Handbook of Christian Apologetics

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 9: The Argument from Change

MY EVALUATION OF THE SECOND HALF OF KREEFT’S CASE 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; hereafter: HCA) are AWFUL arguments that are not worthy of serious consideration, that we should thus toss them aside, and ignore Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 9: The Argument from Change

2017 in the Rearview Mirror

I had hoped to answer the question “Does God exist?” in 2017, at least to my own satisfaction.  No such luck.  That was a bit too aggressive of a goal.   However, I did make some good progress.  I learned that Norman Geisler’s case for God (in When Skeptics Ask) is a steaming pile of dog 2017 in the Rearview Mirror

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 8: Are Believers in God DELUSIONAL?

WHERE WE ARE AT I am in the process of evaluating Argument #19 (the Argument from Common Consent) from Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God (in Chapter 3 of Handbook of Christian Apologetics, hereafter: HCA): 1. Almost all people of every era have believed in God. A.  Either God DOES exist or God does NOT exist. THEREFORE: 2. Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 8: Are Believers in God DELUSIONAL?