Books by John W . Loftus
To believe in a god who created the universe doesn't automatically lead believers to their own sp... more To believe in a god who created the universe doesn't automatically lead believers to their own specific religious sect. The truth is there are an utterly overwhelming number of non-Christian religionists who agree that a different creator god exists. So it's quite apparent that philosophical and scientific god-arguments are beside the point. None of those arguments, even if shown to be true, point to a specific religion, or religious sect, or gain anything at all in the debates between theistic religious faiths.
God or Godless: One Atheist. One Christian. Twenty Controversial Questions, 2013
Here are my concluding thoughts from the co-written debate book with Randal Rauser. I had twin go... more Here are my concluding thoughts from the co-written debate book with Randal Rauser. I had twin goals in co-writing this book. The first one is to force Christians to think about what they would believe if the Bible itself was undermined as a source of divine truth. My claim is that they probably won't believe at all. I'm trying to drive a wedge between the Bible and the brain of the believer. The second goal is to show in a cumulative fashion that Randal's God, having the three main attributes most Christians believe in today--omnibenevolence, omniscience, and omnipotence--does not exist.
Christianity is Not Great: Why Faith Fails, 2014
In this excerpt Loftus answers two questions: 6) Does Christianity cause more harm than good over... more In this excerpt Loftus answers two questions: 6) Does Christianity cause more harm than good overall?; and 7) What does this book attempt to show?
Unapologetic: Why Philosophy of Religion Must End, 2015
Given the influence of Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig, I doubt very much believers have h... more Given the influence of Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig, I doubt very much believers have heard these issues discussed like this before. I share it in hopes you'll like what I write enough to read the whole book.
God and Horrendous Suffering, 2021
The evidential problem of horrendous suffering is one of the most powerful refutations of the the... more The evidential problem of horrendous suffering is one of the most powerful refutations of the theistic god as can be found: If there's a theistic omni-everything god, who is omnibenelovent (or perfectly good), omniscient (or all-knowing), and omnipotent (or all-powerful), the issue of why there is horrendous suffering in the world requires an explanation. The reason is that a perfectly good god would want to eliminate it, an allknowing god would know how to eliminate it, and an all-powerful god would be able to eliminate it. So the extent of horrendous suffering means that either god does not care enough to eliminate it, or god is not smart enough to to eliminate it, or god is not powerful enough to eliminate it. The stubborn fact of horrendous suffering means something is wrong with god's goodness, his knowledge, or his ability.
My focus is on horrendous suffering, the kind that turns our stomachs. It's the best kind of suffering to test the probability of a good god. If believers cannot solve this problem except by focusing on hypothetical possibilities rather than on probabilities, or by punting to ignorance-by saying "God's ways are above ours"-then that god has allowed more suffering in the world than is reasonable for reasonable people to accept. Surely a god who created reasonable people should provide what reasonable people need if he wants us to believe.
Unapologetic: Why Philosophy of Religion Must End, 2016
What changed my mind about the value of philosophy of religion to the point where I’m calling for... more What changed my mind about the value of philosophy of religion to the point where I’m calling for that discipline to end in the secular universities? It was the perspectives of three towering intellectuals, Dr. David Eller, Peter Boghossian and Hector Avalos. Here in this xcerpt from my book, "Unapologetic: Why Philosophy of Religion Must End" I explain why.
From Chapter 1 "In Defense of Hitchens's Razor" in the anthology "God and Horrendous Suffering" (2021)., 2021
My contention is that using Bayes without any prior or subsequent objective data is us... more My contention is that using Bayes without any prior or subsequent objective data is using it in a pseudo-statistical way. Just consider how you could use Bayes to evaluate my bare assertion, without any objective evidence, that I’m levitating right now. All miracle claims must begin and end with objective evidence. Without it, there is nothing else to say or to but dismiss them. No math is needed. No other issue demands to be asked or answered.
On Making Excuses for God, 2021
This is the first half of a chapter of mine for an upcoming anthology on God and Horrendous suffe... more This is the first half of a chapter of mine for an upcoming anthology on God and Horrendous suffering. In it I'm presenting five facts that must be acknowledged. In the rest of the chapter I'll deal with five excuses given to defend a faith in a good all-powerful God despite these five facts. I’ll then conclude my chapter with what it takes to save theistic faith from refutation.
Unapologetic: Why Philosophy of Religion Must End, 2016
I discuss atheistic philosophy of religion in this excerpt from Chapter 4 of my book "Unapologeti... more I discuss atheistic philosophy of religion in this excerpt from Chapter 4 of my book "Unapologetic" (2016). Here's hoping it'll make a difference.
Papers by John W . Loftus
From Chapter 1 "In Defense of Hitchens's Razor" in the anthology "God and Horrendous Suffering" (2021)., 2021
My contention is that using Bayes without any prior or subsequent objective data is using it in a... more My contention is that using Bayes without any prior or subsequent objective data is using it in a pseudo-statistical way. Just consider how you could use Bayes to evaluate my bare assertion, without any objective evidence, that I’m levitating right now. All miracle claims must begin and end with objective evidence. Without it, there is nothing else to say or to but dismiss them. No math is needed. No other issue demands to be asked or answered.
Religious Studies Review, 2008
The author of this volume correctly suggests in his postscript, "Many of the specialists in the f... more The author of this volume correctly suggests in his postscript, "Many of the specialists in the field of ancient Near Eastern studies have steadfastly eschewed the sort of synthesis that has been presented in this book," and for understandable reasons: it is difficult. Trying to introduce and assess what constitutes ancient Near Eastern thought (and the author includes in ancient Near Eastern: Canaan, Egypt, Hittite sometimes, and Mesopotamia) is a difficult task multiplied by trying to connect it with the Old Testament in a way that does not offend overly critical or confessional scholars. Despite the difficulty of the task, this volume is well worth the endeavor despite some of the complications. The book is divided into five main parts: Comparative Studies, Literature of the Ancient Near East, Religion, Cosmos, and People. The writer's style is inviting for students, because an effort is made to clarify concepts without overly simplifying them. This is done through summarizing some issues, such as the main goals of the comparative endeavor to bullet points, and the inclusion of sidebars entitled "comparative exploration." While the book is designed for students and nonspecialists, the attempt to synthesize the material in such a thorough fashion should intrigue scholars.
Uploads
Books by John W . Loftus
My focus is on horrendous suffering, the kind that turns our stomachs. It's the best kind of suffering to test the probability of a good god. If believers cannot solve this problem except by focusing on hypothetical possibilities rather than on probabilities, or by punting to ignorance-by saying "God's ways are above ours"-then that god has allowed more suffering in the world than is reasonable for reasonable people to accept. Surely a god who created reasonable people should provide what reasonable people need if he wants us to believe.
Papers by John W . Loftus
My focus is on horrendous suffering, the kind that turns our stomachs. It's the best kind of suffering to test the probability of a good god. If believers cannot solve this problem except by focusing on hypothetical possibilities rather than on probabilities, or by punting to ignorance-by saying "God's ways are above ours"-then that god has allowed more suffering in the world than is reasonable for reasonable people to accept. Surely a god who created reasonable people should provide what reasonable people need if he wants us to believe.