Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 8: The Design of the Human Brain

The third argument in Phase 2 of Geisler's case for God is another development of his argument from design, and it has many of the same problems as the second argument in Phase 2.   Here is the third argument, sticking closely to the words used by Geisler:ARGUMENT #3 of PHASE 2  26. God designed our brains. (WSA, p.26)  27. IF God designed our brains, THEN God knows everything there is to know about the way we think.  (WSA, p.26)THUS:  28. God knows everything there is to … [Read more...]

Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 7: Argument #2 of Phase 2

Here is the second argument in Phase 2 of Geisler's case for the existence of God:ARGUMENT #2 of PHASE 221. "...the design of the universe is far beyond anything that man could devise." (WSA, p.26)22. IF the design of the universe is far beyond anything that man could devise, THEN the designer of the universe had great intelligence (when the universe was being designed).THUS:23. The designer of the universe had great intelligence (when … [Read more...]

Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 6: Arguments for the Intelligence of the Creator

Here is my version of Geisler's first argument in Phase 2 of his case for God:ARGUMENT #1 OF PHASE 210a. Only a being with great power could create the whole universe by itself, and only a being with great power could sustain the existence of the whole universe by itself  (for even just one moment).11a. There is a being that both (a) created the whole universe by itself (in the distant past), and that (b) sustains the existence of the whole universe by itse … [Read more...]

Behe’s Continues to Ignore His Strongest Philosophical Critic

The blog Evolution News & Views just re-published a long essay written by Michael Behe in 2000 in which he responds to the philosophical objections of his critics. It's unfortunate, however, that Behe has never acknowledged his strongest philosophical critic, Purdue University philosopher Paul Draper. In 2002, Draper wrote a critique of Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box, in the journal Faith and Philosophy. (Click here for a link to the paper's record at PhilPapers.org.) Draper's paper did ma … [Read more...]

Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 3: Just ONE Argument

Although, as I have previously argued, Geisler characterizes his case for God as consisting of multiple arguments for the existence of God,  this is a mischaracterization of his case for God.   Geisler's case for God rests upon five claims, and he gives an argument for each  of those five claims, but each of those five claims plays a critical role in Geisler's case.  If one of the five claims is false, then Geisler's case for the existence of God FAILS.  Thus, Geisler's case for God consists of … [Read more...]

Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 2: How Many Arguments for God?

In Chapter  2 of When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA), Norman Geisler appears to present five different arguments for the existence of God.  However, there are some significant problems with this characterization of Geisler's case for God.   NONE of the five arguments end with the conclusion that "God exists".  In fact, only his first argument even mentions the word "God", and it is precisely the reference to "God" in the conclusion of his first argument that makes that argument logically invalid … [Read more...]

Geisler’s Five Ways

Norman Geisler is a Thomist.  His case for the existence of God is basically a simplified, clarified, and somewhat modified version of the case for God made by Thomas Aqinas in Summa Theologica.  Geisler borrows the basic logical structure of the case for God made by Aquinas, as well as some of the specific sub-arguments of Aquinas.The standard view of Aquinas has it that Aquinas presents Five Ways or five arguments for the existence of God.  Geisler apparently accepts this standard view of A … [Read more...]

The VICTIMs of Christian Apologetics

My latest video, "The VICTIMs of Christian Apologetics: The Things Apologists Falsely Say Depend on God, But, if God Exists, God Depends on Them," is now available on YouTube. It is a narration of some of the many hundreds of PowerPoint slides I created in preparation for my recent debate with Frank Turek on naturalism vs. theism.This video presentation is a (roughly) 2 hour 30 minute critique of Frank Turek's latest book, Stealing from God: Why Atheists Need God to Make Their Case. T … [Read more...]