by “winning”, which is in terms of demographic trends. The “arguments” are having a popular impact and are likely contributing to the demographic trends in some way.
ReplyDeleteSo you think that Loftus means that "winning" in terms of more and more people being convinced of the falsifiable arguments in favor of atheism. Right. Given that the arguments have been weighed, counted, measured, and found wanting it's a good thing they are falsifiable. Winning!
“Atheist” is a tricky term, and we’ve been over that, but I think it can justifiably be used in a way that encompasses all the “nones” on any of the appropriate surveys, which is not how John is using it.
Depending on surveys to determine demographic trend is rather a shoddy rubric. Atheism is the belief that there is no god(s) but given that atheists themselves can't agree on what Atheism is, how can you figure out if it's winning or not if you don't know what it is?
From the person. Ultimately from upbringing, environment, biology, etc...
A person doesn't have much conscious control over their upbringing, biology, or all kinds of other factors I'm sure you would point to - so how can you say it comes from the person? Try again.
DA person doesn't have much conscious control over their upbringing, biology, or all kinds of other factors I'm sure you would point to - so how can you say it comes from the person? Try again.
ReplyDeletewhy does something need to come from something that has control over it?
Everything else you wrote is gibbeish.
hmmm...gibberish...must have been over your head.
ReplyDeleteSorry.
No, it was actual gibberish...
ReplyDelete