Skip to main content

Skeptical Theism - primer for the uninitiated


Heard of skeptical theism? Perhaps not. But it's all the rage in certain religious circles. So, to get you up to speed, here's a quick primer.

There's a good chance your religious opponent will be familiar with skeptical theism and will use against you in an argument about the existence of God.  So it's wise to be prepared.

Continues here....
Labels:

Comments

Unknown said…
As I understand this Pandora's Box argument, it does not rescue the problem of evil. Because it is not an argument, that we can know god's (lack of) justifications. If we switch from problems of evil to sceptical problems, then theists still have problems, but not the one we previously argued about.
May 8, 2015 at 2:40 PM
Anonymous said…
Dr. Law,

I'm still interested in reading your paper on the Pandora's Box argument.
Please email me at mmanryATlifebiblechurch.com

Thanks,

Matt Manry
May 27, 2015 at 5:23 PM
Anonymous said…
I'm not impressed by the Pandora's box objection, at least as presented in the article. Lying is, presumably, an inherently immoral act. For God to lie to us is an active evil in which God would be engaged, not an allowance of evil towards some grander purpose. It seems the skeptical theist can consistently countenance one but not the other.
July 16, 2015 at 3:43 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen
159 comments
Read more

Aquinas on homosexuality

Thought I would try a bit of a draft out on the blog, for feedback. All comments gratefully received. No doubt I've got at least some details wrong re the Catholic Church's position... AQUINAS AND SEXUAL ETHICS Aquinas’s thinking remains hugely influential within the Catholic Church. In particular, his ideas concerning sexual ethics still heavily shape Church teaching. It is on these ideas that we focus here. In particular, I will look at Aquinas’s justification for morally condemning homosexual acts. When homosexuality is judged to be morally wrong, the justification offered is often that homosexuality is, in some sense, “unnatural”. Aquinas develops a sophisticated version of this sort of argument. The roots of the argument lie in thinking of Aristotle, whom Aquinas believes to be scientifically authoritative. Indeed, one of Aquinas’s over-arching aims was to show how Aristotle’s philosophical system is broadly compatible with Christian thought. I begin with a sketch of Arist
49 comments
Read more

Why I won't be voting Labour at the next General Election, not even to 'keep the Tories out'.

I have always voted Labour, and have often been a member of the Party, campaigning and canvassing for them. For what it’s worth, here’s my feeling about voting Labour next General Election:   1. When the left vote Labour after they move rightwards, they are encouraged to just move further right, to the point where they are now probably right of where e.g. John Major’s Tory party was. And each time the Tories go further right still. At some point we have got to stop fuelling this toxic drift to the right by making the Labour Party realise that it’s going to start costing them votes. I can’t think of anything politically more important than halting this increasingly frightening rightward slide. So I am no longer voting Labour. 2. If a new socialist party starts up, it could easily hoover up many of the 200k former LP members who have left in disgust (I’d join), and perhaps also pick up union affiliations. They could become the second biggest party by membership quite quickly. Our voting
Post a Comment
Read more