What is Christianity? Part 2

One objection to my cognitivist view of religion and Christianity is this popular little bit of stupidity:"Christianity is not a religion; it is a relationship with Jesus Christ."I have three initial responses to this statement: (1) read your freaking bible, (2) read your freaking dictionary, and (3) use your freaking brain.1. READ YOUR BIBLEIn Chapter 26 of Acts, the apostle Paul defends himself before King Agrippa and speaks of "our religion":1  Agrippa said to Paul, “You ha … [Read more...]

What is Christianity? – Part 1

Since I am planning to invest the next ten years (or more) of my life in an effort to investigate and answer the question "Is Christianity true or false?",  I need to start out by clarifying and defining the word "Christianity".There are those who would argue that Christianity is not the sort of thing that could be true, and is not the sort of thing that could be false.  If Christianity is not the sort of thing that could be true, and is not the sort of thing that could be false, then I wo … [Read more...]

“Atheism” According to Matt Slick

Somehow I wound up on the website of the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry (CARM). Since the website has a section on atheism, I decided to take a look. I found problems in the very first article I read, "What Is Atheism?"The Definition of AtheismI'll begin with something positive. Unlike virtually every other Christian apologist I have read, Slick seems to be willing to engage his opponents on their own terms. He accepts the idea that there are both strong and weak varieties … [Read more...]

Ten-Year Plan: Revised Scope

I am going to start my Ten-Year Plan this year.However, I have decided to EXPAND the scope of the project; I will attempt to eat the whole enchilada, so ten years might not be enough time.  I wrote a previous post (offsite) on my Ten-Year Plan.The question at issue:  Is Christianity true or false?Here is the overall logic that I plan to use to do my evaluation of Christianity (click on image for a clearer  view of  the chart): Although it might require more than ten y … [Read more...]

Response to William Lane Craig – Part 10

Here is my main objection to William Craig's case for the resurrection of Jesus:It is not possible for a person to rise from the dead until AFTER that person has actually died. Thus, in order to prove that Jesus rose from the dead, one must first prove that Jesus died on the cross. But in most of William Craig's various books, articles, and debates, he simply ignores this issue. He makes no serious attempt to show that it is an historical fact that Jesus died on the cross.  For that reason, … [Read more...]

WLC Denies That Anyone Has Ever Died a Sincere Seeker Without Finding God

Can anyone sincerely lack belief in God? And even if they can, can anyone sincerely lack belief in God for the rest of their lives? Many people, including nontheists but not just nontheists, think the answer to both questions is plainly "yes." But some (many?) theists, no doubt motivated by beliefs such as divine goodness, Biblical inerrancy, and Christian particularism, deny this for the second question and possibly the first.  We'll call people who deny a "yes" answer to the second quest … [Read more...]

Response to William Lane Craig – Part 9

I have finished my discussion of Luke Timothy Johnson's views on the alleged crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, and I will begin my discussion of  Robert Funk's views on the alleged crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus in the next post, after a brief review here of the CONTEXT of this series of posts (i.e. my main objection to WLC's case for the resurrection, and WLC's main response to my objection). =========================================Excerpts from my post The Failure of William … [Read more...]

In Defense of Dwindling Probability – Part 4

Here is another objection to dwindling probabilities from Swinburne:"A defender of the argument from dwindling probabilities may...emphasize that all the same the longer the route of the argument (or the more conjuncts involved in the conclusion), the less probable is the conclusion; and so suggest that it is not plausible to suppose that an argument of any length would yield a very probable conclusion. In rebuttal I make two points. The first is that the argument from dwindling p … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X