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 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
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 14: More On Phase 4
===================== NOTE: To avoid sounding overly aggressive and insulting, I will not be repeating the evaluation that Dr. Geisler’s various arguments for the existence of God are a steaming pile of dog shit. However, please understand that the fact that I refrain from writing such comments does NOT mean that no such thoughts come to my … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 14: More On Phase 4
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 13: Existence and Attributes of a Necessary Being
In Phase 1 of his case for the existence of God, Geisler reformulates the argument from being as follows: Argument from Being #2 – Initial Version 50. If God exists, [then] we conceive of Him [God] as a necessary Being. 51. By definition, a necessary Being must exist and cannot not exist. THEREFORE … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 13: Existence and Attributes of a Necessary Being
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 12: Is the Creator a Necessary Being?
PHASE 3: THE EXISTENCE OF A NECESSARY BEING Geisler abuses the word “God” yet again in Phase 3 of his case for the existence of God. The argument in Phase 3 is on page 27. It makes use of the conclusion from “The Argument from Being” in Phase 1 (pages 24-26). Here is the conclusion … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 12: Is the Creator a Necessary Being?
Does God Exist? Part 2
Here is a third option for breaking down the question “Does God exist?” (click on the image below to get a clearer view of the chart): This is a variation on Option 2 (see the previous post in this series). In this analysis I stick with the process of simply adding on divine attributes to … Does God Exist? Part 2
God as a ‘Necessary Being’ – Part 4
Previously, I argued that it is not possible to become eternal. Recall that a person P is eternal if and only if P has always existed and P will always continue to exist. Here is a step-by-step proof showing that it is impossible for a person to become eternal: <————|———–|————–> …………….t1………..t2 1. At time t1 … God as a ‘Necessary Being’ – Part 4
God as a ‘Necessary Being’ – Part 3
Richard Swinburne analyzes the concept of ‘necessary being’ into two implications (COT, p.241-242): 1. It is not a matter of fortunate accident that there is a God; he exists necessarily. 2. God is necessarily the kind of being which he is; God does not just happen to have the properties which he does. In his … God as a ‘Necessary Being’ – Part 3
God as a ‘Necessary Being’ – Part 2
Although there is an extensive discussion of the meaning of the claim ‘God is a necessary being’ by Richard Swinburne in his bookThe Coherence of Theism (revised edition, hereafter: COT), the main passages that I’m interested in understanding are found in a shorter and more popular book: Is There a God? (hereafter: ITAG), also by … God as a ‘Necessary Being’ – Part 2