On Dealing with Doubt
If you ever spent much time reading Christian apologetics, you’ve probably encountered writings which counsel Christians on “dealing with doubt.” (If you haven’t, do an Internet search on “dealing with doubt” and click on some of the links in the search results to see what I’m talking about.) The assumption seems to be that doubt … On Dealing with Doubt
Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 2
I want to continue where I left off in part 1 of my response to Metacrock on the use of Bayes’ Theorem (BT) to measure evidence about God. Here is Metacrock: Bayes’ theorem was introduced first as an argument against Hume’s argument on miracles, that is to say, a proof of the probability of miracles. … Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 2
Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 1
Over at the Christian Cadre, “Metacrock” has written a post entitled, “Bayes Theorum [sic] and Probability of God: No Dice!” Metacrock makes a number of points regarding the use of Bayes’ Theorem (BT) with evidence about God’s existence. I want to comment on many of those points. It is understandable that naturalistic thinkers are uneasy … Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 1
The Holy Spirit and the Affect Heuristic
I’ve been re-reading Daniel Kahnman’s wonderful book, Thinking, Fast and Slow and came upon the section in which he discusses the ‘affect heuristic’. The affect heuristic is the notion that people often make decisions based on their feelings or emotions about the topic at hand. It is an example of “substitution”, in which “the answer … The Holy Spirit and the Affect Heuristic
Craig’s Argument from Intentionality
Here is my summary of Craig’s “argument from intentionality” in his recent debate with Alex Rosenberg. 5. God is the best explanation for the intentional states of consciousness in the world. Philosophers are puzzled by states of intentionality, the state of being about something or being of something. It signifies the object-directendess of our thoughts, … Craig’s Argument from Intentionality
Blogging the Passive-Aggressive Way
I just happened to go to the Triablogue website. I noticed that Hays dedicated an entire post to his combox exchange with me regarding the failure of the Resurrection as an explanatory hypothesis. I found it interesting to see how he categorized the post: It appears that Hays has dedicated an entire blog post category … Blogging the Passive-Aggressive Way
The Perfect Goodness of God – Again (Part 2)
In my previous post on this topic, I used conditional derivation to try to prove that one statement entailed another statement, to show that ‘There is a person who is omniscient and perfectly free’ entails ‘There is a person who is perfectly good’. But because I’m a bit unclear on how the logic of conditional … The Perfect Goodness of God – Again (Part 2)
When is a Debate “Win” Significant?
A reader asked me if I had watched the debate between William Lane Craig and Alex Rosenberg. Here is my reply. No, I haven’t seen it. I’ve read some of Rosenberg’s book, The Atheist’s Guide to Reality, however. My prediction is that WLC not only “won” the debate, but that Rosenberg did awful. Why would … When is a Debate “Win” Significant?
Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 1: The Anti-Resurrection Prior Probability Argument
As I reported earlier, Greg Cavin has graciously allowed us to publish the slides for his debate with Michael Licona on the Resurrection of Jesus. While only Cavin debated Licona, both Cavin and Carlos Colombetti (C&C) co-authored the slides used in the debate, so I’ve mentioned both C&C in the title. What I want to … Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 1: The Anti-Resurrection Prior Probability Argument
Video of Licona-Cavin Debate on the Resurrection of Jesus
Here is the video of Licona-Cavin debate on the resurrection of Jesus. (HT: Wes)***video deleted***I hope to blog about this debate in detail in the future. Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)