arguments for theism

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 9: The Argument from Change

|

MY EVALUATION OF THE SECOND HALF OF KREEFT’S CASE In Part 1 and Part 2 I argued that eight out of ten (80%) of the last ten arguments in Peter Kreeft’s collection of twenty arguments (from Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Chapter 3; hereafter: HCA) are AWFUL arguments that are not worthy of serious consideration, that we should thus toss them aside, and ignore … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 9: The Argument from Change

Feser’s Case for God – Part 8: Actualization of a Potential

|

FESER’S ANALYSIS OF CHANGE A key idea in Chunk #1 of Feser’s Aristotelian argument is his analysis or understanding of change: A. The occurrence of any change C presupposes the actualization of a potential of some thing or substance S which changes. There are three phrases that constitute the key components of Feser’s analysis of change: the actualization of… …a … Feser’s Case for God – Part 8: Actualization of a Potential

2017 in the Rearview Mirror

|

I had hoped to answer the question “Does God exist?” in 2017, at least to my own satisfaction.  No such luck.  That was a bit too aggressive of a goal.   However, I did make some good progress.  I learned that Norman Geisler’s case for God (in When Skeptics Ask) is a steaming pile of dog … 2017 in the Rearview Mirror

Feser’s Case for God – Part 7: Feser’s Concept of Change

|

FOCUS ON CHUNK #1 We are examining the first few premises of Edward Feser’s lengthy (i.e. containing fifty statements) Aristotelian argument for the existence of God, in Chapter 1 of Five Proofs of the Existence of God (hereafter: FPEG).  What I call Chunk #1 of this argument consists of the following premises and inferences: (FPEG, Location 477-493, p.35-36) Let’s … Feser’s Case for God – Part 7: Feser’s Concept of Change

Feser’s Case for God – Part 5: Potential Attributes vs. Contingent Attributes

|

POTENTIAL ATTRIBUTES VS. CONTINGENT ATTRIBUTES I think (i.e. strongly suspect) it is important to understand the relationship between Edward Feser’s concept of the potential attributes of X and logical possibility.  Feser does not provide clarification on this point, at least not in Chapter 1 of his book Five Proofs of the Existence of God (hereafter: … Feser’s Case for God – Part 5: Potential Attributes vs. Contingent Attributes

Feser’s Case for God – Part 3: Actualization of Potential

|

FESER TAKES OWNERSHIP OF THE FIVE ARGUMENTS In Five Proofs of the Existence of God (hereafter: FPEG), Edward Feser presents five “proofs” or arguments, each of which was inspired by an historical philosopher (or two).  However,  Feser takes full ownership of these five arguments, so that none of these arguments is put forward as merely … Feser’s Case for God – Part 3: Actualization of Potential

Feser’s Case for God – Part 2: Chunking Up the Aristotelian Argument

|

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ARISTOTELIAN ARGUMENT In Chapter 1 of Five Proofs of the Existence of God (hereafter: FPEG),  Edward Feser presents his Aristotelian argument for the existence of God.  This is the most important argument in the book, because the other four arguments presented by Feser in later chapters all have a significant dependency … Feser’s Case for God – Part 2: Chunking Up the Aristotelian Argument