Skip to main content

Index: Assessing Theism in General and Christianity in Particular

Note: This is a work in progress.

0. Preliminaries:
0.1 On caring about and pursuing truth: here
0.2 On faith and reason: here and here.
0.3 On the theistic conception of God: here
0.4 On a Common Apologetic Strategy: here
0.5 On a Common Apologetic Fallacy: here
0.6 On Theism and the Burden of Proof: here.

1. Evaluation of Arguments for Theism
1.1 Cosmological arguments
1.1.1 The Leibnizian cosmological argument: part 1, part 2, part 3. Also: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.
1.1.2 The kalam cosmological argument: here, herehere, here, here, here, here, here, and here (scroll down to the comments), here.
1.1.3 Thomistic cosmological arguments (and others): here, here.
1.1.4 O'Connor's abductive cosmological argument: here.
1.2 Design arguments:
1.2.1 Paley-style versions and fine-tuning versions: Here, here, here, here, here. See also here, here, and here, here, here, here, here.
1.2.2 Behe's irreducible complexity version: Part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5, part 6. See also here, here.
1.2.3 Dembski's explanatory filter version: here, here, here.
1.2.4 Meyer's DNA version: here.
1.3 The ontological argument: here, herehere, here, here.
1.4 The moral argument: here, here, here, here.
1.5 Arguments from religious experience: here, here, here.
1.6 Arguments From Consciousness: Here, here, here.
1.7 The argument from abstract objects: here, here, here.
1.8 The argument from reason: here.
1.9 The argument from the effectiveness of mathematics: here.
1.10 Plantinga's argument from anti-realism: here.
1.11 Plantinga's argument from proper function: here, here, here, here.
1.12 Plantinga's Reformed Epistemology: herehere, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.
1.13 Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism (EAAN): here, herehere, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, see the comments section here, here, here, here.
1.14 Craig's Reformed Epistemology: here
1.15 Presuppositional apologetics: here, here.
1.16 Moser's case for rational belief: Here.
1.17 The argument from common consent: here.
1.18 Cumulative case arguments:
1.18.1 a general point: here
1.18.2 Swinburne's version: here, here, here.
1.19 Pragmatic arguments (overview here)
1.19.1 Pascal's Wager: here, here.
1.19.2 James' Will to Believe argument: here (skip down to section 1.3 of the outline), here, here.
1.19.3 Craig's arguments against atheistic morality, moral motivation, meaning, and purpose: here, herehere, here, here.

2. Evaluation of Arguments Against Theism
2.1 The Logical Problem of Evil: herehere, here, herehere, here, here, here, here.
2.2 The evidential problem of evil: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.
2.3 The argument from religious diversity: here
2.4 Arguments from divine hiddenness, religious ambiguity, and reasonable non-belief: here, here.
2.5 The argument from evolution: here
2.6 The argument from the mind's dependence on the brain: here
2.7 The argument from the demographics of theism: here, here.
2.8 The argument from unreliable mechanisms for religious belief: here.
2.9 The argument from reasonable religious disagreement: here, here.
2.10 The argument from the impropriety of worship: here.
2.11 Arguments from the impropriety of belief: here, here.
2.12 The argument from ordinary morality: here, here.
2.13 The argument from material causality: here, here, here, here.
2.14 The argument from abstract objects: here.
2.15 The from revulsion/ugliness: here, here.
2.16 The argument from environmental mismatch: here.
2.17 The argument from meaning in life: here, here.
2.18 Ontological arguments against theim: here, here.
2.19 The argument for matter's necessity: here.

3. Evaluation of Arguments for Chrisitanity
3.1 Arguments for the reliability of the New Testament: here, here, here
3.2 Arguments for the deity of Jesus: here
3.3 Arguments for the resurrection of Jesus: here, here
4. Arguments Against Christian Theism
4.1 The argument for Jesus as a failed apocalyptic prophet: here and here (scroll down to the comments -- not the post)
4.2 Arguments against the reliability of the New Testament
4.3 Arguments from divinely-caused and/or mandated evil in the Old Testament: here, here, here, and here here
4.4 The argument from the doctrine of everlasting punishment: here, here.
4.5 The argument from evolution: here
4.6 Hume's argument against the rationality of belief in miracles: here, here, here, here, here, here, here,
4.7 The problem of identifying miracles given the Bible's hypothesis of "the Devil's Lying Wonders": here.
4.8 The argument from scientific evidence for the ineffectiveness of prayer: here, here, here. here.
4.9 The argument from the powerlessness of the gospel
4.10 The argument from non-obviousness: here.
4.11 The argument from material causality: here.
4.12 The argument from abstract objects: here.


John D said…
Definitely adding this to my bookmarks. Great stuff.
exapologist said…
Thanks, John.
Mitaad said…
Very nice indeed, thank you
Matt McCormick said…
This is a really useful list, Ex. Consider building this into the template of your site somehow so that this is quickly accessed. I have been putting links to all of my posts under general headings on the side of my site ( and it seems to get people to look at older posts a lot more than having to browse posts by their chronological order. MM
exapologist said…
Thanks, Matt. Great idea. I think I'll take up your advice on that.
Angra Mainyu said…
Great list, thanks.

FYI: It seems that the first link to the moral argument doesn't work.
exapologist said…
Thanks, Angra. Fixed.

Popular posts from this blog

Epicurean Cosmological Arguments for Matter's Necessity

One can find, through the writings of Lucretius, a powerful yet simple Epicurean argument for matter's (factual or metaphysical) necessity. In simplest terms, the argument is that since matter exists, and since nothing can come from nothing, matter is eternal and uncreated, and is therefore at least a factually necessary being. 
A stronger version of Epicurus' core argument can be developed by adding an appeal to something in the neighborhood of origin essentialism. The basic line of reasoning here is that being uncreated is an essential property of matter, and thus that the matter at the actual world is essentially uncreated.
Yet stronger versions of the argument could go on from there by appealing to the principle of sufficient reason to argue that whatever plays the role of being eternal and essentially uncreated does not vary from world to world, and thus that matter is a metaphysically necessary being.
It seems to me that this broadly Epicurean line of reasoning is a co…

CfP: Inquiry: New Work on the Existence of God

In recent years, methods and concepts in logic, metaphysics and epistemology have become more and more sophisticated. For example, much new, subtle and interesting work has been done on modality, grounding, explanation and infinity, in both logic, metaphysics as well as epistemology. The three classical arguments for the existence of God – ontological arguments, cosmological arguments and fine-tuning arguments – all turn on issues of modality, grounding, explanation and infinity. In light of recent work, these arguments can - and to some extent have - become more sophisticated as well. Inquiry hereby calls for new and original papers in the intersection of recent work in logic, metaphysics and epistemology and the three main types of arguments for the existence of God. 

The deadline is 31 January 2017. Direct queries to einar.d.bohn at

Andrew Moon's New Paper on Recent Work in Reformed Epistemology... the latest issue of Philosophy Compass. Here's the abstract:
Reformed epistemology, roughly, is the thesis that religious belief can be rational without argument. After providing some background, I present Plantinga's defense of reformed epistemology and its influence on religious debunking arguments. I then discuss three objections to Plantinga's arguments that arise from the following topics: skeptical theism, cognitive science of religion, and basicality. I then show how reformed epistemology has recently been undergirded by a number of epistemological theories, including phenomenal conservatism and virtue epistemology. I end by noting that a good objection to reformed epistemology must criticize either a substantive epistemological theory or the application of that theory to religious belief; I also show that the famous Great Pumpkin Objection is an example of the former. And if a copy should make its way to my inbox...

UPDATE: Thanks!