Dale Tuggy

Dale Tuggy is Professor of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Fredonia, where he teaches courses in analytic theology, philosophy of religion, religious studies, and the history of philosophy.

8 Comments

  1. des111168
    July 5, 2015 @ 3:52 pm

    I left the Mormons when I was in my late teens… away at sea in the Navy… because I began to find out about Joseph Smith’s past. It all started with, of all things, a true crime book called the Mormon Murders. Now the two authors had an obvious animus against the church, but there was no denying Smith’s run-ins with the law prior to becoming a “prophet”. That was the beginning of the end of the Mormons for me.

    • Dale Tuggy
      July 6, 2015 @ 9:57 am

      des111168, I feel for you, and also admire your courage. For some years, off and on, I’ve followed the Mormon Stories podcast. The host there – I can’t quite figure out his views, but I suspect they are at least sometimes in the range of what philosophers of religion call “anti-realism” about religion – that the value of religion doesn’t requires its claims to be true. Anyway, he’s been brutally honest with some of the historical material, e.g. parts 3 and 4 here. http://mormonstories.org/mormon-stories-030-031-032-and-033-an-insiders-view-of-mormon-origins-an-interview-with-grant-palmer/ Just brutal to the reputation of Smith. And all the more brutal for being totally non-polemical. It seems unthinkable to both host and interviewer that they should just wipe their hands of the Mormon church, and pursue God in some other sort of fellowship. Anyway, I hope that you’ve not rejected belief in God and in his Son because of the example of Smith.

  2. Roman
    June 30, 2015 @ 4:46 am

    One thing about Nabeel Qureshi being an Ahmadiyya muslim.
    In his debate With Shabir Ally and argument made by Greg Boyd was brought up, and instead of actually adressing the argument Nabeel just dismissed Greg Boyd as being an Open Theist Heretic, not an orthodox Christian.
    Now if Nabeel is willing to blow off an Open Theist as not a Christian, because they don’t agree on the issue of pre-knoweldge, but do on everything else, how is he going to claim that his being an Ahmadiyya muslim is a real muslim, when the differences betweeen Ahmadiyya Muslims and Orthodox Muslims are much much larger and more fundemental than the difference between Open Thesets and non Open theist Evangelical Christians.
    To be honest I have very little respect for Nabeel Qureshi, and many of the “Ravi Zacharias” type apologists, they may be completely honest in their arguments and believe they are being consistant, but sometimes it’s hard to believe given their constant picking and choosing of axioms, exegetical Methods, and inconsistant Application of arguments and principles.

    The problem With many of those kind of apologists is they believe their job is to defend their standing no matter what, and if an argument Works it Works, and if it’s inconsistant With an another argument that Works, who cares, what matters is it Works. Theology is not a game, it’s not about scoring polemical Points, or winning no matter what the cost, it’s about ultimate truth.

    • Rivers
      June 30, 2015 @ 8:21 am

      Roman,

      Well said. I’ve gotten the same impression from Nabeel, as well as Zacharias, James White, Rob Bowman, and other such “professional” Evangelical apologists. There isn’t much to learn from them, and they aren’t listening to what others are saying.

      • Dale Tuggy
        June 30, 2015 @ 1:47 pm

        Gentlemen, I agree that the minute an apologist stops learning – that’s when the trouble starts. That’s when people start relying on pat answers and junk arguments that only “the choir” (to whom one is preaching) finds persuasive. This is human nature, that we rest too quickly on our laurels. The best apologists remain engaged with all the leading work in the fields they are working in.

        In Mr. Qureshi’s defense, I did notice that in the book he casts aside some lame apologetics arguments, e.g. Jesus must be omniscient because in the gospels sometimes he supernaturally knows certain things, or Jesus must be omnipotent because in the gospels, he does miracles.

        The hard test for him will be whether or not he can similarly move beyond arguments that he’s been publicly making for some years now, e.g. Jesus must be God, because he provided atonement, or because he is the “Son of Man” of Daniel 7, or because he is properly worshiped.

        Again, in his defense, he has in the past been willing to choose truth over personal loyalty. I pray that he continues to do so.

        In part 2 I will urge Mr. Qureshi to move beyond the superficial defensive moves used by guys like Dr. White and Mr. Bowman, e.g. http://trinities.org/blog/the-standard-opening-move/ and to really see the distinction that the NT presupposes and makes between Father and Son – not as “Persons” in a single god, but rather as between the one God, YHWH, and his unique human Son, the Messiah.

        Will he listen – not to me, but to the texts? I hope and pray so.

        • Rivers
          July 1, 2015 @ 8:29 am

          Dale,

          Excellent comment. You are right; we do need to recognize that Nabeel has already made a significant change in his beliefs. Every one has to consider the evidence for himself and make up his own mind.

    • des111168
      July 5, 2015 @ 3:59 pm

      I’d never heard of Shabir Ally before today. The fellow that seems to pop up most on YouTube about Islam is the Deen Show guy. Maybe that doesn’t count as apologetics as we understand it, but he sure seems to be the most visible Internet figure promoting Islam in the West.

      • Dale Tuggy
        July 6, 2015 @ 9:59 am

        Ally has been a pretty active debater, debating even Craig. He’s knowledgeable, and a pretty effective debater. He spends too much time, in my view, attacking the reliability of the NT books – but I guess he feels the need to take down the NT a notch to make way for the Qur’an.