The Resurrection Hypothesis

The resurrection hypothesis states that 'God raised Jesus from the dead'. However, there is nothing about the claim "God exists" that predicts a resurrection. One must also add the claim that God wants to raise Jesus from the dead. But the problem is that there is nothing in our background knowledge that expects that God …

Continue reading The Resurrection Hypothesis

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

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”