Yet Another Atheist Misrepresents a Theistic Argument (the Leibnizian Cosmological Argument)

The title of this blog post is hardly shocking, but it should be. When a philosopher explicitly lays out their argument with numbered premises and a conclusion, we should expect nothing less from critics than representing the argument by quoting the author's formulation. As we will soon see, however, yet another atheist has failed to do this.As I've mentioned before, William Lane Craig defended eight (8) argument for God's existence in his debate with Alex Rosenberg. Craig apparently (?) … [Read more...]

Response to William Lane Craig – Part 11

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...]

Robert Kuhn’s Nine Levels of Nothing

If you've participated in many discussions about science or religion in which the word "nothing" plays a central role, you've probably noticed that "nothing" has different meanings for different people. Robert Lawrence Kuhn has put together a thought-provoking taxonomy of nine levels of nothing, which I think could be very useful for clarifying which "nothing" someone has in mind during such conversations.LINK … [Read more...]

My Posts for 2015

My Blog Posts for 2015 FAITH (17 posts) Jesus on Faith (6 … [Read more...]

Dr. Richard Carrier’s Rebuttal to My Commentary on His Exchange with Dr. Luke Barnes about the Fine-Tuning Argument

This is one of those debates where you really have to get into the details just to arrive at an informed position. I've read his rebuttal, but so much time has passed that I will need to re-read his book chapter (yes, I did read it), Barnes' posts, and my commentary before I can even decide what to make of his rebuttal. Because of other commitments, it's doubtful that I will be able to do that anytime soon. But that's no reason not to check out his rebuttal for yourself, if you're interested in … [Read more...]

Why Do So Many People Have a “Winner Takes All” Approach to Evidence about Gods?

If you've a regular reader of this blog -- or any other blog or website devoted to the existence of God -- you've probably noticed how often partisans for one side or the other have a "winner takes all" approach to the evidence. In the past, even I was guilty of making statements like, "There is no evidence for God's existence."It now seems to me that one should be very cautious before making such statements (or the theistic equivalent, "There is no evidence against God's existence.") The … [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...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X