About a week ago, I mentioned that a YouTube atheist named Dhorpatan responded to some of my comments about the KCA. Here is my response to him. 1. The first premise of the KCA is not a “dishonest ad hoc construction designed to exclude God.” This appears to be the same criticism of Dan Barker, who [...]
Looks like Dhorpatan himself has decided to respond to a post where I endorsed Veritas48′s defense of the KCA. He uses Dan Barker-esque criticisms of the first premise and argues that kalam equivocates on its use of the term “beginning” in regard to the second. Apparently, he also takes issue with my statement that such [...]
This formulation comes from Scott Sullivan.1 1. Dependent beings exist 2. Either dependent beings exist because of an infinite series of other dependent beings or because of an independent being. 3. Not because of infinite series of other dependent beings 4. Therefore because of an independent being which theists call God The first premise is [...]
Tags: cosmological argument
The short answer: No This type of argument is especially common amongst young adherents of the new atheism. In brief, it alleges that belief in God is the product of the ignorant and weak masses who sought to find comfort in an imaginary friend. The main implication of this is that belief in God is therefore false, outdated, or [...]
YouTube apologist Veritas48 provides an in-depth treatment of the moral argument. He covers several preliminary issues and then critiques relativism and other competing theories of ethics. The video is roughly 42 minutes long. Skip to 00:45 for a table of contents.
Tags: Moral argument, Veritas48
