Christian Apologists Ignore the Best Objections to the Moral Argument

(Redated post originally published on 2 August 2014)To be precise, there are many kinds of moral arguments for theism. The question in the title is really talking about what we might call "ontological" or "metaphysical" moral arguments, the kind which claim that we need God in order to have an "ontological foundation" for objective or absolute morality.People who defend a version of this kind of argument include a veritable "Who's Who?" of contemporary Christian apologists: C.S. Lewis … [Read more...]

For Victor Reppert: The Metaethical Objections to Craig’s Moral Argument Which His Sophisticated Critics Use, But Craig Never Acknowledges in Debate Opening Statements

(Redated post originally published on 21 June 2012)This is a quick follow-up to my last reply to Victor Reppert. The title of Reppert's post is, "The Moral Argument that Christians don't use, but atheists always rebut." In reply, we can point to "The Metaethical Objections to Craig's Moral Argument Which His Sophisticated Critics Use, But Craig Never Acknowledges in Debate Opening Statements."LINK … [Read more...]

I Don’t Care – Part 5

The famous Five Ways passage by Aquinas in Summa Theologica does not contain five arguments for the existence of God. Rather, it contains ZERO arguments for the existence of God.  There is actually only one argument for the existence of God in the Summa Theologica, and the reasoning in the Five Ways passage only represents a tiny piece of that very long and complicated argument.The Five Ways passage presents arguments for these five metaphysical claims:(MC1) There exists a UFC being.   … [Read more...]

Summary and Assessment of the Craig-Draper Debate on the Existence of God (1998)

(Redated post originally published on 15 October 2011)This is a another very old debate summary, which I wrote back in 1998. I have made some minor changes.SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT OF THE CRAIG-DRAPER DEBATE: DOES GOD EXIST? (1997) United States Military Academy at West PointNote: the audio of this debate may be heard here.Craig's Opening StatementCraig's presentation was his standard, cumulative case for Christian theism.T1. The kalam cosmological argument (1) … [Read more...]

Summary of the Craig-Price Debate on Jesus’ Resurrection (1999)

(Redated post originally published on 16 October 2011)This is yet another old debate summary from my archives. I'm not sure when I wrote this, but I'm guessing it was between 1999 and 2002.THE CRAIG-PRICE DEBATE: DID JESUS RISE FROM THE DEAD?The Veritas Forum Ohio State University, 1999Curiously, the audiocassettes do not mention Robert Price's name, or even a debate at all. Instead, the label on the tape reads, "Intellectual Foundations for Belief in Jesus Christ by William … [Read more...]

The Empty Tomb: Reply to Josh and Sean McDowell

(Redated post originally published on 20 November 2012)A friend informed me that Josh and Sean McDowell, in the new (revised?) edition of More Than a Carpenter (MTAC) on page 134, have offered a critique of the relocation hypothesis, which I defended in The Empty Tomb (TET). I have reviewed what they wrote. Here is a rough sketch of how I would respond.First, I could not help but notice similarities between the wording of their comments and the wording of Stephen Davis's review in … [Read more...]

Response to William Lane Craig – Part 13

In Part 10, I argued that Robert Funk was not as certain about Jesus' death on the cross as Craig claims, and I pointed out that three of the seven groundrules proposed by Funk for investigation of the historical Jesus are skeptical in nature, showing that Funk has a generally skeptical view of the historical Jesus.In Part 11, I argued that Funk's specific skeptical beliefs about the Gospel of John imply that gospel to be completely unreliable, and that this by itself casts significant doubt … [Read more...]

Summary of the Craig-Parsons Debate, “Why I Am/Am Not a Christian”

(Redated post originally published on 14 October 2011)This is a repost of a debate summary I wrote a long time ago. (I think I wrote this in 1998.) While I tried to be accurate, I don't claim this summary is perfect. If anyone identifies any errors, omissions, or anything else that requires editing, please feedback alerting me so I can fix the summary accordingly.One thing you will notice is that I tried use a consistent numbering scheme throughout the different speeches, to make it … [Read more...]