How and When Should You Use Ridicule, If At All? It Depends on Your Goals

I think it's self-defeating for philosophers who want to engage in genuine inquiry to use ridicule. If one's primary goal is to be an apologist first and a philosopher second (such as William Lane Craig), then I think ridicule can change some minds while alienating others. (By mentioning his name, I'm not claiming that he does, in fact, use ridicule. I'm simply stating that he is a philosopher who primarily seems to act as an apologist.) I think it's an open question whether using ridicule as a … [Read more...]

Stupid Atheist Meme #1: If You Could Reason with Religious People…

After my post Apologetics Infographic #1, I planned to do a related series titled, "Stupid Atheist Memes." I see, however, that Ed Brayton had the idea first. (See here for the latest in his series; the others so far are here, here, and here.) I trust he won't mind if I do my own series with the same title.For the inaugural entry, I'd like to discuss this. If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people. The meme is attributed to the fictional atheist Dr. … [Read more...]

The Logic of the Resurrection – Part 3

Logic of Resurrection Apologetic

The logic of the resurrection apologetic goes roughly like this: NOTE: This does not represent Swinburne's case for the resurrection.  It is a rough representation of a case for the resurrection that follows the general logic laid out by Swinburne (constituting a three-legged stool).==============KEY TO DIAGRAM(DOC) Jesus died on the cross on the same day he was crucified.(JAW) Jesus was alive and walking around (unassisted) about 48 hours after he was … [Read more...]

Link: Massimo Pigliucci’s “Reflections on the Skeptic and Atheist Movements”

LINK … [Read more...]

The Logic of the Resurrection – Part 2

Case for Resurrection

The two most important writings on the resurrection of Jesus are, IMHO, Richard Swinburne's book The Resurrection of God Incarnate (Oxford University Press, 2003; hereafter: ROGI), especially the Introduction (pages 1-6), and Theodore Drange's short article "Why Resurrect Jesus?" in the collection of skeptical essays The Empty Tomb, edited by Robert Price and our fearless leader Jeff Lowder (Prometheus Books, 2005; hereafter: TET).   [Please feel free to disagree, and/or to offer your own … [Read more...]

The Logic of the Resurrection – Part 1

In thinking about the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus, one needs to either determine an answer to this very basic question:Q1: Does God exist?Or else one needs to determine some sort of approach to how this question is to be dealt with in relation to the two key questions about the resurrection:Q2: Did Jesus rise from the dead?andQ3: Did God raise Jesus from the dead?If one determines that there is no God, then the answer to (Q3) is obviously: NO.  Also, i … [Read more...]

What is Faith? – Part 7

I'm going to take a detour and temporarily set Mr. Swinburne's characterization of the Thomist view of faith aside.  But I will continue to examine the Thomist view of faith, specifically as presented by Dr. Norman Geisler.As Jeff Lowder has recently shown, Dr. Geisler's case for Christianity is a failure.  IMHO Jeff won that match with a K.O. of Geisler in the very first round: Let’s suppose, but only for the sake of argument, that the following evidence favors theism over atheism, i.e. … [Read more...]

Some Thoughts on Naturalism and Morality

It is supposed, by some, to be difficult for naturalism to account for moral properties (both axiological properties like goodness and badness and deontic properties like rightness and wrongness). William Lane Craig and Paul Copan, have each argued incessantly that naturalism cannot account for moral properties. Craig has offered the following argument:If God does not exist, then objective moral value does not exist. Objective moral value does  exist. God exists.This argument has … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X