Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #31: Evaluation of Phase 2 Continued
WHERE WE ARE AT In Phase 2 of Argument #6, the Kalam Cosmological Argument, Peter Kreeft aims to establish two claims: 4. The cause of the coming into being of the universe is eternal. 5. The cause of the coming into being of the universe was a person. In Part 30, I argued that Kreeft’s … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #31: Evaluation of Phase 2 Continued
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #30: Phase 2 of the Kalam Argument
WHERE WE ARE AT In Part 29, I criticized Phase 1 of Peter Kreeft’s Argument #6: the Kalam Cosmological Argument. In this post, I will begin to analyze and evaluate Phase 2 of Argument #6. Phase 1 of the Kalam Cosmological Argument goes like this (HCA, p.58): 1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #30: Phase 2 of the Kalam Argument
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #29: Evaluation of Premise (2)
Here is the second premise of Argument #6 (the Kalam Cosmological Argument) in Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God, from Chapter 3 of his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA): 2. The universe began to exist. (HCA, p.58) In order to be able to rationally determine whether this claim is true or false, we … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #29: Evaluation of Premise (2)
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #28: Did the Universe Begin to Exist?
WHERE WE ARE AT There is only one more argument in Kreeft’s case that we need to evaluate: Argument #6: the Kalam Cosmological Argument. In Part 24, I did an initial analysis of Argument #7, and I pointed out some significant problems with that argument. Argument #6 has the same set of significant problems: Furthermore, the conclusion … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #28: Did the Universe Begin to Exist?
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #27: The Universe and Time
I am starting to think about the Kalam Cosmological Argument, Argument #6 in Peter Kreeft’s case for God, from Chapter 3 of his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA). This is the final argument that we need to consider in Kreeft’s case for God.This is not the first time I have examined this argument. When I … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part #27: The Universe and Time
Letter to Peter Kreeft
Dear Dr. Peter Kreeft, I have recently been studying your Argument #7, the Argument from Contingency: http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm#7 In the second premise, you provide a definition of “the universe”: 2. The universe—the collection of beings in space and time—exists. Although I appreciate the attempt to clarify the meaning of this phrase, the definition itself seems unclear … Letter to Peter Kreeft
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 26: The Unclarity of Argument #7
WHERE WE ARE AT There are only two more arguments in Kreeft’s case that we need to evaluate: Argument #7 (the Argument from Contingency) and Argument #6 (the Kalam Cosmological Argument). In Part 24, I did an initial analysis of Argument #7, and I pointed out some significant problems with that argument, based only on … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 26: The Unclarity of Argument #7
Matthew Ferguson on Jack Ritchie on Understanding Naturalism
LINK Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 25: Clarification of Argument #7
WHERE WE ARE AT There are only two more arguments in Kreeft’s case that we need to evaluate: Argument #7 (the Argument from Contingency) and Argument #6 (the Kalam Cosmological Argument). In Part 24, I did an initial analysis of Argument #7, and I pointed out some significant problems with that argument, based only on … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 25: Clarification of Argument #7
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 24: The Argument from Contingency
WHERE WE ARE AT There are only two more arguments for the existence of God left to consider out of the twenty arguments in Peter Kreeft’s case for God from Chapter 3 of Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA). In this post I will analyze Argument #7: the Argument from Contingency. THE CONCLUSION OF ARGUMENT … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 24: The Argument from Contingency