{"id":5168,"date":"2015-12-18T13:27:46","date_gmt":"2015-12-18T17:27:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/admin.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=5168"},"modified":"2017-04-22T18:21:54","modified_gmt":"2017-04-22T22:21:54","slug":"why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html","title":{"rendered":"Why I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

\"Links\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Various decorative depictions of the \u201cL10a174\u201d link of mathematical knot theory (i.e. a closed 5-link chain), including interlinked circles and pentagons, and interlaced \u201cyin-yang\u201d type shapes<\/span> [public domain \/ Wikimedia Commons<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n

* * * * *<\/p>\n

In my post,<\/span>\u00a0Exchanges w Atheist on Hell & Skepticism<\/a>, I made the following comment, after being asked by my atheist friend, \u201cwhat is your best evidence for God\u2019s existence?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Here are some of the best arguments I could find:<\/span><\/p>\n

1)\u00a0God: Historical Arguments (Copious Resources)<\/a><\/p>\n

2)\u00a0Atheism & Atheology (Copious Resources)<\/a><\/p>\n

3)\u00a0Science and Christianity (Copious Resources)<\/a><\/p>\n

4)\u00a015 Theistic Arguments (Copious Resources)<\/a><\/p>\n

5)\u00a0Teleological (Design) Argument for God (Resources)<\/a><\/p>\n

6)\u00a0Cosmological Argument for God (Resources)<\/a><\/p>\n

7)\u00a0Ontological Argument for God (Resources)<\/a><\/p>\n

The usual atheist response after I present these, that I worked for several weeks compiling is (this has literally happened several times) [my sarcastic embellishment of real events]: \u201cI can\u2019t read all\u00a0that<\/em>! Can\u2019t you\u00a0summarize<\/em>\u00a0some of the best ones in slogans and soundbites, so my feeble mind with its short attention span can comprehend it?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sorry, I don\u2019t do that. We\u2019re not in kindergarten here. If an atheist asks for the best rational arguments we can give, I think I have collected a great deal of them, and they will have to spend serious time reading, if they are serious about an objective examination of the philosophical strength of the theist or Christian worldview.<\/span><\/p>\n

My goal is to present the\u00a0best<\/em>\u00a0evidence I can find. I don\u2019t need to always personally argue some argument. Some scholar is gonna be able to do it way better than I am.<\/span><\/p>\n

Atheist inquirers who weren\u2019t serious in the first place will ignore and mock my links collections. Their goal is usually just to make Christians look stupid and supposedly make themselves look so intellectually superior.<\/span><\/p>\n

More open-minded, serious ones, on the other hand, who have asked for some solid arguments, will look them over (and should thank me for saving them the trouble, collecting all these articles).<\/span><\/p>\n

RhiForest<\/a>, another atheist, started critiquing this in the combox (his words in blue<\/span>, with my replies, and some added material now, regarding \u201cgish gallop\u201d and a few other minor additions or changes):<\/p>\n

First is in regards to this you claim about the responses you get when you link those compilations of various resources and arguments. I have tried for the life of me to think of a phrase the can succinctly describe what it looks like from the outside. Forgive me but there is only one phrase that comes to mind at the moment, and I know it is not completely accurate and that you put a lot of effort into those links. I will be blunt though, it looks like a Gish Gallop. Firstly, in response to a single question you present numerous answers. Now while the question is somewhat open ended, this response does not move the conversation forward because, quite simply, there is too much to go over. No one person can debunk all of that to get back to the focus on the conversation and have anything that resembles a life. Second, and this is why that phrase comes to mind, is that even just looking at the titles of each link, many of them contain argument that many atheists have encountered on their way out of the faith or in passing to inspect it. For example, you mention the teleological argument, the cosmological argument, and the ontological argument as the links. I can say that during my time looking through apologetic arguments, I saw these three arguments destroyed more completely than the Death Star ( :P ). By including these arguments (it may differ depending on the person), you have already made me predisposed to think of the others as being in a similar state. All in all, unless the person is specifically asking for a link of different resources, keeping the conversation focused on a single train of thought is the most productive. So basically, when asked for your \u201cbest\u201d pick the one that, to you, best supports your claim, and move forward.<\/span><\/p>\n

I looked up this \u201cgish gallop\u201d thing. I had never heard of that before. For the sake of those as unfamiliar with it as I was, here is how\u00a0the Urban Dictionary<\/em><\/a> defines it (with a certain word paraphrased in brackets):<\/span><\/p>\n

Named for the debate tactic created by creationist shill Duane Gish, a Gish Gallop involves spewing so much [BS]\u00a0in such a short span on that your opponent can\u2019t address let alone counter all of it. To make matters worse a Gish Gallop will often have one or more \u2018talking points\u2019 that has a tiny core of truth to it, making the person rebutting it spend even more time debunking it in order to explain that, yes, it\u2019s not totally false but the Galloper is distorting\/misusing\/misstating the actual situation. A true Gish Gallop generally has two traits.<\/span>

1) The factual and logical content of the Gish Gallop is pure [BS]\u00a0and anybody knowledgeable and informed on the subject would recognize it as such almost instantly. That is, the Gish Gallop is designed to appeal to and deceive precisely those sorts of people who are most in need of honest factual education.<\/span>

2) The points are all ones that the Galloper either knows, or damn well should know, are totally\u00a0[BS]. With the slimier users of the Gish Gallop, like Gish himself, its a near certainty that the points are chosen not just because the Galloper knows that they\u2019re [BS], but because the Galloper is deliberately trying to shovel as much [BS]\u00a0into as small a space as possible in order to overwhelm his opponent with sheer volume and bamboozle any audience members with a facade of scholarly acumen and factual knowledge.<\/span><\/p>\n

Of course this\u00a0nonsense has nothing whatever<\/em> to do with the reasons for my lists. I simply compiled a bunch of good arguments from scholars, that I could refer people to if they want to read further. It\u2019s \u201cfurther reading\u201d lists. Period.<\/span><\/p>\n

I never said everyone has to read every paper. Pick out a few to read. If you don\u2019t wanna read any, great. It\u2019s a free country. That doesn\u2019t wipe out the legitimate reason and motive I had for compiling them.<\/span><\/p>\n

I know before the atheist reads anything from me (even stuff I link to) that it is 99% certain that he or she won\u2019t be convinced of a damned thing. Ho hum. But the links still have some great arguments for Christianity and theism if they are truly interested in reading both sides.<\/span><\/p>\n

Alvin Plantinga, for example (just one of many scholars in my collections), is widely considered the world\u2019s greatest living Christian philosopher. This is no dummy. He singlehandedly dismantled the \u201chard\u201d problem of evil, and even many atheist philosophers have conceded that. It\u2019s quite an accomplishment for any philosopher to achieve something that notable. He\u2019s worthwhile for anyone<\/em>\u00a0to read.<\/span><\/p>\n

You guys constantly ask for this stuff (evidence, arguments), so I massively provide it in my lists of links, and then I get mocked as supposedly providing a \u201cgish gallop\u201d [someone else used the same phrase, too]. Can\u2019t win for losing. But it\u2019s the same routine as always. Nothing new under the sun.<\/span><\/p>\n

Most atheists are gonna consider me an irrational idiot who hates science and is a young earth creationist, and all the rest of the usual boilerplate. None of that is true. It\u2019s a big joke. But this is what most atheists online do: put people in boxes even if they obviously don\u2019t and can\u2019t fit into them.<\/span><\/p>\n

Occasionally I run across one who can get beyond all that and engage in mutually respectful dialogue, which I consider great fun, and challenging. I\u2019ve probably engaged in over a thousand lengthy dialogues over the last 18 years online. My favorite of all was with an atheist. I\u2019ve met several like that in the last four months. But online, they\u2019re few and far between.<\/span><\/p>\n

I have explained why I did what I did with the links. I don\u2019t have the time to climb Mt. Everest and deal in excruciating detail with every jot and tittle of every argument that an atheist brings up. Only so many hours in a day, and we apologists deal with hundreds of topics.<\/span><\/p>\n

But if I think a discussion with an atheist is worthwhile and has some informative substance for my readers, I roll with it, and have compiled many dialogues with atheists (such as the present one above this combox, which offered me opportunities to clarify many things). These constitute my own arguments for my position and against atheism.<\/span><\/p>\n

A few notes on this . . .<\/span><\/p>\n

First, even if you are not saying to read every paper, it is still a method to shut down the conversation. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cFurther reading\u201d is not shutting down any conversation. It\u2019s simply \u201cfurther reading\u201d (for those seriously interested in reasonable arguments for Christianity). Links are wonderful things. I make full use of the technology.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s true that many times I have neither time, energy, nor desire to get into a huge discussion, and so I mention the links when pressed for \u201cevidence.\u201d But that is not shutting down anything, either. It\u2019s the limitations of time and my desire to refer folks to good material in lieu of my lack of time, and in light of the fact that I am not a scholar, and almost all of my links are written by scholars.<\/span><\/p>\n

In the discussion you showed above, you were asked for your best. Your responded with a host of different apologetics. By doing this you shut down the conversation, you had the option to choose the particular apologetic you found best and present it. Or maybe even one you just enjoyed. Then the conversation would have continued. But that avenue instead shut the conversation down.<\/span><\/p>\n

Second, tying in with the first part and your second comment, is that these discussions are almost never for the person you are discussing. They are for those who are silently watching. Even if you \u201cknow\u201d the person you are conversing with will never change, it is still worth it to continue the conversation. I can speak from personal experience as one who never went very deep into the faith, when I went looking for one these kind of conversations were the most valuable resource.<\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s absolutely true, and most of the reason I do dialogues. Partly I simply enjoy it when it is a good one, but it\u2019s a teaching tool for readers. As an apologist I\u2019m a teacher.<\/span><\/p>\n

Third, while \u201cwe\u201d do ask for the stuff, the reasons behind it vary from person to person. For example, if I were to ask it, I would be looking for something that I have not seen before. You once provided a fairly decent discussion in regards to the problems of evil (or maybe more than once, you do put forth a lot of posts). My thoughts at the time were that maybe Christians did have a good solution on some level, but the problem was ultimately just pushed off onto free will, witch comes with an entire host of new problems.<\/span><\/p>\n

Lastly, you have made you last comment very clear. I suppose that that mindset is important if you are in a field basically under constant siege. However, this ties into my second point. It is for the silent readers. Abandoning the conversation if fine, but choosing when to do so is critical. Forgive me for this harsh criticism here, as in a weird way you have my respect, but you do not seem to have this timing down at all. You are extremely prone to abandoning the conversation early, in a manner that shows you you are not seeking a conversation but rather a forum to present your view. And the words you choose to leave on are often poorly chosen, usually pointing out how it is not worth your time or how the argument is pointless. While it is tiring and thankless, it is important to always be the better than those who appear against you.<\/span><\/p>\n

You may have a few valid points here and there in your final paragraph. I\u2019m not perfect. I get frustrated with futile discussions and false charges, straw men, obfuscation, non sequiturs<\/em>, illogical arguments, bigotry against Christians and Christianity, arguing with five atheists at once: all expecting instant answers, and other stuff. So that may be reflected at times in what I write. But these are some of the many reasons, apart from time factors and being bored, that I leave conversations. Usually it is simply time factors and other more pressing priorities.<\/span><\/p>\n

But if I have time and desire, I will put up an in-depth reply to atheists. Many of those sorts of discussions are online right now. You can see the effort I put into them.<\/span><\/p>\n

In any event, I\u2019d much<\/em> rather discuss issues<\/em> (again, time permitting), than discussing this<\/em>\u00a0sort of stuff about method and style, and misplaced criticisms of why I have collected good links for atheists to read as they please.<\/span><\/p>\n

Fair enough. I do understand what you are saying. Its more you are moving the conversation with the links than outright ending it, though the result, in my eyes, at that moment remains the same. I also do understand the frustration in the discussion, as there are those on both sides who love their straw men, illogical arguments, etc. Thank you for taking the time to have this conversation with me. Now in accordance with what I was saying earlier, I shall gracefully bow out and haunt Patheos for the foreseeable future.<\/span><\/p>\n

Fair enough here, too. You seem like a very thoughtful, bright guy, and I\u2019d like to dialogue with you on various topics, as they arise. You\u2019ve been critical, but with class, content, and articulation, and minus the usual crass insults that we Christians so often receive.<\/span><\/p>\n

But hell has been beaten to death, so right now I\u2019m sort of burned out of that discussion [no pun intended!]. That\u2019s why I gave relatively short answers in the post above this combox (which I fully explained in the intro), and also to you. I\u2019m just sick of talking about it (it happens: surely you or anyone can understand that, and have felt the same way at times). I have<\/span> a very long paper about it<\/a>, that was\u00a0posted on this blog just eight days ago, if you want to read that [as well as several others posted]. That\u2019s from me<\/em>: not a link!<\/span><\/p>\n

So please hang around over the long run, and in due course we can have some good discussions on mutually agreeable topics? Deal?<\/span><\/p>\n

Sounds good. Though I do tend to be more of a haunter than a participator, I will not be afraid to hop into a conversation if I feel I could contribute to it in a productive manner. And I do recall reading that particular post when you posted it. An enjoyable read :). Now it is time for me to head off it bed. I have a vacation day tomorrow so I get to sleep in!<\/span><\/p>\n

Good! Enjoy your time off.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Various decorative depictions of the \u201cL10a174\u201d link of mathematical knot theory (i.e. a closed 5-link chain), including interlinked circles and pentagons, and interlaced \u201cyin-yang\u201d type shapes [public domain \/ Wikimedia Commons] * * * * * In my post,\u00a0Exchanges w Atheist on Hell & Skepticism, I made the following comment, after being asked by my […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":5169,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[124,112],"tags":[267,258,119,979,253],"class_list":["post-5168","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-atheism-agnosticism","category-philosophy-science","tag-agnosticism","tag-atheism","tag-philosophy-of-religion","tag-religious-epistemology","tag-theistic-arguments"],"yoast_head":"\nWhy I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"It's the limitations of time and my desire to refer folks to scholarly articles in lieu of my lack of time, & in light of the fact that I am not a scholar.\" \/>\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\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Why I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"It's the limitations of time and my desire to refer folks to scholarly articles in lieu of my lack of time, & in light of the fact that I am not a scholar.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.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=\"2015-12-18T17:27:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-22T22:21:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2015\/12\/Links.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"600\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"600\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\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=\"13 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\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html\",\"name\":\"Why I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2015-12-18T17:27:46+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-22T22:21:54+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"It's the limitations of time and my desire to refer folks to scholarly articles in lieu of my lack of time, & in light of the fact that I am not a scholar.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Why I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists\"}]},{\"@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":"Why I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists","description":"It's the limitations of time and my desire to refer folks to scholarly articles in lieu of my lack of time, & in light of the fact that I am not a scholar.","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\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Why I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists","og_description":"It's the limitations of time and my desire to refer folks to scholarly articles in lieu of my lack of time, & in light of the fact that I am not a scholar.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2015-12-18T17:27:46+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-22T22:21:54+00:00","og_image":[{"width":600,"height":600,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2015\/12\/Links.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html","name":"Why I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2015-12-18T17:27:46+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-22T22:21:54+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"It's the limitations of time and my desire to refer folks to scholarly articles in lieu of my lack of time, & in light of the fact that I am not a scholar.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2015\/12\/why-i-collect-scholarly-links-for-atheists.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Why I Collect Lots of Scholarly Articles for Atheists"}]},{"@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\/5168","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=5168"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5168\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5169"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5168"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5168"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5168"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}