Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 2
I am going to engage in a bit of logic chopping now. But for those who do not have an appreciation for logic chopping, do not despair; my close examination of the bark on one tree will lead me to make some broader points that have significance for philosophy of religion, ethics, and serious thinking … Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 2
Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 1
In his essay “Why I Believe God Exists”, William Craig gives three main reasons for believing in God (Why I am a Christian – hereafter: WIAC – edited by Norman Geisler and Paul Hoffman, Baker Books, 2001, p.62-80): One problem with the Kalam cosmological argument is that it fails to establish the existence of a … Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 1
Why God did not raise Jesus from the Dead
The evidence for the claim that Jesus was alive and walking around on the first Easter Sunday is weak. Overall, the evidence indicates that the first post-crucifixion appearances of Jesus probably occurred in Galilee several days after, perhaps several weeks after, the crucifixion of Jesus. Although there probably were some sort of ‘resurrection’ experiences or … Why God did not raise Jesus from the Dead
The Atheist named Richard Swinburne
I was reading the Martyrdom of Polycarp recently, which is “the oldest written account of a Christian martyrdom outside the New Testament.” (The Apostolic Fathers, updated edition, edited and revised by Michael Holmes, p.222; hereafter: TAF). Polycarp was killed between 155 and 160 C.E: The Martyrdom of Polycarp sets out quite clearly both the issue … The Atheist named Richard Swinburne
Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 2
I want to continue where I left off in part 1 of my response to Metacrock on the use of Bayes’ Theorem (BT) to measure evidence about God. Here is Metacrock: Bayes’ theorem was introduced first as an argument against Hume’s argument on miracles, that is to say, a proof of the probability of miracles. … Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 2
Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 1
Over at the Christian Cadre, “Metacrock” has written a post entitled, “Bayes Theorum [sic] and Probability of God: No Dice!” Metacrock makes a number of points regarding the use of Bayes’ Theorem (BT) with evidence about God’s existence. I want to comment on many of those points. It is understandable that naturalistic thinkers are uneasy … Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 1
Thoughts on the “Logical vs. Evidential” Distinction
Chris Hallquist recently questioned the significance of the distinction between logical arguments from evil and evidential arguments from evil. He writes: In general, the insistence of people who follow these issues on classifying versions of the problem of evil as either “logical” or “evidential” is weird. It isn’t something you see with any other kind … Thoughts on the “Logical vs. Evidential” Distinction
The Perfect Goodness of God – Again (Part 2)
In my previous post on this topic, I used conditional derivation to try to prove that one statement entailed another statement, to show that ‘There is a person who is omniscient and perfectly free’ entails ‘There is a person who is perfectly good’. But because I’m a bit unclear on how the logic of conditional … The Perfect Goodness of God – Again (Part 2)
When is a Debate “Win” Significant?
A reader asked me if I had watched the debate between William Lane Craig and Alex Rosenberg. Here is my reply. No, I haven’t seen it. I’ve read some of Rosenberg’s book, The Atheist’s Guide to Reality, however. My prediction is that WLC not only “won” the debate, but that Rosenberg did awful. Why would … When is a Debate “Win” Significant?
Feser Insults (Insulted?) Parsons Again
If Edward Feser is not yet the JP Holding of theistic philosophers, he seems to be well on his way. I don’t always read his blog, but his latest item caught my attention. “God and Man at HuffPro“ In that brief article, he links to this older article: “So you think you understand the cosmological … Feser Insults (Insulted?) Parsons Again