![]() ![]() Everything needs an explanation of its existence.ģ. He does this by claiming a distinction between “contingent” things (which need explanation) and a “transcendent personal being” (which doesn’t). While claiming that everything needs an explanation, he then exempts his god, which of course doesn’t need explaining. Anyone can “explain” why something exists if you’re allowed to start off with something!Īdmittedly, even Craig can see that flaw, so he uses special pleading. Right, so in order to “explain why anything at all exists” you start off with something unexplained, namely God. (I) God is the best explanation why anything at all exists Only, the believer doesn’t ask that question because at that point they’ve already got to their god, and so stops. Their general tenor is actually to make things worse, trying to “explain” something by pointing to something that is even harder to explain. Lewis, Lee Strobel, Josh McDowell and many others) that only convince those who already believe. They are the sort of arguments (following in a long tradition including C. All show the pattern of deciding ones conclusions on wishful-thinking grounds and then using any amount of special pleading and spurious argument to defend them. ![]() For an atheist these are worth reviewing if only to marvel at how bad such arguments - touted as the best of a “renaissance of Christian philosophy” - actually are. William Lane Craig - Professor of Philosophy at the Talbot School of Theology - has set out in the latest edition of Philosophy Now his eight “best” arguments for the existence of God ( non-paywall access here). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |