Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 3: Clarification of My Reasoning
WHERE WE ARE AT In Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, I have shown that Dr. Erasmus’ objection to my skeptical reasoning (a) attacks a STRAW MAN, and (b) is based on an INVALID INFERENCE. In doing so, I also argued that Dr. Erasmus does not have a good understanding of probability calculations, especially … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 3: Clarification of My Reasoning
Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 2: Straw Man and Invalid Inference
In this post I will reply to an objection that was raised by Dr. Jacobus Erasmus against my reasoning in one of my skeptical posts about the resurrection of Jesus. DR. ERASMUS COMMITS THE STRAW MAN FALLACY The most basic problem with the objection raised by Dr. Erasmus is that he commits the all-too-common STRAW … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 2: Straw Man and Invalid Inference
Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 1: Untrained in Probabilistic Logic?
MY UNDERSTANDING OF PROBABILITY Dr. Jacobus Erasmus has raised an objection to one of my posts on the resurrection. Before presenting his objection he takes a swipe at my credibility: …Bowen’s argument is an example of what happens when a blogger who is untrained in probabilistic logic tries their hand at probability. …Bowen does not … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 1: Untrained in Probabilistic Logic?
The Logic of Miracles – Part 6: The Problem of Evil
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL The problem of evil is concerned with whether the existence of evil (or of particular kinds or amounts of evil) is logically incompatible with the existence of God or provides significant evidence against the existence of God. The “logical” problem of evil focuses on whether evil (or particular kinds or amounts … The Logic of Miracles – Part 6: The Problem of Evil
The Logic of Miracles – Part 5: Two Objections
WHY CLASSICAL APOLOGETICS IS DOOMED TO FAILURE I have previously argued in Part 2 that Richard Swinburne’s case for the existence of God depends on some assumptions about the PLANS or PURPOSES of God. I have also argued in Part 3 and in Part 4 that Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God depends … The Logic of Miracles – Part 5: Two Objections
The Logic of Miracles – Part 4: Kreeft’s Last Ten Arguments
WHERE WE ARE AT I am in the process of examining Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God, in order to test the following hypothesis: Classical Apologetics FAILS at Phase 1 because we are ignorant about the PLANS and PURPOSES of God, and this ignorance makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to SHOW … The Logic of Miracles – Part 4: Kreeft’s Last Ten Arguments
The Logic of Miracles – Part 3: Kreeft’s First Ten Arguments
WHERE I AM HEADED I am going to examine Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God, in order to test the following hypothesis: Classical Apologetics FAILS at Phase 1 because we are ignorant about the PLANS and PURPOSES of God, and this ignorance makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to SHOW that God … The Logic of Miracles – Part 3: Kreeft’s First Ten Arguments
The Logic of Miracles – Part 2: Showing that God Exists
CLASSICAL APOLOGETICS FAILS IN PHASE 2 Classical Christian Apologetics organizes the case for Christianity into three phases: In my previous post on The Logic of Miracles, I argued that Classical Apologetics FAILS at the second phase because SHOWING that a particular event is a miracle, i.e. an event caused by God, requires that one first … The Logic of Miracles – Part 2: Showing that God Exists
The Logic of Miracles
Most people who want to criticize or attack an argument, will attack a PREMISE of the argument as being FALSE or questionable. When it comes to criticizing the arguments of Christian apologists, skeptics and atheists also tend to attack premises of such arguments as being false or questionable. This is especially true when it comes … The Logic of Miracles
Skepticism about Religion – Part 6: Cultural Bias and Social Conditioning
========================= II. There are good reasons to be SKEPTICAL about religion and religious beliefs. A. Religion is NOT the key to Happiness and Virtue, contrary to common belief. B. Significant Disagreements exist Between Different Religions. C. Religious Beliefs are Typically Based on Cultural Bias and Social Conditioning. ======================== Religious Beliefs Are Associated with Geographical Locations … Skepticism about Religion – Part 6: Cultural Bias and Social Conditioning