Comments on: XFiles: The surprise ending

By: Kalimeros

Kalimeros — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 18:16:33 +0000

Excellent series! Are you planning to build up a downloadable compilation? I volunteer to translate it to Spanish, just for the sake of the good mental health of my catholic daughter.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:08:52 +0000

Fortunately for the unbelievers, the Catholic Church and its very own pedophile “faithful” has given us the biggest and best example of an evil that a loving God (or gods) could have easily prevented but (if he/she/it exists) has chosen instead to permit.

It/she/he could easily have prevented its own leaders from assaulting children all over the world and turning hundreds or thousands of people away from Church teaching. But no, it was better for defenceless children to be sodomised by cruel and evil old men.

By: Evangelicals Acting, Badly | Unreasonable Faith

Evangelicals Acting, Badly | Unreasonable Faith — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 09:01:23 +0000

[...] co-author of I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (which our friend Deacon Duncan has recently finished demolishing), are sticking by him. « Ancient Cosmology [...]

By: Ian

Ian — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 01:06:28 +0000

It’s astounding that even when Geisler and Turek completely control the conversation they end it this way, and then still have the gall to say right on the cover of their book that atheists are the ones relying on faith.

Anyway, I’d just like to join everyone else in thanking you for doing this wonderful series I’ve rarely seen the arguments against this particular brand of Christianity put so succinctly and thoroughly all in one place. I look forward to reading more on your site!

By: Prazzie

Prazzie — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 23:30:46 +0000

Thank you very much for doing all this so I don’t have to read the book (or pay for it!). I’ve been following the series since the beginning. I’ve also been able to direct some people here when they mentioned the book and received positive feedback about how useful your posts were.

By: Korou

Korou — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:36:21 +0000

I think a book would be a great idea.

I’ve REALLY enjoyed reading this series. Thanks for all the hard work! They’ve all been great.

How about tackling some Lee Strobel? I always enjoy reviews of his books.

Thanks again!

By: Chigliakus

Chigliakus — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:24:43 +0000

And pretty soon we’re going to get the whole series as a single, downloadable .rtf file, right? Right? Or are you going to publish a book?

He’s even come up with a great name for a book already: I Don’t Have Enough Gullibility to be a Christian.

By: mikespeir

mikespeir — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 09:38:17 +0000

And pretty soon we’re going to get the whole series as a single, downloadable .rtf file, right? Right? Or are you going to publish a book?

By: Swimmy

Swimmy — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 04:10:35 +0000

“STRAW: I must admit that your intellectual answers make some sense”

“GEISTUR: God may have permitted evil in order to defeat it.”

Does not compute.

What a depressing ending. For GEISTUR, not for the series.

By: Tacroy

Tacroy — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:46:19 +0000

Gah, I forgot to end the bold tag.

By: Tacroy

Tacroy — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:45:55 +0000

Modusoperandi:

That would require they argue in good faith. It would hardly be apologetics then, would it?

You can’t really argue in good faith if your faith isn’t any good

By: David D.G.

David D.G. — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:08:07 +0000

Wonderful series, DD! I look forward to seeing what you’ll tackle next.

~David D.G.

By: Modusoperandi

Modusoperandi — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 18:30:15 +0000

JohnMWhite “Could not Geisler and Turek critique atheist ideas on their own merits, rather than telling us ‘the gospels say this and it must be so!’?”
That would require they argue in good faith. It would hardly be apologetics then, would it?

By: JohnMWhite

JohnMWhite — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 17:21:05 +0000

Thanks very much for the series, I have been following along and enjoying your thorough critique. I am disappointed only in that the authors of the book fell into the same old traps we’ve all seen so many times before, but you still managed to make refuting their errors and highlighting their serpentine squirms of logic entertaining. From the title of the book, like yourself I thought we might see something a little different, but it was not to be. Instead we just are told once more to take things on faith…

I’ve not read the book itself, and it may just be due to your selection of what parts of the text to highlight, but it seemed to me that for a book with ‘atheist’ in the title, there was very little actual discussion of atheism and its arguments (aside from Mr. Straw still managing to argue rings around the authors in the appendix about evil when he was supposed to be a lame duck) and a boatload of Christian proselytizing. Could not Geisler and Turek critique atheist ideas on their own merits, rather than telling us “the gospels say this and it must be so!”? Could they not even have used further sources as evidence for God, like the Book of Mormon, the Qur’an, the Upanishads, the Theogony?

By: pboyfloyd

pboyfloyd — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 04:22:15 +0000

Considering the premise of their story, their conclusion is very surprising. And they make it up themselves.

By: Philip Malaby

Philip Malaby — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:01:32 +0000

Excellent series! Very well written and highly informative with a good amount of humor thrown in to the bargain. I have enjoyed reading these every week and look forward to what ever you come up with next.

By: J. Ash Bowie

J. Ash Bowie — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 22:04:15 +0000

Well done. I’ve been reading the series and enjoyed your rebuttals. Frankly, I’d enjoy your own socratic conversation between a more genuine atheist and your best understanding of “Dr. Geistur”.

By: Malky

Malky — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:48:21 +0000

I have thoroughly enjoyed this series of posts and have been happy to read them. Please keep up the good work.