At any rate, we're not here to talk about John's fortitude, nor his surgery. The sickos only concerned with John's surgery can stop reading now. We're here to comment on his latest post. Of course, Steve Hays already weighed in on it below. What my post lacks in intelligence, it will be made up in its brevity. Basically, we'll see the untouchable position John has maneuvered his atheology into. Like a child on who is 50 yards away from a bigger kid who's trying to chase him yells, "Nee ner nee ner nee ner, you can't get me," John has his version of this. And it's a smash hit with atheists 'round the world. You Can't Touch This.
Notice that John can't be touched by any historical argument for Christianity. Says Loftus,
"A foreknowing and omniscient God should've easily known that history is a poor medium to reveal himself in, especially if he did so in an ancient superstitious era. If he did so, he's not too bright, for there is every reason for us to disbelieve today."
Heads John wins, tails God looses. If God is all knowing he wouldn't reveal himself in history, especially ancient history, when all the morons lived. And, if we could show that God did reveal himself, then God is stupid, and hence not omniscient, and therefore not the God of Christianity.
So far so good... for Loftus. His next maneuver is this:
"I'll go with logic over history everytime, especially a miraculous history which can be attibuted [sic] to visions."
Loftus gives the impression that he's open minded. Willing to look at arguments. As long as we can prove these metaphysical truths from logic, John will listen. One could go off on a brief detour, talking about that ancient superstitious Aristotle - who believed God made the world move by thinking about himself, or, rather, thought thinking itself - and that silly thing called "logic" that he formalized and believed in. In the words of Loftus, "Why should I believe what they did? Why? We reject many ideas that the ancients believed. There are many ancient philosophical, theological, historical and psychological ideas which we reject today." But, such a digression would make this post longer than it needs to be. So, back to my post. Loftus is willing to listen, not to history, but to logic. The search for God is a metaphysical truth, and Loftus will listen to logic here.
But, in a stroke of genius, Loftus has an ace up his sleeve! Check this maneuver out. Says Loftus,
"I am finding that logic doesn't help us much at all in the quest for metaphysical truths."
So, to avoid any historical argument, Loftus consigns it all (well, all of it that the ancient stupid people said) to the flames. But, since he has put much stock into his appearance as an "open minded, intellectually honest skeptic," he didn't want to give the impression that he has his eyes closed to any argument for God's existence, and so says that he'll accept logical arguments for these metaphysical truths. But, and this is the great part, he banks on the fact that hardly anyone remembers what he has posted about in his inane ramblings of days gone by, and so if ever confronted by a logical argument he can dismiss that as well since it "doesn't help us much at all in the quest for metaphysical truths."
Hence, we can't touch Loftus, stop, stammer time.