I can no longer take sophisticated theology/philosophy used in defense of the Christian delusion seriously. Atheists who want to deal with sophisticated theology/philosophy correctly must seek to end its grip over our institutions of higher learning. They must seek to end its influence in our world. Gamesmanship will not do. Puzzle-solving will not do. Dealing with questions that are interesting for the sake of an interesting discussion will not do. Seeking affirmation from Christian pseudo-intellectuals will not do. A delusion is a delusion is a delusion. Two thousand years of Christianity are enough, as someone once said. I'll give plenty of reasons why atheists should reject sophisticated theology/philosophy in defense of Christianity in my next book, Unapologetic (along with how to treat it as it deserves).
Now for Zeta's quote:
Thank you, sir_russ for stating so eloquently ideas and arguments (some of which) I have in mind but that I am unable to express so well.
I have always felt that philosophical arguments about god (especially) were mere plays on words, totally unproductive and useless. After all the so-called strong arguments by apologists such as W. L. Craig, they failed to produce any evidence that the (deist or philosopher's) god they argue so vehemently for leads to any existing (claimed) god such as Yahweh. The leap in logic from a deist god to Yahweh is like jumping across the U niverse and is shameful coming from such highly educated people. You don't need sophistication in philosophy to see through such non-sense. What is the use of using (invented) sophisticated theology to try and explain away errors, inconsistencies, bad morality, and fairy tales from the bible which are plain for all to see?