Gnu Atheism on the March: The Real Issue: argument from efficient causality

Gnu Atheism on the March: The Real Issue: argument from efficient causality


via Gnu Atheism on the March: The Real Issue: argument from efficient causality.

via Gnu Atheism on the March: The Real Issue: argument from efficient causality.

Advertisements

With All I Am

God

Theodore M. Drange presented, in  the Society of Humanist Philosophers published journal of Philosophy Philo,  10 incompatible properties arguments against the existence of God.  In this article I explored his 7th argument, namely the incompatibility of a nonphysical person.

Drange outlined “The Nonphysical-vs.-Personal Argument” as follows:

1. If God exists, then he is nonphysical.
2. If God exists, then he is a person (or a personal being).
3. A person (or personal being) needs to be physical.
4. Hence, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1-3).(Drange 1998: url)

Since Judeo-Christians agrees with the truthfulness of Drange’s premise 1 & 2, if premise 3 is also true, then I believe theists are forced to the conclusion that a God, who is  nonphysical  and person, does not exist.

Drange quoted Kai Nielsen as championing premise 3,  namely, “we have no understanding of ‘a person’ without ‘a…

View original post 552 more words

What twaddle, but WLC revels in twaddle anyway. Why, he believes what uncorroborated writers of uncorroborated tall tales prattle and he let’s the holy spirit guide him no matter the evidence, but as with all other religious experience, its his own mind telling him what he wants to believe, as no such spirit exists! So much for dogmatism and faith, however defined!

Evangelical Realism

(Book: On Guard, by William Lane Craig. Chapter 7: “What About Suffering?”)

William Lane Craig deals with the problem of suffering by assuming that it’s not really an intellectual problem, since he can imagine the possibility that God might be working under some set of unknown constraints. He may not have any grounds (other than wishful thinking) for supposing this to be true, but as long as he can claim that atheists are unable to prove the contrary, he considers the intellectual argument a non-problem for God.

That leaves what he calls “the emotional problem of suffering.” It’s a bit misnamed, because the problem isn’t our response to suffering. Suffering is evil, and people should have a negative reaction to it. When you see one person suffering, and you know that someone else can help them and simply refuses to do so, without any justification for their refusal, then…

View original post 2,033 more words