Audible会員プラン登録で、20万以上の対象タイトルが聴き放題。
-
Apology Not Accepted
- Common Sense Refutations for Nonsensical Apologetics
- ナレーター: Gregory Blount
- 再生時間: 9 時間 12 分
カートのアイテムが多すぎます
カートに追加できませんでした。
ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。
ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。
ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました
ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました
聴き放題対象外タイトルです。Audible会員登録で、非会員価格の30%OFFで購入できます。
あらすじ・解説
Apology Not Accepted is a no-holds-barred critique of common Christian apologetics. Blount is direct, informative, and highly entertaining.
From the preface:
I appreciate the intentions of fairness in a debate, as each party deserves the opportunity to present their case. I am also a huge fan of Christian apologetic debates.... What I feel is missing is the opportunity to interrupt a bad argument or false representation of the point being made to thoroughly analyze it.
Live on stage, it would be rude to cut somebody off in the middle of their argument, but it is still a very fruitful endeavor to play back the video, stopping it as necessary, and giving their statements the proper criticism they deserve. It is for this reason I have made this audiobook; to provide the analysis that is simply not feasible in a debate format.
This is not to say the representatives of atheism or science have not adequately outperformed the Christians in the actual debates. I would say they clearly have, but as Aron Ra stated in the Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism, “[I]t takes longer to refute a lie than to tell one”. So, I feel more can be said against the obsequiously bad arguments of Christian apologetics than is ever allowed in a debate format.
As the edgy comedy cartoon South Park has stated on its show: “All celebrity voices are impersonated...poorly.”
To provide a contrast between my own personalized comments and the narratives by the apologists, I felt it was necessary to use different vocalizations. If I did not do this, then I fear the audiobook would become confusing as to where their comments stop and where mine start.
There may be times when I appear to be mocking the apologists, but I hope I have presented their arguments in the same tone they have in the debates. It is not my intention to demean their case by merely mimicking them; I intend to do that with my own common-sense response to their arguments.