Among the most read posts on this blog are the ones in which I dissect the artful dodger named William Lane Craig. I have plenty more to say about him and his outright intellectual dishonesty and endless double standards, and his tendency to change the definitions of words so long as it suits him. The thing is that I mentioned in the past that I'd also address another mind-numbingly laughable apologist. In relation to that, I've been getting emails that rather make me think even less of Christian apologetics than I already had. Yes, some people picked up on my use of the term "Plantinga-class circularity" and decided they should defend by singing the praises of the Magister Stultitia, Alvin Plantinga.
It's kind of fun to see them all act so desperate. But in general, a lot of Christians seem to think Plantinga is one of the premier purveyors of apologetics out there. A lot of theists of various religions consider him one of the most important of all modern philosophers because of his arguments for theism, dualism, etc. They seem to miss the fact that that's really quite pathetic. Really, the man peddles the sort of idiocy packaged in such a shoddy veneer of fake sophistication that it would make even William Lane Craig blush. If this is really the best Christian apologists have to offer, it's pretty astonishingly sad.
The easiest way to identify instances of Plantinga-class circularity when someone begins a sentence the same way Plantinga invariably does whenever he wants to accumulate details on his arguments in order to make it sound more solid -- "If Christianity is true..."
It's kind of fun to see them all act so desperate. But in general, a lot of Christians seem to think Plantinga is one of the premier purveyors of apologetics out there. A lot of theists of various religions consider him one of the most important of all modern philosophers because of his arguments for theism, dualism, etc. They seem to miss the fact that that's really quite pathetic. Really, the man peddles the sort of idiocy packaged in such a shoddy veneer of fake sophistication that it would make even William Lane Craig blush. If this is really the best Christian apologists have to offer, it's pretty astonishingly sad.
The easiest way to identify instances of Plantinga-class circularity when someone begins a sentence the same way Plantinga invariably does whenever he wants to accumulate details on his arguments in order to make it sound more solid -- "If Christianity is true..."
