Showing posts with label Apologetics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apologetics. Show all posts
Alister McGrath is the Professor of Theology, Ministry and Education, and Head of the Centre for Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College, London. McGrath has written numerous books including "Christian Theology: An Introduction" and "The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine". Richard Dawkins was previously the Professor for Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford. Dawkins is the founder of the Richard Dawkins Foundation and is the author of the bestseller "The God Delusion".
It seems to be that the main talk in this debate/discussion ends up being the question of why would an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God seemingly act in some situations and not in others? The discussion between the two on this question actually reaches a point of no return where they are forced to disagree and move along. Worth a look, check it out.
It seems to be that the main talk in this debate/discussion ends up being the question of why would an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God seemingly act in some situations and not in others? The discussion between the two on this question actually reaches a point of no return where they are forced to disagree and move along. Worth a look, check it out.
In talk at the University of California, Koukl talks about the impacts of a belief system founded on moral relativism. He says anyone who espouses moral relativism is actually, by definition, impotent to object to the action of any other being. Koukl talks about what he deems the myth of moral neutrality and the myth tolerance which moral relativism likes to set a double standard for. He also provides a series of fatal flaws of relativism which includes:
- A moral relativist can never say that someone did something wrong.
- A moral relativist can never say that there is evil in any capacity.
- A moral relativist can never demand tolerance.
- A moral relativist can never actually live out their beliefs.
- A moral relativist is a type of passive-aggressive.
» To get the audio for the talk visit the Veritas Forum. The notes to follow along with this talk can be downloaded here. «
Veritas48, aka Noah, is one of the most popular YouTube apologist for modern theism. He is a graduate from the Biola University apologetics program and has defended theism, particularity Christianity, with hundreds of videos. He present a clear, honest, respectful and reflective view of Christianity and is a light on a hill in terms of integrity on YouTube. You can view his YouTube account here or his blog here.
At the start of 2010 Noah announced the start of his series on the Presumption of Atheism along with other popular theistic youtubers (who won't be listed here). Noah has four videos in the series, one introducing the series, the next clarifying some objections, one on getting the project started, and finally a large video on the actual case of the Presumption of Atheism. I will only embed the larger last video in here but will place links to all four below.
In this video, Noah covers topics on the Presumption of Atheism including the expectation of evidence and the expectation to have knowledge of the evidence. He presents a solid case for the presumption of atheism and shows why any atheist has an equal share in the burden of proof when it comes to the existence or non-existence of God.
- The Presumption of Atheism: A Project
- The Presumption of Atheism: Clarifying the Argument
- The Presumption of Atheism: Moving Along
- The Presumption of Atheism: The Absence of Evidence (embeded video below)
This debate was particularly interesting because it was actually set up as a series of mini debates. A quote is read and each side was given a three minute response and a one minute rebuttal. I believe there was a total of seven quotes read on various issues between atheism, theism and apologetics with varying degrees of agreement between the two participants.
Veritas48, aka Noah, is one of the more popular YouTube apologist for modern theism. He is a graduate from the Biola University apologetics program and has defended theism, particularity Christianity, with hundreds of videos. He present a clear, honest, respectful and reflective view of Christianity and is a light on a hill in terms of integrity on YouTube. You can view his YouTube account here or his blog here.
In this video Noah presents his version of the Axiological (moral) Argument for the existence of God. He explains how if absolute moral standards are to exist at all, then there must be something to set that standard. The reason this video is so valuable is because not only does Noah present a clear version of the argument, but he critics seven common alternative views on morality outside of Christian theism, they are:
- Ethical Subjectivism (Moral Relativism)
- Conventionalism (Cultural Relativism)
- Ethical Naturalism
- Moral Skepticism (Epistemological Version)
- Moral Skepticism (Ontological Version)
- Ethical Emotivism
- Ethical Platonism
Noah presents one of the most clear and concise presentations of the Kalam Cosmological Argument I have heard to date. He gives the argument not in it's typical syllogistic form but in the form of three exhaustive dilemmas:
- The universe either had a beginning or no beginning.
- Given 1, the beginning of the universe was either caused or uncaused.
- Given 2, the cause of the universe was either personal or impersonal.
This formulations seems to make the progression of the Kalam argument a little clearer to the laymen to follow step by step. Noah also goes over seven popular objections to the argument and why he believes they are invalid.
Moreland's opening statement consists of arguments from the origin of a finite universe, the fine tuning of the universe, biological information, objective moral law, and the historical reliability of the New Testament. Martin's opening statement contains arguments from the unfalsifiability fallacy, the localized activities of God, the impossibility of the moral standard, the problem of evil, and that the Christian faith should not have reason.
In his opening speech, Craig presents his arguments from existence, fine-tuning, moral values, the resurrection of Jesus, and the personal experience of the Holy Spirit. Stenger's opening response consists of four main points: the attributes of the Christian God are self-contradictory, tributes of the Christian God are inconsistent with what we know about the world, naturalism is a better explanation than supernaturalism, and the actions of the Christian God should be observable but are not. My favourite point was a response Craig made on Stengers objection of justice vs. mercy; Craig points out that this is not a contradiction, but actually the great beauty of the Christian faith. Overall this was a pretty good debate, worth the listen.
William Lane Craig is author of numerous books and founder of Reasonable Faith. He is Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology. Criag is one of the most widespread name for Christian apologetics in North America and is considered "the finest Christian apologist of the last half century.”
In this talk Craig demonstrates that without God, life is utterly void of meaning, value and purpose. He goes into detail on how each of them are meaningless using aspects of the moral argument. Craig shows how even the great atheist Friedrich Nietzsche was forced to face this conclusion of absolute nihilism.
» You can find the PDF of Craig's talk on the absurdity of life without god here. The audio is available at the Veritas Forum. «
In this talk by Collins, presented by the Veritas Forum, we are given a brief overview of his work on the HGP and much of his personal testimony before getting into some scientific evidences for the existence of a God. He also coins the name for BioLogos and presents the goals of the foundation.
This debate between two giants of religious discussion took place on April 7th, 2010 at the University of Notre Dame. The debate topic is "Is Religion the Problem?" and is a continuation of "The God Debate". Dinesh D'Souza is the author of books such as "What's So Great about Christianity". Christopher Hitchens is the author of numerous books such as "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything".
- Chris Reese: Essay Series Forward
- Brian Auten: Essay Series Introduction
- Tawa Anderson: Does God Exist?
- Jim Wallace: The Best Explanation
- Wes Widner: Coherent, Consistent & Livable
- Richard Gerhardt: The Failure of Naturalism
- Bob Perry: Defrocking the Priests of Scientism
- Peter Grice: Orthogonal Complexity
- Chad Gross: Cumulative Reasons for Christianity
- Shelby Cade: Prophecy and Resurrection
- Luke Nix: Making Sense of the Resurrection
- Aaron Brake: The Facts of the Resurrection
- Amy Hall: The Historical Event of the Resurrection
- James Patrick Holding: The Impossible Faith
- Stephen J. Bedard: Christianity and Other Ancient Religions
- Anthony Horvath: Christianity Proved by the Nature of the Jewish Nation
- Mariano Grinbank: The Euthyphro Dichotomy
- Marcus McElhaney: Christianity is Objectively True
- Vocab Malone / Paul D. Adams: The Gospels Tell Me So
- Glenn Hendrickson: Christianity Explains Logic
- Brian Colón: Atheism: A Falsified Hypothesis
- Kyle Deming: Testing Christianity's Core Truth Claims
- Matthew Flannagan: Showing Christianity is True
- Brian Auten: The Wise Man Seeks God
Craig spends most of his time on the problems with Bart Ehrman's approach to the historical conception of Jesus and the resurrection.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
