Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 9: The Supreme Moral Lawgiver

In Phase 1 of his case for the existence of God (in When Skeptics Ask, hereafter: WSA), Norman Geisler argues for the existence of  a "supreme moral Lawgiver".  The argument goes like this (see WSA, p. 22):Geisler's Moral Argument32. There is an objective moral law.33. Moral laws imply a moral lawgiver.THEREFORE:34. There is a being that is the supreme moral lawgiver.Premise (32) is a controversial claim, and so a good reason or agument is needed to support this claim.   … [Read more...]

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...]

Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 5: The Gap Between Phase 1 and Phase 2

Here is my version of Geisler's first argument in Phase 2 of his case for God:  ARGUMENT #1 OF PHASE 2  10a. 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 itself (rig … [Read more...]

Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 4: Phase Two of Geisler’s Case for God

It is tempting to jump right into a critique of Geisler's five initial arguments.  However, my first priority is to sketch out the logic of Geisler's case for the existence of God in When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA), and, as I have previously argued (in Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3), the five arguments are merely the first phase of Geisler's case. So, let's dive into the next phase of Geisler's case for the existence of God.  Recall that Geisler stated that all five arguments must be sound for h … [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...]