Mick wrote:Lowder was being facetious, of course.
And probably aiming his barbs, however indirectly, at a target other than the one you assume to be the case.
Mick wrote:however he is critical towards village atheists
What is one of these? Please, do tell.
Mick wrote:and so I suspect there is some underlying seriousness to this post in some degree or another.
Ah, the smell of wishful thinking.
Mick wrote:He takes the case for theism seriously
And what case would that be? Only we've been waiting for supernaturalists to come up with something other than made up shit for 5,000 years, and they still haven't delivered. Just because supernaturalists think that their pet mythologies constitute established fact doesn't make it so - on that basis, the Harry Potter novels are evidence for Hogwarts.
Mick wrote:as well as the case for Jesus' resurrection
Oh please, do tell us all what independent corroboration exists to support the assertions about this purported "event". Last time I checked, the only so-called "evidence" for this was the assertions contained within your favourite mythology, written decades after the purported "event" took place, by people who were pre-disposed to think in terms of magic entities, because they were too backward to bother paying attention to reality.
Mick wrote:and in fact I have seen him criticize his fellow scholarly atheists quite a bit.
Was there any substance to this, or was it merely a lot of hot air?
Mick wrote:Skeptics should take note.
Why should we take note of someone who thinks that treating mythology as fact is in any way respectable? Please, once again, do provide us with some substance here, and succeed where 5,000 years of past supernaturalist hot air have failed. A Nobel Prize awaits you if you achieve this.