tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8766213929139682844.post2482086398523086376..comments2023-10-15T08:36:48.841-07:00Comments on A Counter Apologist Blog: Book Review: God or GodlessA Counter Apologisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15173218521712325250noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8766213929139682844.post-22983111410690971592013-06-09T19:16:26.519-07:002013-06-09T19:16:26.519-07:00Thanks for the kind words.
I'm not sure how t...Thanks for the kind words.<br /><br />I'm not sure how to respond to the link you mentioned in ways that would counteract the Islamic doctrines, since I'm not well versed in Islam like I am in Christianity. My first instinct is to reject the dichotomy that is proposed between "happiness can't exist without suffering". The immediate theologicla question is to ask if that is the case then is Allah suffering at times or is he unhappy? I don't know if answering that Allah suffers is theologically objectionable or not however, so that may not work.<br /><br />The only other thing is to ask about the Muslim heaven and paradise, if there will be no suffering there, then the same problems of heaven and hell come up for them. A Counter Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15173218521712325250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8766213929139682844.post-63897793891118327692013-06-09T08:37:55.020-07:002013-06-09T08:37:55.020-07:00Hi CA, great job on these blog posts. I have a que...Hi CA, great job on these blog posts. I have a question regarding the problem of evil: does the following "happiness cannot exist without suffering" theodicy undermine the PoE? http://www.alislam.org/library/books/revelation/part_2_section_6.html <br /><br />It's from a Muslim source, so you won't get any of that "free-will" nonsense.Small Heath Net_007784https://www.blogger.com/profile/16356795614086468790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8766213929139682844.post-74426972074688393982013-06-08T08:30:29.140-07:002013-06-08T08:30:29.140-07:00My comment about not surviving long was based on t...My comment about not surviving long was based on the idea that Christianity and Islam have outlasted other religions due in part to their doctrines of eternal punishment. They've come up with the most fearful thing imaginable and used it's threat to both spread their religion and retain adherents.<br /><br />In nearly all of my interactions with rank and file Christians, when pressed, it always seems to come back to fear of hell (read: Pascal's Wager). I realize that's anecdotal, and your mileage may vary, but that's where the comment was coming from, anyway. It seems to me that a Christianity without a real hell has no teeth, no relevance and little motivation.<br /><br />I'm also not as convinced that education will undermine fundamentalism at a tremendous pace. For one, I know too many educated fundamentalists. I used to be one [more anecdotal evidence, I know]. I do hope you're right, though. I live in the Southeast US, so it's hard for me to see anything but growing fundamentalist religious influence everywhere around me. Perhaps much of the resurgence I'm witnessing is just the beast crying out in the throes of death.The Apostatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07849387032571497899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8766213929139682844.post-35175002076207647492013-06-07T05:22:31.933-07:002013-06-07T05:22:31.933-07:00Nothing like that pesky Bible to get in the way of...<i>Nothing like that pesky Bible to get in the way of a reasonable theological position. This isn't just a problem for Rauser, of course. It's a problem for just about any Christian that considers the Bible a source text.</i><br /><br />That's a pretty good line about theological positions, I may have to steal it. <br /><br />The issue here is that from a philosophical perspective, Randal can indeed rationalize away the issues. The problem is that for me, even when I was a believer, such re-interpretations struck me as wildly implausible. If I was to infer to the best explanation, it seems to weigh in on the idea that "This is really just a bunch of stories put together by people 2k+ years ago that has nothing to do with a god."<br /><br />Randal's "out" from that problem is that he starts with the assumption that Christianity is true and that the Bible is inspired. He can do that, but it's up to individuals as to whether that's convincing or not.<br /><br />In terms of Rauser's brand of Christianity, I'm not sure I agree that it will not "survive long". If anything the fundamentalist readings/versions are what will die off at a tremendous pace, they're so easy to disprove. At some point when growing up, kids become adults and need jobs - they go to college, they learn science and critical thinking, because we generally need those kinds of things to get the kinds of jobs that are in demand today. That will undermine fundamentalism. <br /><br />Randal's version lets them harmonize the two, but at the cost of becoming, I think, irrelevant for the purposes that most atheists care about. Will that brand of Christian rail against same sex marriage? Contraceptives being made freely/cheaply available? If anything they'll probably be active on the pro-life front, but that's just one issue compared to the wide berth they're fighting against now. A Counter Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15173218521712325250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8766213929139682844.post-8718370279733243252013-06-06T11:05:08.753-07:002013-06-06T11:05:08.753-07:00Randal is forced to provide rationalizations to sq...<i>Randal is forced to provide rationalizations to square some basic version of Christianity with the problematic areas of the bible in terms of atrocities and failed prophecies.</i><br /><br />Nothing like that pesky Bible to get in the way of a reasonable theological position. This isn't just a problem for Rauser, of course. It's a problem for just about any Christian that considers the Bible a source text.<br /><br />Nice review. I just may have to pick this one up after I finish the backlog of stuff I'm currently working through. I enjoyed <i>The Christian Delusion</i> because I could process it in small chunks, so it's nice to know this one is similarly digestible even though it's not the same format, obviously.<br /><br />I agree that pulling Christianity in Rauser's direction is desirable because I think his version is much more benign and may not even survive that long. The problem I see with the more benign forms of Christianity is that constantly lurking beneath the surface are the seeds of fundamentalism just waiting for some charismatic nutcase to start ranting about taking "God's Word" seriously.The Apostatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07849387032571497899noreply@blogger.com