Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 17: God Exists?
Because Dr. Norman Geisler is unclear and confused in his use of the word “God”, he fails to properly conclude his case for the existence of God in his book When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA). But this failure is easily fixed. I will reconstruct the final inference of his case for God in this post. … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 17: God Exists?
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 15: Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Perfectly Good?
Dr. Norman Geisler uses cosmological arguments to show that God is very powerful, and a teleological argument to show that God is very intelligent, and a moral argument to show that God is good (When Skeptics Ask [hereafter: WSA], p.26-27). But in Phase 4 of his case, he has not yet attempted to show that God exists. … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 15: Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Perfectly Good?
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 11: The Structure of Geisler’s Case
I’m going to take a step back in this post and look at the overall structure of Geisler’s case for the existence of God, a presented in When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA). PHASE 1: GEISLER’s FIVE WAYS On pages 15 through 26, Geisler presents five arguments for five conclusions. I call this Phase 1 of … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 11: The Structure of Geisler’s Case
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 10: The Goodness of the Creator
REVIEW OF MY EVALUATION OF GEISLER’S CASE (SO FAR) In Phase 1 of his case for the existence of God, Norman Geisler presents five arguments for five different conclusions: In Phase 2 of his case for the existence of God, Geisler presents more arguments for conclusions about the attributes of “the” being that caused the … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 10: The Goodness of the Creator
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 9: The Supreme Moral Lawgiver
In Phase 1 of his case for the existence of God (in When Skeptics Ask, hereafter: WSA), Norman Geisler argues for the existence of a “supreme moral Lawgiver”. The argument goes like this (see WSA, p. 22): Geisler’s Moral Argument 32. There is an objective moral law. 33. Moral laws imply a moral lawgiver. THEREFORE: … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 9: The Supreme Moral Lawgiver
Does Theism Explain the Necessity of Moral Truths?
The book, Does God Exist? The Craig-Flew Debate, contains a transcript of the debate between William Lane Craig and Antony Flew, responses by eight commentators, and final responses by Craig and Flew. Many of the commentators, including some of the theists, sharply criticized Craig’s moral argument for God’s existence because, they argued, some moral truths are … Does Theism Explain the Necessity of Moral Truths?
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 3: Just ONE Argument
Although, as I have previously argued, Geisler characterizes his case for God as consisting of multiple arguments for the existence of God, this is a mischaracterization of his case for God. Geisler’s case for God rests upon five claims, and he gives an argument for each of those five claims, but each of those … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 3: Just ONE Argument
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 2: How Many Arguments for God?
In Chapter 2 of When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA), Norman Geisler appears to present five different arguments for the existence of God. However, there are some significant problems with this characterization of Geisler’s case for God. NONE of the five arguments end with the conclusion that “God exists”. In fact, only his first argument even mentions the word “God”, … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 2: How Many Arguments for God?
Geisler’s Five Ways
Norman Geisler is a Thomist. His case for the existence of God is basically a simplified, clarified, and somewhat modified version of the case for God made by Thomas Aqinas in Summa Theologica. Geisler borrows the basic logical structure of the case for God made by Aquinas, as well as some of the specific sub-arguments … Geisler’s Five Ways
Quibbling over Semantics While Missing the Point
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I’m a linguistic relativist. I don’t think words have objective meanings. I think the meaning of words is relative to time and place. So when I encounter someone who is adamant about defining a word in a different way than I do, I just shrug my … Quibbling over Semantics While Missing the Point