I have been asking evangelical apologist Randal Rauser the following question, over and over again on his blog, but he refuses to answer it. He complains that I have not worded my question properly, but when I re-word it, he refuses to answer the re-worded question. The truth is obvious. Dr. Randal Rauser is terrified to answer this question:
Do you believe that you have a personal relationship with Jesus, and if so, why?
I’m tired of asking. I left this statement on Rauser’s blog:
To Randal Rauser, evangelical apologist,
I don’t think you have any intention of answering my question no matter how I re-word the question. You are using the same dirty, dishonest debate tactics used by Fox news host, Tucker Carlson: Denigrate the character and intelligence of your debate opponent while persistently avoiding answering your opponent’s questions.
https://www.shanesnow.com/a…
You are smart enough to know that the following would be the conclusion to our discussion, if you had engaged in it, a conclusion which you want to avoid at all cost:
How can someone objectively evaluate the very extra-ordinary claim of a resurrection of a brain-dead first century peasant if he believes that the man in question “lives in his heart” and is his “best friend”??
It is not possible!
You can object all you want to my use of the terms “peasant” and “man”, but that is exactly what Jesus was unless YOU prove that he was something more. Disputed eyewitness testimony from partisan sources and your subjective personal feelings, intuitions, and perceptions are NOT sufficient evidence for most educated, modern, non-Christian adults to buy into the historicity of this ancient tall tale.
That is why Dr. Randall Rauser is NEVER going to answer this question.
You are a dishonest man, sir.
Rauser’s response: So your response to the charge that you’re obnoxious and strident is to be … wait for it … obnoxious and strident. I think it’s time that you move on.
Gary’s final response: I will go, but let every skeptic and Christian see the weakness in the apologetic defense of Randal Rauser: his subjective, irrational belief that he has a personal relationship with the creator of the universe…a creator who at one time was a first century peasant.
Your PhD and all your philosophical psycho-babble cannot compensate for this silly irrational belief which was ingrained into your brain as a gullible child. Let us all hope for the day when no parent teaches his or her innocent child these horrific ancient superstitions!
.
.
.
.
.
.
End of post.
Escaping Christian Fundamentalism 
re: “How can someone objectively evaluate the very extra-ordinary claim of a resurrection of a brain-dead first century peasant if he believes that the man in question “lives in his heart” and is his “best friend”??”
You say this question (above) would be the “conclusion”. But, how can a question be a conclusion?
I think you mean to say “the conclusion would be that you cannot objectively evaluate the very extra-ordinary claim of a resurrection of a brain-dead first century peasant if you believe that the man in question “lives in your heart” and is your “best friend”.
And, of course, this is a ground-breaking, earth-shattering conclusion. It’s not obvious at all.
Good work! Lots of effort went into that. And all for a good cause!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I cast the seeds of truth wherever I can, FT, even on the rocky ground of Randal Rauser’s blog. You never know where a new sprout will take root and flourish!
LikeLiked by 3 people
You couldn’t carry Randal Rauser’s cock, you idiot.
LikeLike
A man with a PhD who believes that he has a personal relationship with a first century peasant is either hopelessly brainwashed due to childhood indoctrination or an over-educated FOOL.
I challenge Rauser to come onto this blog and prove me wrong…without engaging in philosophical word-salad. Just give us the evidence for your relationship with this first century man/god.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Joe
I feel sure that while Randal may not be able to hold his own, he will most assuredly appreciate your efforts in championing his cause and holding his end up, even though you do not have said appendage and its two relevant accompaniments.
Well done, that man!
LikeLiked by 1 person
If that’s true, one or both of them, should seek medical advice ASAP.
LikeLike
Ahhh yes! The language of a True Christian™!
LikeLike
Joe is a “liberal” Christian who feels his master’s degree in theology makes him more intelligent than any skeptic on the planet. Crude, profanity-laced language is his trademark.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is this “Joe”, Joe Hinman by any chance?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am not going to say “yes”, because I am not 100% sure, but I would place a large bet that it is. “Joe”: care to reveal your full identity?
LikeLike
Does Joe have a blog by any chance?
LikeLike
If it is who I think it is, yes.
LikeLike
Go on, then, be a sport …Link?
LikeLike
Again, I’m not sure of the full identity of “Joe”, but I will bet it is Joe Hinman of Metacrock blog. Joe and I have interacted many times over the years, including two weeks ago on Randal Rauser’s blog. Many times during our discussions he has used colorful, profanity-laced language and informed me how much of an idiot I am to question is superior intellect. So today’s comment certainly fits Joe Hinman’s past behavior. But maybe it is another “Joe”. Feel free to check out Joe’s blog but let’s not accuse him unjustifiably of the delightful “cock carrying” comment until we have more information.
http://metacrock.blogspot.com/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Joe, do you have a blog?
LikeLike
I asked Joe Hinman, author of Metacrock blog, if he left the “cock” comment. Here is what he said, full of typos:
I hope it wasn’t me because it;s quite ride Bit it probably was as I have told Im a real piece of work. However I invite you t hang arouind and discuss, i promise I wont insult you.
LikeLike
Maybe he’s been drinking. 🤭
LikeLike
If you check out his blog posts, they are always full of typos. I think he is just lazy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry to see you go, Gary. I have also faced the situation in the past where RR refuses to give a direct answer to a simple question. When an intelligent apologist does that, it’s a fairly safe assumption that cognitive dissonance and an unwillingness to acknowledge a flaw in their epistemology are the driving forces.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Which then negates the term, ”intelligent apologist”, and makes said apologist come across as an ignorant arse.
LikeLike
Cognitive dissonance is a powerful force.
LikeLike
Indeed it is!
I sometimes wonder how someone such as Francis Collins can justify being a Christian.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Because “look at the waterfall!”
(face plants to palm)
LikeLiked by 1 person
”And frozen in three parts , too, just like the Trinity!
It’s a miracle!”
LikeLike
Very true. It drives me nuts when apologists try to control the conversation on their blogs. It demonstrates to me that they are insecure in the strength of their beliefs.
After he once again attacked my character after I had already said my “good byes”, I challenged him to a “polite, snark-free, philosophical-ese free” discussion regarding his belief that he has a personal relationship with Jesus. What do you think the chances are he will bite?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think 0%.
If it makes you feel any better, RR resorted to personal insults with me today, rather than deal with my actual point.
The real shame is that the other Christians reading along never say anything about the behavior.
LikeLike
I think the time has come to stop politely debating these people regarding “evidence” and simply laugh whenever they bring up their ancient resurrected corpse tale. People like Rauser crave credibility and respect. They do not merit respect. Anyone who peddles fear-based superstitions deserves as much respect as the tom-tom waving witch doctor in the deepest jungle.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Angry_Grasshopper,
As an FYI, Randal took to his twitter account yesterday to attack someone who I am certain is you. He didn’t mention you by name, but I am certain he is referring to you. This recent thread has two tweets by Randal:
You have spent a good bit of time on his blog. I don’t understand why you (apparently) place much value on his opinion. I’ve observed him insult you multiple times on his blog. He sometimes acts dismissive towards you. You also mentioned that you find it a shame that other Christians who know about his behavior don’t call him out. Well, one did… and often. His name was Steve Hays, though Steve passed away recently. There is a lengthy list of articles by Steve Hays on a site call Triablogue re. Randal. There may be over 100 of them. Steve understood Randal all too well (imo), and he didn’t hold his punches. If you want to know more about who you are dealing with re. Randal, read some of those articles. Steve believed Randal could be mean-spirited and vindictive. I agree wholeheartedly. He also displays (glaring) selective moral outrage on a variety of subjects. I think he needs to be called out and/or tuned out.
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/search?q=randal+rauser
LikeLike
Gary is totally obnoxious and you don’t call him out, now do you? We all like defending our own tribes…
LikeLike
Could you give a specific example of my obnoxiousness, Joe?
LikeLike
@Joe Blowtask
To paraphrase:
”You couldn’t carry Gary’s clock, you idiot.”
LikeLike
I don’t know Gary, and I would not say we are part of the same tribe. I first encountered Gary on Randal’s blog fairly recently. I didn’t think Gary was being obnoxious. I thought Randal was being evasive, and Gary was determined to get a response. The behavior that Gary and Angry_Grasshopper have noted re. Randal is consistent with behavior I have seen from Randal for some time. They aren’t the first two folks to make note of it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Seems you guys are having a lot of fun jerking each other off in here. Is there room for one more?? 🙂
LikeLike
Oh, look, boys and girls! It’s Mr Tourettes.
LikeLike
Can somebody please jerk me off. This bible stuff is boring. Which one of you is the Bitch??
LikeLike
Sorry , Joe, as you are being such a wanker, I’m afraid you’ll just have to play with yourself.
LikeLike
Which one of you is the BITCH?? 🙂
LikeLike
I normally would not allow this misogynistic word to be posted on my blog but I am allowing the comments of Joe Hinman of Metacrock blog to demonstrate to the world the non-Jesus like behavior of many of Jesus’ most ardent followers and defenders.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You quoted this on Rauser’s blog regarding Habermas.
A majority of scholars believe there was an empty tomb: Habermas estimates it at 75% in his major survey of scholarship since 1975.
I stand under correction, but as far as I am aware Habermas has never released details of this survey, so in effect all we are dealing with here is a claim .
LikeLike
Yes, Habermas refuses to release the data. (I was quoting Randal.)
I’m simply testing Rauser’s commitment to accept majority scholarly opinion on ALL issues not just the ones that help his side.
LikeLike
Just for the record, I don’t accept the so-called scholarly view on the empty tomb, and I wouldn’t trust Habermas as far as I could throw him.
LikeLike
Uhhm. I’m not Joe Hinman. Feel bad for whoever that chap is.
LikeLike
Really? Why do you feel bad?
LikeLike
I asked Joe Hinman on his blog, Metacrock, if he made the “cock” comment. He hemmed and hawed at first but then stated: “Probably”.
http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2020/08/time-for-big-scare.html
LikeLike
I love steak. Big, juicy, grilled STEAK! Mmmmmm.
LikeLike
This dude gets that drunk that he doesn’t even know where and if he’s posting? Damn.
LikeLike