{"id":4596,"date":"2015-11-16T13:03:48","date_gmt":"2015-11-16T17:03:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/admin.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=4596"},"modified":"2017-04-26T17:08:16","modified_gmt":"2017-04-26T21:08:16","slug":"critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html","title":{"rendered":"Critique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>
. . . And of Course,\u00a0\u201cJittery John\u201d Again Explodes . . .\u00a0<\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0\"Volcano\"<\/a><\/div>\n
[Flickr<\/a> \/ \u00a0CC BY 2.0<\/a> license]<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
(11-30-06)<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u201cGird up your loins like a man, I will question you, and you shall declare to me.\u201d\n

Job 38:3 (RSV)<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\u201cPour forth the overflowings of your anger, and look on every one that is proud, and abase him . . . bring him low; and tread down the wicked where they stand.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Job 40:11-12<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

This amazing display of condescension came about after I commented on a post from atheist\u00a0John W. Loftus<\/span>\u00a0(author of a bunch of books and webmaster of the influential\u00a0Debunking Christianity<\/em><\/a>\u00a0website), having to do with\u00a0whether God was in time or not<\/a>. John has a history (with me, at any rate) of flying off the handle, rather than presenting rational counter-replies, when some criticism is offered. The classic case was when I dared to offer criticisms of his deconversion story. His reaction has to be seen to be believed.<\/p>\n

I had hoped that (with the passage of time) he had gotten over this skittishness and hair-trigger defensiveness and condescension where I am concerned, but alas, it was not to be. He has even \u201cupped the ante\u201d and continued a stream of insults toward me, for (quite outrageously) being and acting like a Christian confident in his faith and able to defend it. In the past, he has called me a \u201cjoke\u201d and an \u201carrogant idiot\u201d among other things. He has yet to retract any of the epithets.<\/p>\n

Now, I\u2019m the first to gladly assert that his reaction should not be seen as one that typifies atheists, or disproves any particular atheist version of reality. Neither is true. But that is not my purpose at present; rather, it is to show how even intelligent people (John has two masters\u2019 degrees) can become utterly irrational and unreasonable when confronted with criticism of their arguments, and how harmful this is to the intellectual endeavor. This is how\u00a0not<\/span>\u00a0to do it, folks!<\/p>\n

There is also some considerable humor and amusement to be enjoyed (the section about \u201cobvious\u201d); I simply couldn\u2019t resist. He laid himself out wide open on that one; provided the rope to hang him with. John\u2019s words will be in\u00a0blue<\/span>.<\/p>\n

* * * * *<\/div>\n

. . . look these arguments up before you comment further. Please do my readers a favor here. Read up on this topic before you continue to waste space. Let other more informed people comment.<\/span><\/p>\n

ME: On the other hand, it is obvious that God must be outside of time, if one accepts the description of Him that the Bible offers.<\/p>\n

That he walked in the cool of the Garden of Eden? That he showed Moses his back side? That he appeared to Abraham? That he changed his mind? That he visited us in Jesus? You are ignorant if you think what you just said is obvious.<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . Anthropomorphism. That saves you, doesn\u2019t it? Then show me one verse in the Bible that could not have been written by an ancient superstitious person. Just one. Show me where there was a prediction of the computer chip, or a vaccine for Polio. Show me where God told people about the vastness and age of the universe.<\/span><\/p>\n

ME: I suspect you are slanting his full argument. If he is orthodox, he would not put it in such despairing terms.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read it yourself. Why is it that you distrust what I say? If you distrust what I say then why bother to comment on this at all? Just say you don\u2019t believe he said this and move on.<\/span><\/p>\n

[I didn\u2019t say I distrusted it, only that there was possible bias in presenting the Christian\u2019s argument]<\/p>\n

Dave, you present your uninformed arguments as if everyone should agree with you, and that is what I object to.<\/span><\/p>\n

You used the words \u201cobvious\u201d and \u201cobviously\u201d twice in this last comment alone, when not even all Christians will agree with you, much less atheists. Why do you continue to insist that the things you believe are obvious? That\u2019s what I think is ignorant of you, for if they were obvious no one would disagree.<\/span><\/p>\n

But that\u2019s not all. You state \u201cit is nonsensical and utterly illogical.\u201d You state \u201cThis is radically unbiblical,\u201d and \u201cimpossible exegetically.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

You annoy me, not because of your arguments, but because of your ill placed confidence. Any educated person would not state the things you do with such arrogance. That\u2019s all.<\/span><\/p>\n

Besides, it does nothing for your argument to add the word \u201cobviously\u201d to it. And if you were informed as you say about this, then you would know that such interpretatons are not impossible since Christians themselves think otherwise.<\/span><\/p>\n

I mean, really, with you there is no discussion to be had for any topic you write about. You are the answer man. Everyone else is ignoring the obvious. And that\u2019s the hallmark of an ignorant and uneducated man.<\/span><\/p>\n

You keep being personally insulting, John, and I\u2019ll keep making arguments (just like when I critiqued your deconversion). People can see through that.<\/p>\n

If I\u2019m as big of a dolt and an ignoramus as you endlessly contend, then surely you\u2019ll be able to blow my arguments out of the water.<\/p>\n

But of course, since you\u2019re far less \u201cconfident\u201d than I am, this handicap (or virtue, depending on one\u2019s point of view) would OBVIOUSLY present an opposing counter-weight to your doing so.<\/p>\n

Which scholar, for instance, would you point to who says his arguments are obvious?<\/span><\/p>\n

I don\u2019t know who\u2019s a scholar or who isn\u2019t, but I\u2019ll use examples from this very blog:<\/p>\n

Obviously<\/b>, the problem is that each author of the various books treats \u2018Faith\u2019 as something differently.<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(DagoodS,\u00a011-1-06<\/a>)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(I won\u2019t argue whether such a conception of \u201cdegrees of individuality\u201d is \u201ctrue or not\u201d in a philosophical sense, which will\u00a0obviously<\/b>\u00a0get us no where, since how could one prove any of my assumptions above at all)?<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(Ed Babinski, 10-20-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>Obviously<\/b>, this passage presents some theological difficulties for early Christians. This passage seems to run against the notion that Jesus is God.<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(Bill Curry, 11-6-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>. . . God must take the sum total of His wrath out on the most unworthy recipient, a wholly guiltless individual, who also happens to be Himself? Why is such a belief necessary? And why do Christian creeds insist on the necessity of such a belief, when it\u00a0obviously<\/b>\u00a0does not appeal to all, nor even make sense to all?<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(Ed Babinski, 10-20-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>Conclusive proof that the Bible is NOT inerrant. [title] . . . The God who created the Universe, stars, planets, and our own Sun,\u00a0obviously\u00a0<\/b>wasn\u2019t aware of the very astronomical phenomena he created.<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(Desolate-Paladin, 6-21-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>Steve is\u00a0obviously<\/b>\u00a0committing a fallacious appeal to authority, considering he hasn\u2019t yet even evaluated my writing in order to refute it on the grounds of \u201cno formal credentials\u201d.<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(Daniel Morgan, 5-11-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>The Establishment Clause is best understood by the Lemon Test. This situation fails the test on\u00a0obvious\u00a0<\/b>grounds, . . .<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(Daniel Morgan, this very day: 11-30-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>The message was as\u00a0obvious<\/b>\u00a0as anything, but I tried to look for answers. I read up on the responses from all the theological camps, from the conservatives (Blomberg, Marshall, McKnight, Wright, Witherington) to moderates (Meyer, Brown) to the Jesus Seminar.<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(exapologist \u2013 almost a scholar, going for his doctorate in philosophy, 9-9-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>Rather it is a book easily proven to be filled with errors and of\u00a0obvious<\/b>\u00a0human origin.<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(s burgener, 11-5-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>Now let\u2019s say a Calvinist offers an answer and is unconvinced by any of my replies. I never said I could convince those who hold to absolutely\u00a0idiotic<\/span>\u00a0beliefs such as this one, that they are wrong.\u00a0Any thinking person not already blinded by their faith<\/span>\u00a0would see the\u00a0obvious<\/b>\u00a0and serious problem here.<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(John W. Loftus, 10-15-06)<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>[I]t is apparent that upon careful examination, several fundamental elements of the Christian faith do not stand up to outside critiques, or even, in some cases, to several passages in the same book. In the case of the \u2018virginal birth\u2019 and the accompanying prophecies, it is\u00a0obvious<\/b>\u00a0that the two critical parts of the faith of Christianity can not logically coexist. But then, logic is not what religion is based upon.<\/span>
\n
\n<\/span>(C.J. Baserap, 5-14-06)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

But here\u2019s one scholar, at least:\u00a0William Lane Craig<\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n

There\u2019s another version of Dr. Ehrman\u2019s objection which is even more\u00a0obviously<\/b>\u00a0fallacious than Ehrman\u2019s Egregious Error. I call it \u201cBart\u2019s Blunder.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In this paper, presented by you (6-6-06), you yourself state that Craig is a pretty decent scholar, not an idiot and deluded and presumptuous fool like you think I am:\u00a0\u201cCraig understands symbolic logic, and uses it to his advantage whenever he can. . . . Craig does a masterful job of it.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Since Dr. Craig used the outrageous word \u201cobvious\u201d with regard to one of his own arguments, or regarding the \u201cobviously fallacious . . . Egregious Error\u201d [his capital letters] and \u201cBlunder\u201d of an opponent, then he, too must be (as you say I am)\u00a0\u201cthe answer man. Everyone else is ignoring the obvious . . . the hallmark of an ignorant and uneducated man.\u201d\u00a0<\/span>Nice little foray into symbolic logic there, John . . .<\/p>\n

And again you (5-7-06) cite NT scholar James Dunn (one whom Ed Babinski has tried to cite against my position):<\/p>\n

\u201cJohn\u2019s Gospel is\u00a0\u2018obviously<\/span>\u00a0different\u2019 [Dunn] from the other three earlier Gospels in terms of style and content.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So there is another\u00a0\u201cignorant and uneducated\u201d<\/span>\u00a0scholar, using this dreaded word \u201cobvious\u201d and thus proving that he has no business commenting on anything at all, with such unmitigated gall and\u00a0hubris<\/i>, leading him to possess such inappropriate confidence!<\/p>\n

Okay Dave. Fine. Where do you get the time to search these things out? For me to answer you I would have to search out the context of every one of these uses of \u201cobviously.\u201d But let me guess. Craig does this only in debates for rhetorical effect. Others were talking about their own notions and personal experiences. Still others are indeed fairly obvious.<\/span><\/p>\n

They\u2019re\u00a0what<\/span>???!!!<\/p>\n

There are other usages you pointed to which I\u2019ll let those who used them speak for themselves. But if I\u2019m arguing against a viewpoint that I know my opponent doesn\u2019t agree with, or if I\u2019m arguing a minority viewpoint, or a contestable viewpoint then it\u2019s ignorant to use the word for anything contestable,\u00a0<\/span>especially as much as you use it<\/b>. And even when you don\u2019t use such a word it\u2019s in the whole tone of what you write.<\/span><\/p>\n

For instance it is \u201cobvious\u201d to me that Christianity is false.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s\u00a0what<\/span>???!!! But of course, this is not an arrogant use of the word; only when I use it to defend Christianity. Curious logic . . .<\/p>\n

That\u2019s my personal belief, and it\u2019s proper to use this word to describe my personal feelings about Christianity. But to say it\u2019s \u201cobvious\u201d that Christianity is false in an argument that attempts to show another person that it\u2019s false, is ignorant, unless done for rhetorical effect, which is merely rhetorical and has no force at all. Ehrman could\u2019ve simply said \u201cthis is not obvious to me.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s interesting. So to describe an\u00a0argument<\/span>\u00a0as \u201cobviously wrong\u201d is insufferably arrogant, but to utilize a number of different arguments to make a statement describing one\u2019s conclusion that an\u00a0entire religion<\/span>\u00a0is obviously false, is perfectly prim and proper. It\u2019s a silly distinction. Just let people say what they want to, and give them the freedom to use whatever words they wish. John finds my style offensive and overly-confident. I find his insulting and condescending. Does he really think my being confident that an argument is \u201cobviously wrong\u201d is more offensive than him calling me an \u201carrogant idiot\u201d and all the additional insults (most aimed at my knowledge and intelligence) seen presently?<\/p>\n

I am annoyed by people like you, and it may be a personality problem. I\u2019m annoyed with pompous self-righteous know-it-all\u2019s, especially when I know they don\u2019t.<\/span><\/p>\n

See, there you go! LOL Yet another to add to my collection. So John lectures me about supposed attitudes, using examples that don\u2019t prove his point, and then absolutely proves that his attitude is far worse than mine, by any objective criteria.<\/p>\n

And that is how you come across. Now it might go over well with your supporters and visitors to your site, but not here. Here you will find people who disagree with you a lot more often.<\/span><\/p>\n

Not only do you think you\u2019re right when you haven\u2019t read the relevant literature. Now you are attempting to defend the arrogant way you argue. You\u2019re just right about everything, or, at least you always come across that way. And in my book that reveals you are an uneducated, ignorant, arrogant know-it-all.<\/span><\/p>\n

What I am probably going to do is to delete these comments tomorrow so that we can start this discussion all over again. You may copy them if you want to, but they are off track.<\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, of course (precisely why I knew I had to preserve them). I suppose I would do the same thing, if something made me look like a fool, as this stuff does regarding John.<\/p>\n

[to someone else]:<\/p>\n

I think people who argue in the manner I see over at Triablogue\u00a0<\/span>[an anti-Catholic site],\u00a0and even Dave Armstrong to some degree, don\u2019t care about us as persons. They only want to show to others, whom they do care for, that we are wrong. Many of them think we are ignorant or willfully ignorant deceivers who don\u2019t care about the truth at all. So they treat us like non-persons.<\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, of course. I disagree with a position, and this sort of hyper-paranoid tripe is what I get back. But John is clearly (whoops, OBVIOUSLY) showing tons of \u201ccare\u201d for me as \u201cperson\u201d when he uses the following descriptions (all now a matter of record):<\/span><\/p>\n

you continue to waste space<\/span>
\n
\nYou are ignorant<\/span><\/p>\n

you present your uninformed arguments as if everyone should agree with you<\/span><\/p>\n

Any educated person would not state the things you do with such arrogance.<\/span><\/p>\n

with you there is no discussion to be had for any topic you write about.<\/span><\/p>\n

You are the answer man. Everyone else is ignoring the obvious. And that\u2019s the hallmark of an ignorant and uneducated man.<\/span><\/p>\n

I am annoyed by people like you, . . . pompous self-righteous know-it-all\u2019s<\/span><\/p>\n

Now you are attempting to defend the arrogant way you argue.<\/span><\/p>\n

You\u2019re just right about everything, or, at least you always come across that way.<\/span><\/p>\n

you are an uneducated, ignorant, arrogant know-it-all.<\/span><\/p>\n

I think people who argue in the manner I see over at Triablogue, and even Dave Armstrong to some degree, don\u2019t care about us as persons.<\/span><\/p>\n

Many of them\u00a0[implied, including me]\u00a0think we are ignorant or willfully ignorant deceivers who don\u2019t care about the truth at all. So they treat us like non-persons.<\/span><\/p>\n

(all on 11-30-06)<\/span><\/p>\n

Not bad for a day\u2019s work, especially for one who is lecturing another about how to treat folks respectfully. What else has John said about me in the past?:<\/p>\n

Dave, as I read this<\/span>\u00a0[my critique of his deconversion]<\/span>\u00a0I thought to myself, he doesn\u2019t think of me as an equal. He looks down his nose at me. As I\u2019m writing he looks for loopholes. He doesn\u2019t think I was sincere. I\u2019m probably not even a person to him.<\/span><\/p>\n

You\u2019re a joke. I\u2019m surprised you have an audience. You\u2019re also a psychologist, eh? Wow! . . . Again, you\u2019re a joke.<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . that quite frankly is stupid of you.<\/span><\/p>\n

You\u2019re a joke, and I just don\u2019t have the time to teach you what you need to understand.<\/span><\/p>\n

To think you could pompously proclaim you are better than me is beyond me when you don\u2019t know me. It\u2019s a defensive mechanism you have with people like me.<\/span><\/p>\n

You have shown yourself to be non-objective with me and to parade before the ignorant how smart and how much more faith you have than I did.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s called respecting people as people, and Dave\u2019s Christianity does not do that with people who don\u2019t agree with him.<\/span><\/p>\n

I\u2019m just tired of pompous asses on the internet who go around claiming they are superior to me in terms of intelligence and faith. Such arrogance makes me vomit.<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . self-assured arrogant idiots out there, like Dave, who prefer to proclaim off of my personal experience that they are better than I.<\/span><\/p>\n

(10-16-06; wow, it\u2019a close call between these two insult-days. I give the nod to 10-16, though, because I love \u201carrogant idiot\u201d and \u201cjoke\u201d the best)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

. . . And of Course,\u00a0\u201cJittery John\u201d Again Explodes . . .\u00a0 \u00a0 [Flickr \/ \u00a0CC BY 2.0 license] (11-30-06) \u201cGird up your loins like a man, I will question you, and you shall declare to me.\u201d Job 38:3 (RSV) \u201cPour forth the overflowings of your anger, and look on every one that is proud, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":4597,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[124],"tags":[1043,258,648,647],"class_list":["post-4596","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-atheism-agnosticism","tag-anti-theism","tag-atheism","tag-debunking-christianity","tag-john-loftus"],"yoast_head":"\nCritique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Condescension reigned after I commented on a post from atheist John Loftus (author and webmaster of the influential "Debunking Christianity" website).\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Critique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Condescension reigned after I commented on a post from atheist John Loftus (author and webmaster of the influential "Debunking Christianity" website).\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2015-11-16T17:03:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-26T21:08:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2015\/11\/Volcano.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"600\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html\",\"name\":\"Critique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2015-11-16T17:03:48+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-26T21:08:16+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"Condescension reigned after I commented on a post from atheist John Loftus (author and webmaster of the influential \\\"Debunking Christianity\\\" website).\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Critique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Critique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God","description":"Condescension reigned after I commented on a post from atheist John Loftus (author and webmaster of the influential \"Debunking Christianity\" website).","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Critique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God","og_description":"Condescension reigned after I commented on a post from atheist John Loftus (author and webmaster of the influential \"Debunking Christianity\" website).","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2015-11-16T17:03:48+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-26T21:08:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":600,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2015\/11\/Volcano.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html","name":"Critique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2015-11-16T17:03:48+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-26T21:08:16+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"Condescension reigned after I commented on a post from atheist John Loftus (author and webmaster of the influential \"Debunking Christianity\" website).","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/11\/critique-of-atheist-john-loftus-re-a-timeless-god.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Critique of Atheist John Loftus Regarding a Timeless God"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4596","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4596"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4596\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4597"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4596"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4596"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4596"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}