Wednesday, February 15, 2012

John Loftus has drawn a line in the sand!

John Loftus has been on the warpath lately attacking William Lane Craig–in a classic case of biting the hand that fed him. Loftus entitles one of his posts:

Is William Lane Craig Dishonest With the Facts? I’ve Drawn a Line in the Sand

Sounds pretty intimidating, dontcha think? What does Loftus imagine would happen to Craig if he dared to cross the line that Loftus drew in the sand? Would Craig vaporize the moment his big toe trespassed the sandy line? Would Craig go up in a puff of smoke? Somehow I doubt Craig is terrified by the prospect.

And in another post, Loftus treats us to this doozy:

I know he’s not trying to convince anyone else that he experienced it. He distinguishes between knowing Christianity is true from showing it to be true.…A private subjective experience has no more evidence for it than none at all.

By that criterion, none of John Loftus’s memories count as evidence for what he experienced. His personal memories aren’t even convincing to himself that he experienced what he remembers having experienced. He may have memories of his mother, but that’s no more evidence for her than none at all.

After all, what’s past is past. At present, he has no direct access to the past–not even his own. In many instances, all that’s left are his private, subjective recollections. That’s all he can rely on at this juncture. 


  1. One time I saw a bunch of drunk people out on the beach drawing lines in the sand. Just saying.

  2. And by these standards John's much bally hooed "deconversion" experience...which is the start of his "cumulative case" irrelevant.

    In fact, as the new edition of WIBA will show...and which he edited while "drinking himself to sleep"(his words)...he actually made up the reasons for his "deconverion".

    Unless, of course, the NEW version is the lie, and not the old one...etc.