Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 5: The Argument from Common Consent
WHERE WE ARE AS OF PART 4 In Part 1 and Part 2 I argued that eight out of ten (80%) of the last ten arguments in Peter Kreeft’s collection of twenty arguments (from Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Chapter 3) are AWFUL arguments that are not worthy of serious consideration, that we should thus toss … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 5: The Argument from Common Consent
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 4: Evaluation of Argument #12
WHERE WE ARE AT WITH EXAMINATION OF ARGUMENT #12 In Part 3 of this series I analyzed the logical structure of Argument #12 in Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God from Chapter 3 of his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA). My initial criticism of this argument is that much of it is … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 4: Evaluation of Argument #12
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 3: The Origin of the Idea of God
MY DIVIDE-AND-CONQUER STRATEGY I have argued that Peter Kreeft puts forward what he takes to be his strongest and best arguments for the existence of God in the first half of his list of twenty arguments (Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Chapter 3), and then puts forward his weakest and most … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 3: The Origin of the Idea of God
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 2: Tossing Out Four More Arguments
KREEFT’S CREDIBILITY PROBLEM To focus in on the alleged flaws and failings of an arguer, as opposed to the alleged flaws and failings of his/her arguments is generally to be avoided, and can amount to the fallacy of ad hominem. However, the CREDIBILITY of an arguer can affect the persuasive force of an argument, so credibility should … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 2: Tossing Out Four More Arguments
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 1: Tossing Out Four Arguments
INTRODUCTION TO KREEFT’S CASE FOR GOD In this new series of blog posts, I plan to analyze and evaluate Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God. Peter Kreeft is a Catholic philosopher of religion and a Christian apologist. He has published many books defending the Christian faith. Kreeft co-authored Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 1: Tossing Out Four Arguments
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 19: The Whole Enchilada
In part 11 of this series of posts I reviewed the overall structure of Norman Geisler’s case for the existence of God, the case that he presented, along with coauthor Ronald Brooks, in When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA). In this present post, I will once again review the overall structure of Geisler’s case, and will summarize … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 19: The Whole Enchilada
Hinman’s Replies to My Objections to ABEAN and REMEC
I. HINMAN’S REPLIES TO MY OBJECTIONS TO ABEAN A. POSTS IN THIS DEBATE THAT DISCUSS ABEAN: Joe Hinman’s ABEAN Argument for God http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2017/07/opening-argument-resolved-that-belief.html My Criticism of Hinman’s ABEAN Argument for God Joe Hinman’s Responses to My Criticism of His ABEAN Argument http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2017/07/first-defense-of-god-argument-1.html http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2017/07/bowen-hinman-debate-existence-of-god.html B. MY MAIN OBJECTION: ABEAN IS VERY UNCLEAR My contention is not … Hinman’s Replies to My Objections to ABEAN and REMEC
Podcast 5: How Should We Evaluate the Christian Worldview?
In Podcast 5, I briefly review some key points from Podcast 3 and Podcast 4, and then I discuss how to evaluate the Christian worldview: http://thinkingcriticallyabout.podbean.com/e/podcast-5-how-should-we-evaluate-the-truth-of-the-christian-worldview/ Some key points in Podcast 5: There is a PowerPoint (in a PDF) available with the content of the podcast: http://thinkingcriticallyabout.podbean.com/e/powerpoint-for-podcast-5-pdf/ My previous podcasts are available here: Thinking Critically About: Is Christianity … Podcast 5: How Should We Evaluate the Christian Worldview?
Hinman’s REMEC Argument: DOA
Joe Hinman has (allegedly) posted a second argument for the “existence of God”: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2017/07/bowen-hinman-debate-existence-of-god-my.html Although Hinman believes that the claim “God exists” is NOT literally true (but is only “metaphorically true”, whatever that means), he has included the phrase “existence of God” in the title of this latest post, implying that his second argument is … Hinman’s REMEC Argument: DOA
Hinman’s ABEAN & REMEC Arguments: INDEX
1. Joe Hinman’s ABEAN Argument for God http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2017/07/opening-argument-resolved-that-belief.html 2. My Criticism of Hinman’s ABEAN Argument for God 3. Joe Hinman’s Responses to My Criticism of His ABEAN Argument http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2017/07/first-defense-of-god-argument-1.html http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2017/07/bowen-hinman-debate-existence-of-god.html 4. Joe Hinman’s REMEC Argument for God http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2017/07/bowen-hinman-debate-existence-of-god-my.html 5. My Criticism of Hinman’s REMEC Argument for God 6. Joe Hinman’s Responses to My Criticism of His REMEC Argument … Hinman’s ABEAN & REMEC Arguments: INDEX