Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 4: Were There Qualified Witnesses?
THE CLARIFICATION OF KREEFT’S ARGUMENT FOR OBJECTION #2 In his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) Peter Kreeft presented his Objection #2 against the Hallucination Theory in just two brief sentences: Presenting an argument for the falsehood of the Hallucination Theory in just two brief sentences is IDIOTIC. One reason this is IDIOTIC is that this … Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 4: Were There Qualified Witnesses?
Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 3: The Witnesses Were Qualified
WHERE WE ARE Peter Kreeft’s first three objections against the Hallucination Theory in his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter HCA) can be summarized this way: Objection #1: There were too many witnesses. (HCA, p.186, emphasis added) Objection #2: The witnesses were qualified. (HCA, p. 187, emphasis added) Objection #3: The five hundred [eyewitnesses] saw Christ … Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 3: The Witnesses Were Qualified
Feser’s Perverted Faculty Argument – Part 2: Clarifying the Conclusion of the Core Argument
WHERE WE ARE Edward Feser has put forward a version of the Perverted Faculty Argument (hereafter: PFA) against homosexual sex, so I will now examine that argument in the hopes that it is an actual argument consisting of actual claims. Based on his book Five Proofs of the Existence of God, Feser understands the need … Feser’s Perverted Faculty Argument – Part 2: Clarifying the Conclusion of the Core Argument
Professor Craig on Theistic Hypotheses
In 2018 I posted on SO a review of Tim Crane’s book The Meaning of Belief: Religion from an Atheist’s Point of View: Crane argues that atheists have largely misunderstood religion by regarding it as a sort of cosmological hypothesis, one that makes insupportable claims about the creation of the universe via the supernatural acts … Professor Craig on Theistic Hypotheses
Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 2: “Witnesses”
THE “WITNESSES” OBJECTIONS In his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) the first three objections that Peter Kreeft raises against the Hallucination Theory are all about “witnesses”: Objection #1: There were too many witnesses. (HCA, p.186, emphasis added) Objection #2: The witnesses were qualified. (HCA, p. 187, emphasis added) Objection #3: The five hundred [eyewitnesses] saw … Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 2: “Witnesses”
Craig’s Dismissive Attitude Towards Arguments from Evil
On Twitter, user @BissetteHunter tweeted this fifteen second video clip of William Lane Craig discussing arguments from evil: Another bad take from Craig given during the Law debate. �♂️ pic.twitter.com/SycXWzMptW — yourtypicaltheist (@BissetteHunter) July 19, 2021 In the case the link doesn’t work, here is the transcript: “Therefore, this problem of evil, I think, though … Craig’s Dismissive Attitude Towards Arguments from Evil
Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 1: Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection
MCDOWELL’S CASE AGAINST THE HALLUCINATION THEORY I recently examined Josh McDowell’s case against the Hallucination Theory in his book The Resurrection Factor (hereafter: TRF), and I showed that each one of the seven objections that McDowell raised against this skeptical theory FAILS, and thus that his case for the resurrection of Jesus also FAILS. The … Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 1: Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection
Leviticus and Homosexuality – Part 13: False Claims and Assumptions in Leviticus
WHERE WE ARE One important reason for rejecting the view that Leviticus was inspired by God is that this book contains several FALSE claims and assumptions. I have already argued that Leviticus contains FALSE historical claims and assumptions and that it also contains logical contradictions, so I have already shown that Leviticus contains FALSE claims … Leviticus and Homosexuality – Part 13: False Claims and Assumptions in Leviticus
The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 12: What is Potentiality?
WHERE WE ARE In his book Philosophy of Religion (hereafter: POR), Norman Geisler provides an argument in support of the second premise of his Thomist Cosmological Argument (see pages 194-197). Here is my understanding of the argument that Geisler gives in support of that premise: 52. But no potentiality can actualize itself. THEREFORE: 53a. There … The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 12: What is Potentiality?
Back to God and Leviticus
When Easter rolled around this year, I dove back into the questions “Did God raise Jesus from the dead?” and “Did Jesus rise from the dead?” These are issues that I have enjoyed thinking about for the past four decades, and will continue to think and write about for the rest of my life. DEFENDING … Back to God and Leviticus