William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 3
I had planned to discuss counterexamples (to Craig’s principle) that were based on dependencies existing between the premises in some valid deductive arguments. But I am putting that off for a later post, in order to present a brief analysis of some key concepts. It seems to me that an important part of understanding the relationship … William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 3
William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 2
I admit it. I enjoyed pointing out that William Lane Craig had made a major blunder in his recent discussion of the logic of deductive arguments (with premises that are probable rather than certain). However, there are a variety of natural tendencies that people have to reason poorly and illogically when it comes to reasoning about … William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 2
William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson
The March Newsletter from Reasonable Faith just came out, and it includes a brief lesson in logic from William Lane Craig. However, the lesson presents a point that is clearly and obviously WRONG, and it promotes bad reasoning that could be used to rationalize UNREASONABLE beliefs. It appears that WLC is himself in need of … William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 14
Here is my main objection to William Craig’s case for the resurrection of Jesus: In order to prove that Jesus rose from the dead, one must first prove that Jesus died on the cross. But in most of William Craig’s various books, articles, and debates, he simply ignores this issue. He makes no serious attempt … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 14
I Don’t Care – Part 6
Aquinas is often thought of as a rigourously logical and systematic thinker. This is only half-true. There is a good deal of vaguness, ambiguity, and illogical thinking in his book Summa Theologica, as far as I can see. Here is a cautionary note from a philosopher who is an expert on Aquinas: From the concept of … I Don’t Care – Part 6
I Don’t Care – Part 5
The famous Five Ways passage by Aquinas in Summa Theologica does not contain five arguments for the existence of God. Rather, it contains ZERO arguments for the existence of God. There is actually only one argument for the existence of God in the Summa Theologica, and the reasoning in the Five Ways passage only represents a … I Don’t Care – Part 5
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 13
In Part 10, I argued that Robert Funk was not as certain about Jesus’ death on the cross as Craig claims, and I pointed out that three of the seven groundrules proposed by Funk for investigation of the historical Jesus are skeptical in nature, showing that Funk has a generally skeptical view of the historical Jesus. … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 13
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 12
Here is my main objection to William Craig’s case for the resurrection of Jesus: It is not possible for a person to rise from the dead until AFTER that person has actually died. Thus, in order to prove that Jesus rose from the dead, one must first prove that Jesus died on the cross. But … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 12
I Don’t Care – Part 4
I have previously argued that, contrary to popular opinion, there are ZERO arguments for the existence of God in the famous Five Ways passage by Aquinas in Summa Theologica (Part I, Question 2, Article 3: Whether God Exists?). Now I’m getting into what I do care about, namely the ACTUAL argument(s) that Aquinas gives to prove the … I Don’t Care – Part 4
I Don’t Care – Part 3
According to the Christian philosopher Peter Kreeft, and many others, Aquinas gives five different arguments for the existence of God. In the Handbook of Christian Apologetics (IVP, 1994; hereafter: HCA) by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, there is a chapter that lays out twenty different arguments for the existence of God, and the first five arguments … I Don’t Care – Part 3