Month: February 2016

The Argument from Silence, Part 9: Mormonism’s Missing Golden Plates

I began this series with a Bayesian interpretation of arguments from silence and then proceeded to use that interpretation to evaluate various arguments from silence about Jesus and God. In this post, I want to assess an argument from silence against a central claim of Mormonism, namely, that the Book of Mormon is the English translation of golden plates The Argument from Silence, Part 9: Mormonism’s Missing Golden Plates

William Lane Craig Admits His Debate Quotations of Anthony Kenny Are Misleading

In his popular debates on God’s existence, William Lane Craig is fond of quoting philosopher of Anthony Kenny regarding the combination of atheism and Big Bang cosmology. Now this tends to be very awkward for the atheist. For as Anthony Kenny of Oxford University urges, “A proponent of the Big Bang theory, at least if William Lane Craig Admits His Debate Quotations of Anthony Kenny Are Misleading

Moreland: Christians are biased, but less biased than naturalists

(redating post originally published on 14 January 2006) According to Christian philosopher J.P. Moreland (as paraphrased by Melinda Penner), Christians are biased, but they are less biased than naturalists. In Melinda’s own words: when a Christian deals with issues like science and faith, or the historicity of the Gospels, it’s fair to say that he’s Moreland: Christians are biased, but less biased than naturalists

Off-Topic: A U.S. Constitutional Amendment Wish List

All the presidential primary debates, primaries, and causes got me thinking about the U.S. Electoral College, which in turn got me thinking about changes I’d like to see made to the Constitution. 1. Eliminate Lifetime Supreme Court Appointments. See, for example, here. Instead, have Supreme Court justices get, say, 20-year terms after which they are ineligible Off-Topic: A U.S. Constitutional Amendment Wish List

Yet Another Atheist Misrepresents a Theistic Argument (the Leibnizian Cosmological Argument)

The title of this blog post is hardly shocking, but it should be. When a philosopher explicitly lays out their argument with numbered premises and a conclusion, we should expect nothing less from critics than representing the argument by quoting the author’s formulation. As we will soon see, however, yet another atheist has failed to do Yet Another Atheist Misrepresents a Theistic Argument (the Leibnizian Cosmological Argument)

Three Ontological Arguments

I have been trying to provide some clear and plausible versions of the ontological argument for one of my classes. This is a lot harder than it sounds. Below is what I have so far. The first argument is an attempt to capture what Anselm was arguing in his first version in Proslogion. The second Three Ontological Arguments