Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part 4: More Problems with Objection TRF5
WHERE WE ARE TRF5 is the fifth objection presented by Josh McDowell against the Hallucination Theory in his book The Resurrection Factor (hereafter: TRF). The objection TRF5 can be stated in terms of a brief argument: 1. Hallucinations REQUIRE that a person who has an hallucination of circumstance C previously had a hopeful expectation or wish … Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part 4: More Problems with Objection TRF5
Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part 3: The “No Expectancy” Objection
WHERE WE ARE I generally argue in defense of the Apparent Death Theory, not in order to prove it to be TRUE, but in order to show that this skeptical theory about the alleged resurrection of Jesus is still viable and that the objections raised against it by Christian apologists FAIL to refute it. However, … Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part 3: The “No Expectancy” Objection
Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part 2: More Objections to the Hallucination Theory
In The Resurrection Factor (1981; hereafter: TRF), Josh McDowell raises seven objections against the Hallucination Theory, a skeptical theory that explains the origin of the early Christian belief that Jesus rose from the dead in terms of one or more of his followers having an “hallucination” (or non-veridical sensory experience) of Jesus being alive sometime … Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part 2: More Objections to the Hallucination Theory
Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part 1: The Hallucination Theory
On the issue of the alleged resurrection of Jesus, I usually argue in defense of the Apparent Death Theory. I do this NOT because I believe that the Apparent Death Theory is true, but in order to show that, contrary to the claim of Christian apologists, the Apparent Death Theory is a viable theory, that … Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part 1: The Hallucination Theory
Feser’s Perverted Faculty Argument – Part 1: The Core Argument
HSIAO’S PERVERTED FACULTY ARGUMENT I have REJECTED Timothy Hsiao’s Perverted Faculty “Argument” against homosexual sex NOT because it was a bad argument, but because it was a FAUX argument, and not an actual argument. The core “argument” by Hsiao consists of three declarative sentences that were so UNCLEAR that they cannot be rationally evaluated, and … Feser’s Perverted Faculty Argument – Part 1: The Core Argument
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)
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)
The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 9: Enhanced 2nd Argument for Changing Things
WHERE WE ARE In his book When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA), Norman Geisler presents his general version of a Thomist Cosmological Argument (hereafter: TCA). The first premise of Geisler’s TCA is this: 1. Finite, changing things exist. (WSA, p.18) Geisler provides a very brief argument in support of (1) in WSA. In Part 4 of … The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 9: Enhanced 2nd Argument for Changing Things
New Book Published on Feser, Thomism, and Natural Law Theory of Ethics
I recently wrote the Foreword for a new book that takes a skeptical look at Edward Feser’s views, Thomism, and the Natural Law Theory of Ethics. The book is called The Unnecessary Science: A Critical Analysis of Natural Law Theory. Here is the final paragraph of the Foreword that I wrote for the book: In … New Book Published on Feser, Thomism, and Natural Law Theory of Ethics
The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 8: 2nd Argument for Changing Things
In his book When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA), Norman Geisler presents his general version of a Thomist Cosmological Argument (hereafter: TCA). The first premise of Geisler’s TCA is this: 1. Finite, changing things exist. (WSA, p.18) Geisler provides a very brief argument in support of (1) in WSA. In Part 4 of this series I … The Unmoved Mover Argument – Part 8: 2nd Argument for Changing Things