Thanks, I think. I would not have read it, but it seems that it avoids the one essential question for all religions and their adherents:
"Why is your religion better / truer / more correct than the thousands of other ones ?"
And no theist can ever actually answer it. They try, but at best come up with some circular reasoning. "My holy book is holy because it is true" and "My book is true because it is holy".
The theist completely lacks the ability to see that the reasons and evidence for and against her particular sky fairy story are exactly the same as those for and against every other sky fairy story.
Yes, there is some of this kind of begging the question in Miles’ writing. He calls for a new apologetics, which made me briefly optimistic that he might offer something, but he didn’t.
Thanks, I think. I would not have read it, but it seems that it avoids the one essential question for all religions and their adherents:
"Why is your religion better / truer / more correct than the thousands of other ones ?"
And no theist can ever actually answer it. They try, but at best come up with some circular reasoning. "My holy book is holy because it is true" and "My book is true because it is holy".
The theist completely lacks the ability to see that the reasons and evidence for and against her particular sky fairy story are exactly the same as those for and against every other sky fairy story.
Yes, there is some of this kind of begging the question in Miles’ writing. He calls for a new apologetics, which made me briefly optimistic that he might offer something, but he didn’t.