In previous posts I argued discussions that aim at a representation of reality are a game, bound by rules of rationality and evidence. But, it’s not the only game in town and another one is apologetics ― bound by rules of contrived reason, aiming to look like rationality but aiming in a completely different direction.… Continue reading A Case Study in Apologetics
In the last post I discussed a spectrum of genres of existence. They went from a physical reality to a conceptual reality unbounded by sense data. I finished talking about the need for evidence when one is talking about the physical reality and existence, and so the appropriate follow up, so far as I see,… Continue reading Values and Evidence
What follows is 10 questions aimed at theists, along with an explanation as to why the questions are meaningful. The questions are sincere, as they have been the stumbling blocks to many a conversation about religion. What is contained in the explanations that follow the questions is not meant to limit a theist’s response, and… Continue reading Questions for Theists.
Inter-faith dialogues, despite their pretty name, should be a case of pitting infallible and mutually exclusive ideas against each other: God says this vs God says that. It’s not, and that’s a good thing. Anyone who has watched an interfaith discussion in a university, on the TV or listened to one on the radio will… Continue reading xPrae: How I defeated you so soundly (part 2: Understanding another religion)
I have heard many times from apologists and blogosphere theologians that God must be good. I am then given some variety of bad reasoning: circular arguments about God’s nature being good because goodness is defined by God’s nature, brute force arguments about God being either “Perfect” or the Creator and this is therefore just the… Continue reading Why is God good?
No. The methods of science may well be theologically neutral. An experiment runs and is either destined to accept or reject the null hypothesis. As these experiments build up and explanations build up along side them, we start to build a body of knowledge. That body of knowledge is not theologically neutral. It has theological… Continue reading Is Science Theologically Neutral?
God and the Universe have quite a lot in common. There is ambiguity about both their beginnings, their nature and their definition. A quick look: This universe is thought to have a finite beginning 13.8 billion years ago. But that depends on your definition of "universe". If you maintain that "universe" refers to this bubble… Continue reading God Vs the Universe: which is more worthy of our admiration?
Argument A: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God (1) God is a being greater than which none can be conceived (or the Greatest Conceivable Being). (2) The Greatest Conceivable Being does exist in the mind. (3) If the Greatest Conceivable Being were to exist in only the mind, we could conceive of a… Continue reading Of Gods and Unicorns: there must be a mistake with the ontological argument
Here's a part of my book, for free. I write it up this afternoon, when I should have been doing more constructive things. Nevertheless, for your cerebral entertainment, here is a subchapter on miracles. (The last paragraph, in bold; I didn't do that. Somewhere between Google Docs and WordPress it did it all by itself.… Continue reading Book Excerpt: Miracles
Jesus had a brother. This brother doubted there was anything divine about Jesus (a great guy, but God? He ain’t heavy… he’s my brother). But after Jesus’ death his brother—James—lead the Jerusalem Christians. Why would he turn from a doubter to a believer? On a related note, I received a junk email from a girl… Continue reading 19. Jesus was Resurrected, so Who do You Think Resurrected Him?