Does God Exist? Part 2: Believe What You Were Raised to Believe
In my humble opinion, the question “Does God exist?” is best answered by taking a particular approach: We should answer this question by means of philosophical investigation, especially by critical examination of philosophical arguments for and against the existence of God. However, this is NOT the only way to approach the question “Does God exist?”. Here … Does God Exist? Part 2: Believe What You Were Raised to Believe
Does God Exist? Part 1: How Should We Answer this Question?
ANSWERING THE QUESTION “DOES GOD EXIST?” THROUGH PHILOSOPHY How should we answer the question “Does God exist?” ? Having studied philosophy as an undergraduate at Sonoma State University, and having studied philosophy as a graduate student at the University of Windsor, and then having studied philosophy for a number of years more at UC Santa … Does God Exist? Part 1: How Should We Answer this Question?
Arguments For God that are Arguments Against God
GOD AND CONFIRMATION BIAS There is a theme in Jeff Lowder’s case for Naturalism: the thinking of religious believers is often distorted by confirmation bias. They look for evidence that supports their belief in God, but ignore, or forget, or fail to notice, evidence that goes against their belief in God. When believers offer some reason or … Arguments For God that are Arguments Against God
More Reflections on Epistemology: Prove Your Authority
WHERE WE ARE AT Recent comments on Part 11 of my series defending the Swoon Theory concern some basic issues of epistemology, and for some reason I could not prevent myself from jumping in and responding to some of the comments concerning epistemological issues. So, I shared some of those comments and some of my … More Reflections on Epistemology: Prove Your Authority
Some Reflections on Epistemology
To be honest, I tend to shy away from discussions of epistemology (the theory of knowledge, the sub-discipline of philosophy that attempts to understand and clarify the concept of knowledge and the conditions or criteria for what counts as knowledge). First of all, I don’t enjoy discussing “Calvinist epistemology” which has been a big topic … Some Reflections on Epistemology
Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 1: Untrained in Probabilistic Logic?
MY UNDERSTANDING OF PROBABILITY Dr. Jacobus Erasmus has raised an objection to one of my posts on the resurrection. Before presenting his objection he takes a swipe at my credibility: …Bowen’s argument is an example of what happens when a blogger who is untrained in probabilistic logic tries their hand at probability. …Bowen does not … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 1: Untrained in Probabilistic Logic?
The Logic of Miracles – Part 6: The Problem of Evil
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL The problem of evil is concerned with whether the existence of evil (or of particular kinds or amounts of evil) is logically incompatible with the existence of God or provides significant evidence against the existence of God. The “logical” problem of evil focuses on whether evil (or particular kinds or amounts … The Logic of Miracles – Part 6: The Problem of Evil
The Logic of Miracles – Part 5: Two Objections
WHY CLASSICAL APOLOGETICS IS DOOMED TO FAILURE I have previously argued in Part 2 that Richard Swinburne’s case for the existence of God depends on some assumptions about the PLANS or PURPOSES of God. I have also argued in Part 3 and in Part 4 that Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God depends … The Logic of Miracles – Part 5: Two Objections
The Logic of Miracles – Part 4: Kreeft’s Last Ten Arguments
WHERE WE ARE AT I am in the process of examining Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God, in order to test the following hypothesis: Classical Apologetics FAILS at Phase 1 because we are ignorant about the PLANS and PURPOSES of God, and this ignorance makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to SHOW … The Logic of Miracles – Part 4: Kreeft’s Last Ten Arguments
The Logic of Miracles – Part 3: Kreeft’s First Ten Arguments
WHERE I AM HEADED I am going to examine Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God, in order to test the following hypothesis: Classical Apologetics FAILS at Phase 1 because we are ignorant about the PLANS and PURPOSES of God, and this ignorance makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to SHOW that God … The Logic of Miracles – Part 3: Kreeft’s First Ten Arguments