The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 11: The Argument for Premise (2)
WHERE WE ARE Norman Geisler has FAILED to show that premise (1) of his Thomist Cosmological Argument is true, but premise (1) is obviously true. Since premise (1) is obviously true, we should not reject TCA just because Geisler FAILED to prove that (1) is true. Since premise (1) seems to be obviously true, we should accept … The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 11: The Argument for Premise (2)
Off-Topic: Three Proposed Amendments to the U.S. Constitution to Decrease Government Dysfunction
The four years of the Trump administration, but especially the events of January 6, 2021 and the ensuing impeachment by the House and acquittal by the Senate, have caused me to go into problem-solving mode. After giving this a lot of thought, I have concluded that various flaws, oversights, and loopholes created structural flaws which … Off-Topic: Three Proposed Amendments to the U.S. Constitution to Decrease Government Dysfunction
The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 10: Geisler’s Argument for Premise (2)
WHERE WE ARE In his book When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA), Norman Geisler presents his general version of a Thomist Cosmological Argument (hereafter: TCA). I analyze this argument in Part 2 of this series. The first premise of Geisler’s TCA is this: 1. Finite, changing things exist. (WSA, p.18) Geisler provides a very brief argument … The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 10: Geisler’s Argument for Premise (2)