Category Archives: Apologetics

Does Theism Foster Scepticism? | Reasonable Faith

Does Theism Foster Scepticism? | Reasonable Faith — These Q&A by Dr. William Lane Craig come right to my Inbox.  I found this one particularly interesting.  It mentions Plantinga’s argument against naturalism, Descarte’s evil demon (with a deceptive God version), as … Continue reading

Posted in William Lane Craig | Leave a comment

Can you turn these into t-shirts and images for me?

If you know how to design these t-shirts, contact me!  I want ichthus77.com somewhere on each t-shirt.  No pocket t-shirts, and no close-fitting t-shirts.  I hate white t-shirts, primary colors and pastels.  I will give this project to whomever can … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics | 3 Comments

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.11: Cosmological Arguments

I very much enjoyed this chapter from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics on cosmological arguments. There are three:  Principal of Sufficient Reason (Leibniz), Kalam Cosmological Argument (Muslim theologians, St. Bonaventure, WLC, etc.), and what I’d like to call the Non-eternal Heat Death Argument (cool YouTube … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Answering Lawrence Krauss’ marking Higgs Boson as "Godless" Particle

Scientists have found a subatomic particle they think may be the long-invoked Higgs Boson.  In a blog called Cosmic Log on MSNBC.com, Alan Boyle quotes an email from Lawrence Krauss that deems the Higgs Boson the “Godless Particle”. To learn … Continue reading

Posted in God Particle | Leave a comment

New Additions to "Blogs" and Apologetics Daily

Christian Apologetics Alliance and its off-shoot, Apologetics Bloggers Alliance, have grown between my departure and return to Facebook, requiring some updates to my Blogs page, and, here shortly, Apologetics Daily: Appeared to Blogly – Chad McIntosh http://appearedtoblogly.wordpress.com Attempts at Honesty – … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.10: The Ontological Argument

This chapter from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics on the ontological argument will probably boggle my mind forever.  Here’s what I’ve got, though. The first premise below is okay, because the idea of a perfect being is conceivable (not contradictory). Anselm’s first ontological argument:1.  God … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.9: In Defense of Theistic Arguments

One thing I found helpful in this chapter of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics was the distinction between general revelation and natural theology.  Not all general revelation is ‘natural’–“God may have revealed himself in a way not susceptible to argumentation.  If so, this general revelation … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.8: Faith, Risk and Rationality

Selected favorite quotes from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics: p. 158:  “Pascal does not mention hell overtly in his famous argument.” p. 161:  “First, prudential matters do not determine beliefs; they merely prime the pump for investigation and consideration.  One must consider the credibility … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.7: Why Truth Matters Most

Selected favorite quotes from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics: p. 147-148:  “most postmodernists are not skeptics but nonrealists.  Knowledge for them is not difficult but easy: just assent to the language game in which we find ourselves–unless we deem it a totalizing metanarrative.” p. … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Norris' Epistemology, Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

The Humean-Platonic tripartite (Ought-Is-Belief) theory of (moral) knowledge

Our beliefs, moral or otherwise, in order to be knowledge, must be ‘both’ justified (ought) by reasons ‘and’ true (is) to reality, satisfying both Plato and Hume.  Read my latest post all about that here. About Portfolio Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Request Project

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment