evidence

An F-Inductive Argument from Consciousness for Theism, Revisited

|

Edited on 15-Feb-20While some theistic arguments are “God of the gaps” arguments, many, including those defended by Christian philosophers, are not “God of the gaps” arguments. Before accusing a theist of trotting out another “God-of-the-gaps” argument, atheists should first verify that the argument actually is a “God-of-the-gaps” argument.Here is the basic structure of a “God-of-the-gaps” … An F-Inductive Argument from Consciousness for Theism, Revisited

How to Think about Historical Evidence about Anything, Part 1: The Credibility of Testimony

|

Note: So far as I know, no one working in New Testament scholarship, apologetics, counter-apologetics, or ancient history is applying the concepts in this blog post. As will soon become obvious, most of the ideas in this blog post are not mine, but if other people find these techniques useful, I would appreciate being given credit for the … How to Think about Historical Evidence about Anything, Part 1: The Credibility of Testimony

Weighing Theistic Evidence Against Naturalistic Evidence

|

In the next-to-last paragraph of his book, C.S. Lewis’ Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason, Victor Reppert makes a very interesting statement: However, I contend that the arguments from reason do provide some substantial reasons for preferring theism to naturalism. The “problem of reason” is a huge problem for reason, as serious or, I … Weighing Theistic Evidence Against Naturalistic Evidence

Does God Exist? Part 1

|

The overarching question for my ten-year plan is: Is Christianity true or false? After I clarify this overarching question, the first major question to investigate is this: Does God exist? I will, of course, at some point need to address the traditional arguments for the existence of God (ontological, cosmological, teleological, and moral arguments).  But I … Does God Exist? Part 1

Why Do So Many People Have a “Winner Takes All” Approach to Evidence about Gods?

|

If you’ve a regular reader of this blog — or any other blog or website devoted to the existence of God — you’ve probably noticed how often partisans for one side or the other have a “winner takes all” approach to the evidence. In the past, even I was guilty of making statements like, “There … Why Do So Many People Have a “Winner Takes All” Approach to Evidence about Gods?

Jesus on Faith – Part 6

|

Here is the “Doubting Thomas” story from Chapter 20 of the Gospel of John: 24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples were saying to him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands … Jesus on Faith – Part 6

Evidential Asymmetry, Scientific Confirmation of Prayer, and Horrific Evils

|

1. The General Case One of the most important (and equally most often forgotten) lessons that Bayes’s Theorem can teach us about evidence is that the strength of evidence is a ratio. To be precise, let H1 and H2 be rival explanatory hypotheses, B be the relevant background information, and E be the evidence to … Evidential Asymmetry, Scientific Confirmation of Prayer, and Horrific Evils

Stan Stephens’s Categorical Misunderstandings of Atheism, Part 2

|

In my last post about Stan Stephens, I documented how he fundamentally misrepresents the purpose and nature of my evidential case for naturalism, in turn because he seems to fundamentally misunderstand inductive arguments. Let’s continue reviewing Stan’s post on empirical evidence. Now we can more readily see that not a single line item is a … Stan Stephens’s Categorical Misunderstandings of Atheism, Part 2