Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 151 results found
An increasingly more common stance toward the Christian claims is skepticism.  I've heard and read this kind of position more and more.  The position seems to presume that belief requires a burden of proof that hasn't yet been met.  Sometimes the kind of evidence asked for - or the amount of evidence requested - is unreasonable and the wrong kind of standard.  Some skeptics seem to take their posture as not requiring justification itself, but that's not so.  At some point, in the face of evidence, skepticism itself needs to be justified.  Skep
The problem is this:  You don't get anything new out of a heap, not matter how big it is, that isn't put into the heap.  Yet, a physicalist view of human beings has to either deny consciousness or explain that somehow the heap creates a startlingly new kind of feature of human beings.  A heap of physical cells cannot beget something new like consciousness.
Well, it's real.  But it's not about reality.  It's about personal preferences and personal meaning.  That's the presumption behind Dan Brown's view of religion in his books and it's the increasingly common one in the world.  NYT columnist Ross Douthat explains this very clearly:
Michael Sean Winters, in his evaluation of President Obama's speech at Notre Dame Sunday (and Winters is a supporter of the President), nails an important epistemological issue that is bandied about quite a lot these days with the usual recommendation being wrong a wrong prescription because the diagnosis has mistaken two fields.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.  That's what I kept thinking my review should be as I watched the movie this afternoon.  Same old myths and cliches repeated, not only from "The Da Vinci Code," but from the general culture who don't ever seem to attempt to actually double-check the facts or interact with critics.  Gee, it gets very tiring.  Who are the parochial ones?  I'd be tempted to leave it at "blah" except the themes of "Angels &
There were two things Christopher Hitchens said in the debate Saturday night at Biola.
We're often asked where to study apologetics more formally.  Here is a very useful list.
Apparently, Richard Dawkins is speaking at Michigan State University next week.  Someone asked me what question I would ask Professor Dawkins if I had the chance.  Here is what I came up with:
Our friend Jim Wallace from PleaseConvinceMe.com has a great weekly podcast, and the latest one is on truth and skepticism and the games skeptics play.
From the Evangelical Philosophical Society blog: