Ramified Natural Theology And The Ascension of Christ

I’ve previously brought up an objection to “the” Argument From The Resurrection, specifically as it relates to William Lane Craig’s version of the argument. My objection centered on the fact that Craig cherry-picks or ignores facts that don’t fit his resurrection hypothesis–or don’t fit the resurrection hypothesis better than an alternative hypothesis. One such fact …

Continue reading Ramified Natural Theology And The Ascension of Christ

Swinburne’s Ridiculous Probability Argument for the Existence of God

I've picked on Protestant apologist Alvin Plantinga a lot before for his asinine claims and Roman Catholic apologist Edward Feser for his claims that have more gall than a gallbladder, but I haven't addressed Eastern Orthodox apologist Richard Swinburne as much. They're all supposed to be professional Philosophers, but often they read like Christian apologists. …

Continue reading Swinburne’s Ridiculous Probability Argument for the Existence of God

A Review of ‘The Unnecessary Science: A Critical Analysis of Natural Law Theory’

I've been critical of Edward Feser and his sycophants a lot in the past (for good reasons). While I've been too lazy to write a book on Edward Feser's philosophy, others were kind enough to do so, like Gunther Laird. Laird brilliantly and humorously demonstrates that, contrary to what Feser and his followers claim, natural …

Continue reading A Review of ‘The Unnecessary Science: A Critical Analysis of Natural Law Theory’

How Darwin Made The Problem Of Evil So Much Worse For Theism

Hypotheses don't get many more bonus points-or any bonus points- if what's being predicted is something we already knew anyways (i.e. something that is already part of our background knowledge). For example, we already know that gravity exists so that hardly confirms (or more strongly confirms) a newly proposed hypothesis. One of the reasons evolution …

Continue reading How Darwin Made The Problem Of Evil So Much Worse For Theism

A Cumulative Case For The Existence of Evil God

Evil god is an entity of which none worse can be conceived. If you could imagine an entity worse than evil god, then that being would be evil god. By definition, a maximally evil entity would be maximally hateful, maximally cruel, and maximally selfish. (1) Evil isn’t a privation of good; rather, evil is identical …

Continue reading A Cumulative Case For The Existence of Evil God

The Implications of Prayer Experiments

Experimental studies have been done on intercessory prayer. The results are tantamount to prayer being a failed hypothesis. Implications If we expect certain gods to answer prayers, these experiments are clear evidence against their existence. If we expect the God of classical monotheism to answer prayers-as theists insist-then failed prayer is strong evidence against the …

Continue reading The Implications of Prayer Experiments

Are Religious Experiences “Innocent Until Proven Guilty”?

At one point in my life I took the position that one's religious experience gives that same individual prima facie justification/reason to think God exists. Now, however, I'm not quite sure what to think of the matter. In other words, I'm not sure we should treat religious experiences as innocent until proven guilty. And even …

Continue reading Are Religious Experiences “Innocent Until Proven Guilty”?

What Can Arguments Do?

Why do people give arguments? When should people give arguments? What are the limits of arguments? These are important questions, and there seems to be a lot of confusion among scholars and laypersons about logical arguments.  Arguments are mainly for convincing other people of some claim. One idea of giving arguments is that one should …

Continue reading What Can Arguments Do?

The Convenient ‘Special Pleading’ of Skeptical Theists

Skeptical theism is a double-edged sword. As any honest and consistent skeptical theist would tell you, skeptical theism would undermine (some/all) arguments for the existence of God. (And as Michael Tooley, and one commenter on this blog have noted, the Bible seems to tell us some of Yahweh's reasons for allowing suffering; therefore, we are not …

Continue reading The Convenient ‘Special Pleading’ of Skeptical Theists

Is there a ‘Problem of Good’?

The alleged 'Problem of Good' refers to the fact that if a good God doesn't exist, then why is there so much pleasure, beauty, and good-will in the world? And aren't all the good things in the world evidence that an evil god doesn't exist? I do think that the existence of pleasure and experience …

Continue reading Is there a ‘Problem of Good’?

An Evidential Argument from Non-God Objects: Part 2

In a previous post I talked about how any non-God object (and/or objects) is evidence against classical theism. My argument is as follows: 1. It is a known fact that (concrete) reality consists of some thing(s) that is/are not God 2. (1) is more expected on the hypothesis of metaphysical naturalism than on the hypothesis of …

Continue reading An Evidential Argument from Non-God Objects: Part 2

How would I classify arguments for and against God’s existence?

Generally when one looks at general overviews or outlines of the various arguments for and against God, the arguments are classified in a neat order. However, I have found that the classifications for theistic arguments (in particular) are often prone to counter-examples. For example, it is often said that what makes ontological arguments what they …

Continue reading How would I classify arguments for and against God’s existence?

Alternative concepts of God

On this blog I mainly talk about classical/traditional theism. Classical/traditional theism, at bottom, claims that there exists a Being who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good. More specifically this Being is all-loving, personal, timeless, spaceless, uncaused, immaterial, immutable, etc. This position is also known as "Anselmian theism", "Perfect Being Theism", or "Theism". Saint Anselm held that …

Continue reading Alternative concepts of God

Non-supernaturalism vs. naturalism

Most of us in Western society have heard of the term 'naturalism'. Metaphysical naturalism is the position that the only entities that exist are natural entities, and anything that is mental depends on the physical. Supernaturalism, however, gives priority to the mental, and anything that is physical is dependent on the mental. Non-supernaturalism is the …

Continue reading Non-supernaturalism vs. naturalism

The Argument from Biblical Confusion against Christianity

What exactly do I mean by biblical confusion? Basically, I mean that Christians have varying interpretations (i.e. disagreement) about what the Bible says. Moreover, there are some/many passages in the Bible that are ambiguous and vague. The fact that there is so much confusion around the Bible is surprising if Christianity is true; however, this …

Continue reading The Argument from Biblical Confusion against Christianity

Stop saying that it’s ‘obvious’ that God exists

One of the problems with claiming that something is obviously true is that it's basically a non-starter. That is, just because you saying something is just obviously the case, that does not mean that it really is. But what is the claim being made? Saying that something is obvious must mean that it is obvious …

Continue reading Stop saying that it’s ‘obvious’ that God exists

Of Miracles and Edward Feser

Philosopher Edward Feser has argued on his blog that the prior probability of a miracle occurring has to do with our background knowledge of the world; therefore, there isn't an absurdly low prior probability of a miracle occurring if: God exists, supernaturalism is true, God wants to perform miracles, God wants to raise Jesus from the dead, …

Continue reading Of Miracles and Edward Feser

Skeptical Theists admit defeat

Appealing to God's 'mysterious ways' is nothing new. I'm sympathetic to the idea that skeptical theism is just a more dressed up version of appealing to God's mysterious ways. Whether or not that is the case, I do not think skeptical theism is plausible in its own right. I think skeptical theists admit defeat. What …

Continue reading Skeptical Theists admit defeat

An Evidential Argument from ‘Non-God Objects’

If God exists, would God create anything at all? The problem of non-God objects (PONGO) has to do with the fact that anything exists at all besides the God of classical theism. In other words, if God exists, then only God should exist; God wouldn’t create anything. From Problem to Argument Obviously, this alleged problem can …

Continue reading An Evidential Argument from ‘Non-God Objects’

The Existential Argument Against God’s Existence

Nobody denies that there are some people who don't find life to be meaningful and/or purposeful. But if God exists, why is this the case? Wouldn't God be concerned with us wanting to find purpose and meaning? Wouldn't God want us to think that there really is purpose and meaning? (1)(2) On classical theism, meaning and purpose …

Continue reading The Existential Argument Against God’s Existence

Evidential/Probabilistic Argument from Hell

The evidential argument from hell argues that the existence of hell (if it exists) makes God's existence improbable. The first argument will assume that hell exists. In other words, it will operate on what theists, particularly Christian theists, already believe. The argument grants what a certain Christian theist believes and tries to reach a conclusion. The …

Continue reading Evidential/Probabilistic Argument from Hell