- 200 (or so) Arguments for Atheism
- Index: Assessing Theism
- Why Mainstream Scholars Think Jesus Was A Failed Apocalyptic Prophet
- What's Wrong With Plantinga's Proper Functionalism?
- Draper's Critique of Behe's Design Argument
- The Failure of Plantinga's Free Will Defense
- 100 Arguments for God Answered
- Thomistic Arguments for God Answered
- On a Common Apologetic Strategy
- On Caring About and Pursuing Truth
- A Priori Naturalism, A Priori Inerrantism, and the Bible
What kind of friend would be if I didn't send you a postcard? Here ya' go. Today I'm off to Giverny to take a peek at Monet's gardens. After that, I'm off to Amsterdam for two days. I hope to send you another postcard when I get there. From there, I go to the philosophy conference for two days at the university of Cologne. Then I'm back to the States on the 30th.
Hope all is well with you and yours,
This paper really needed to be written.
UPDATE: Paul Copan has written a rejoinder to Morriston's paper. It can be found here. A tip of the hat to TKD for the link. I leave it to the reader to decide whether Copan's reply is adequate.
Marilyn Adams is a prominent philosopher of religion, along with her husband, Robert Adams. Both recently taught at Oxford, but have since accepted senior offers at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (starting next Fall).
Paul K. Moser is the Chair of the Department of Philosophy at Loyola University (Chicago). His recent book, The Elusive God: Reorienting Religious Epistemology, is a novel and important defense of Christian theism.
Btw, he has another novel defense of Christian theism (The Evidence for God: Religious Knowledge Reexamined) coming out in December. It looks as though he will argue that the evidence for the Christian God is the moral transformation of believers.
"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
The plain reading of the text supports this, but it's further corroborated by standard conservative exegetical commentaries. Here's a representative sampling, taken from the Expositor's Bible Commentary:
Thus, from the passage above, it seems that Paul thinks that non-believers suppress the obvious truth about an evident God, and that the obviousness of the existence and nature of God is seen through the Creation. And if that's right, then it seems that the cost of the humble claims apologists make about the evidence for theism is holding a view that entails that Paul was wrong: what Paul says in the epistle to the Romans is false. It seems to me, then, that apologists have a choice: (i) defend the claim that the evidence makes the existence and nature of a theistic God evident, or (ii) reject conservative Christianity.
1. Either the existence and nature of God are clearly seen through the creation or the apostle Paul was wrong.2. The existence and nature of God are not clearly seen through the creation (it's possible to survey the evidence for theism, and yet rationally disbelieve, or at least suspend judgement).3. Therefore, the apostle Paul was wrong. (from 1 and 2)4. If the apostle Paul was wrong, then conservative Christian theism is false.5. Therefore, conservative Christian theism is false. (from 3 and 4)
I'm going to a Philosophy workshop in Germany in a few weeks. I'll be in Paris from the 24th to the 27th, and Cologne from the 28th to the 29th. Any advice about food, lodging, pubs, etc. would be greatly appreciated. And if you're in the area, I'd be happy to meet up with you for a beer!
Schmid, Joseph C. " The End is Near: Grim Reapers and Endless Futures ", Mind (forthcoming). Abstract: José Benardete developed a...