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

Can God Create Another Omnipotent & Omnibenevolent Being?

Naturally, I’m skeptical of logical/deductive arguments for and against the existence of God. One such argument, against the existence of God, alleges that:1). If God exists, then other omnipotent/omnibenevolent beings are the only beings that exist2). Other omnipotent/omnibenevolent beings are not the only beings that exist3). Therefore, God does not existThe obvious objection is that …

Continue reading Can God Create Another Omnipotent & Omnibenevolent Being?

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

Is the concept of God incoherent?

I don't have a Ph.D., nor do I claim that I have some special knowledge. But it is interesting when I hear laymen talk about certain philosophical topics like abortion or God. I say it's interesting because a lot of the public discourse around these topics seems to be outdated by 50 years, as if …

Continue reading Is the concept of God incoherent?

Some quick thoughts on the “character-building” theodicy

Firstly, I don't think character-building is a good thing in itself. I think it's only instrumentally good. But let's give the character-building theodicy a bit of a break and see where it takes us.It doesn't explain instances of suffering where someone is crushed by suffering.It doesn't explain instances of suffering caused by nature-i.e. natural evil.It …

Continue reading Some quick thoughts on the “character-building” theodicy

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’

The Problem of God and the Problem of Belief

J.L. Schellenberg has written about the pragmatic benefits of 'not' believing that God exists (where 'believing that' God exists is to be understood propositionally, and 'not' is to be understood disjunctively in terms of propositional attitudes). In other words, the supposed benefits that Pascal and William James say can only come when one believes that …

Continue reading The Problem of God and the Problem of Belief

Response to Jeffrey Jay Lowder on God and Consciousness

Lowder has written a post on the argument from consciousness for the existence of God. His argument, if sound, would establish consciousness as being a piece of evidence that lowers the probability of naturalism; however, it would not show that theism gets a boost in probability because theism and naturalism are not the only hypotheses …

Continue reading Response to Jeffrey Jay Lowder on God and Consciousness

I’ve Grown Tired

I've grown tired of discussing 'omni-theism'(i.e. OT). By 'omni-theism', I mean the position that there exists an entity which is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good, and all-loving. Even if you want to water down OT, I'm tired of that too. By 'water down' I mean a position like- for instance- that there exists an entity that is …

Continue reading I’ve Grown Tired

Crank Ethicists

Academic Philosophy can be a breeding ground for people with nonsense ideas. Hell, where else are they going go? If you know of other departments that produce as much nonsense in terms of quality and quantity, let me know! With that being said, let's get into a branch of philosophy known as ethics. One idea …

Continue reading Crank Ethicists

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

Non-Physicalist Views Of The Mind: Meet The New Vitalism, Same As The Old One

By, 'non-physicalist', I mean the rejection of the physicalist view (of the mind). Obviously, this includes a lot of views in the philosophy of mind. The most well-known rival of physicalism, when it comes to the mind, is probably dualism about the mind. Dualism itself includes positions like substance dualism and property dualism. Substance dualism …

Continue reading Non-Physicalist Views Of The Mind: Meet The New Vitalism, Same As The Old One

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?

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’?

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

Should we also refer to God as a “she”?

It's no secret that traditionally speaking God has been referred exclusively as "he". Most of the time people don't really think of why they refer to God only as a 'he'; it's more of a custom or tradition. What's more, everyone agrees that God isn't male or female. Given that this is the case, I …

Continue reading Should we also refer to God as a “she”?

How Aquinas and Feser rely on incomplete premises

It's no secret that Edward Feser is a big fan of Thomas Aquinas. One could even say that Feser is somewhat of a 'popularizer' of Aquinas. In particular, Feser specializes in Aquinas's natural theology (i.e. arguments for God's existence). Feser himself believes that Aquinas' arguments are airtight arguments. Naturally, I would say that I am …

Continue reading How Aquinas and Feser rely on incomplete premises

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

Some New Arguments for the Principle of Sufficient Reason?

The Principle of Sufficient Reason (or PSR) states that everything that exists has an explanation for its existence. As Sean Carroll points out, "The PSR is kind of like that bumper sticker that says 'Everything Happens For A Reason' ". Defending the truth of the PSR has not been easy for those that endorse it. …

Continue reading Some New Arguments for the Principle of Sufficient Reason?

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

Beauty as evidence for and against God’s existence

Over the past couple of centuries, there has been a lot of skepticism with regards to the concept of 'objective' beauty. I must admit that I myself am skeptical that there is (or could be) such a thing as objective beauty. In other words, beauty really is in the eye of the beholder. Do you …

Continue reading Beauty as evidence for and against God’s existence

Autism and Deformed Epistemology

Those who are autistic (like me) tend to have a harder time believing that God exists than the general population. As I was thinking about this interesting fact, I recalled what Alvin Plantinga (yes, him again) has said in his writings about people who don't believe that God exists. In his writings on Deformed Epistemology …

Continue reading Autism and Deformed Epistemology

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

Divine Command Theory and Moral Arguments for the Existence of God

In general, moral arguments for God presuppose divine command theory (DCT). What I've noticed, however, is that philosophers tend to make a few mistakes when it comes to the relationship between DCT and moral arguments for God (MAFG). Common Mistakes One mistake is to assume that if DCT is false, then all MAFG fail. However, …

Continue reading Divine Command Theory and Moral Arguments for the Existence of God

Consciousness as evidence for and against the existence of God

The existence of consciousness has been argued to be evidence for God. That's because on classical theism we already start with a mind, which is the mind of God. But would God create minds? Would God create finite minds? Would God create human minds? These are good questions. However, even if we grant that theism …

Continue reading Consciousness as evidence for and against the existence of God

Dishonest Apologetics

It's no secret that Christian apologetics is not the same thing as Philosophy or Philosophy of Religion. If there is one thing that can get under my skin about apologetics, it is the fact that many apologists will present arguments for God's existence in an intellectually dishonest way. What's the dishonest way? Well, I think …

Continue reading Dishonest Apologetics

The Omnipotence of God and Economic Competition

If the God of classical theism exists, then God is omnipotent (all-powerful). Given that God is all-powerful, would God set up the world in such a way where humans compete for resources? The upshot is that an omnipotent Being doesn't need competition in order for humans to survive and thrive; God can bring about human …

Continue reading The Omnipotence of God and Economic Competition

Response to Timothy Perrine on Skeptical Theism and Humean Arguments from Evil

In previous posts, I've discussed skeptical theism and certain types of arguments from evil (i.e. Humean arguments from evil). My contention has been that it is plausible that skeptical theism doesn't apply to certain Humean arguments from evil, particularly Draper-style arguments from evil. Recently, however, Timothy Perrine released a paper where he contests this by …

Continue reading Response to Timothy Perrine on Skeptical Theism and Humean Arguments from Evil

On “The Limitations of Pure Skeptical Theism”

In his article, "The Limitations of Pure Skeptical Theism," Paul Draper argues that skeptical theism can't be applied to Humean arguments from evil (like Draper's own argument). To be sure, Draper repeats some of the points that he has made before. Nevertheless, it seems that (many) skeptical theists needed a refresher. Definitions As a reminder, …

Continue reading On “The Limitations of Pure Skeptical Theism”

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’

Response to ‘Capturing Christianity’ on “The Conflict Between Natural Theology and Skeptical Theism”

Cameron Bertuzzi of "Capturing Christianity" recently wrote an interesting post on the alleged conflict between skeptical theism and natural theology (i.e. arguments for God's existence). Undergirding the skeptical theist position is the idea that (on classical theism) God's reasons for allowing and doing various things, especially in particular instances, are unknown. There are various forms of skeptical …

Continue reading Response to ‘Capturing Christianity’ on “The Conflict Between Natural Theology and Skeptical Theism”

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

The Problem of Religious Diversity

If God exists, why are there so many religions? In other words, if God is all-powerful and all-good, then is it not surprising that we have so much confusion when it comes to religion? This problem is 'up there' with the problem of evil and problem of divine hiddenness. The Issue The problem of religious …

Continue reading The Problem of Religious Diversity

Religious experience as an argument for and against God’s existence

When we talk about sensory experiences, we sometimes talk about how such experiences can give justification to a belief. For example, me seeing a cat with my eyes provides a reason/justification for me to believe that there is a cat in front of me. This same move is commonly made when it comes to religious belief/experiences. …

Continue reading Religious experience as an argument for and against God’s existence

Would God give creatures knowledge via the senses?

What does it mean to be all-knowing? Can an Omniscient Being know what it's like to feel sick? Can such an entity know what it's like to feel lust? These would be examples of knowledge by experience. In my experience, theologians say that God's knowledge is merely propositional. In other words, God doesn't have experiential …

Continue reading Would God give creatures knowledge via the senses?

Would God create animals?

Would God create non-human animals? I am not merely wondering why God would create animals. What I am wondering is that, if God exists, would God* really create animals? At the very least, assuming that God would create animals, would they look like animals in the actual world? So, we can easily imagine how non-human …

Continue reading Would God create animals?

Why I don’t talk about Pascal’s Wager

Recently, I thought about why I haven't really written about Pascal's Wager. One might expect me to talk about it because I talk about belief in God (a lot) on this blog. The reason I haven't talked about the Wager is because Pascal's Wager is more concerned with pragmatic reasons for believing that God exists. That …

Continue reading Why I don’t talk about Pascal’s Wager

Free will and monotheism: Can’t live with it or without it

When it comes to God and suffering, it's rare that you do not hear the subject of free will come up. It's common to hear something along the lines of, "If humans don't have free will, then we're just puppets. Do you think God wants us to be puppets?" In fact, in some instances, one gets …

Continue reading Free will and monotheism: Can’t live with it or without it

Does it matter if God exists?

The God-debate mainly focuses on whether or not God exists; it also focuses on what God's nature is like. This blog discusses classical/traditional theism, which says that if God exists, then God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good. If that sort of God exists, wouldn't it obviously matter? Wouldn't God's existence make a difference? At first …

Continue reading Does it matter if God exists?

Argument from Boredom

Alvin Plantinga has an argument for God's existence called, "The Argument from Play and Enjoyment". Here's what Plantinga says: Fun, pleasure, humor, play, enjoyment. (Maybe not all to be thought of in the same way.) Playing: evolution: an adaptive means of preparing for adult life (so that engaging in this sort of thing as an …

Continue reading Argument from Boredom

The fine-tuning argument and alternative design explanations

The fine-tuning argument for God's existence is a very popular argument these days. One of the problems with the argument that is often overlooked is what I will call the "gap problem" or problem of alternative explanations. Roughly speaking, even if we grant that design best accounts for the fine-tuning problem, it's not clear that …

Continue reading The fine-tuning argument and alternative design explanations

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

“To be is to be perceived (Esse est percipi).” Or, “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?” – Bishop George Berkeley (1685 – 1753)

"As an idealist, Berkeley believed that nothing is real but minds and their ideas. Ideas do not exist independently of minds. Through a complicated and flawed line of reasoning he concluded that “to be is to be perceived.” Something exists only if someone has the idea of it. Though he never put the question in the …

Continue reading “To be is to be perceived (Esse est percipi).” Or, “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?” – Bishop George Berkeley (1685 – 1753)

William Lane Craig: An objection and response to Bill Craig’s cosmological argument for God’s existence

For the Kalam Argument, Bill Craig says that his argument is subject to the criticism that the cause of the universe might not exist anymore.Could this possibly be true? MaybeLikely? I don't think so.The cause that Craig discovers from the argument is that this cause is:Timeless, spaceless, immaterial, eternal, unchanging, personal. and uncaused.I think it …

Continue reading William Lane Craig: An objection and response to Bill Craig’s cosmological argument for God’s existence

What is the Historical Induction argument against the existence of God?

The argument is an argument that God does not exist. In other words, it's an argument for atheism or the truth of atheism. Before we get started, what do we mean by induction? Well induction is reasoning from a sample to a broader audience or population. For instance, "Every swan that I've ever encountered has …

Continue reading What is the Historical Induction argument against the existence of God?