I stole this from a comment by Occam’s Blog:
(1) If a claim X is plausible and accepted by a large number of intelligent people, and if accepting X would result in enormous benefits if X is true, then we should spend some time investigating X to see whether or not it is true.
(2) Christianity is plausible and accepted by a large number of intelligent people.
(3) Accepting Christianity would result in enormous benefits if Christianity is true.
(4) Therefore, we should spend some time investigating Christianity to see whether or not it is true.
This is a post I’m re-blogging from The Cartesian Theist:
Prove God! [Part1]
This has to be the single most commonly made demand on me as a theist on the internet. Curiously I don’t recall ever having been given this demand in a real conversation (that is a conversation which takes place fact to face for those of you who still communicate in the old-fashioned way!) but one that only happens on the web. I have no idea if there’s something to that or not.
I am going to defend the view that this is an unreasonable request and therefore, if I am right, not meeting an unreasonable request is quite reasonable.
In chapter 12 of Heretics by G. K. Chesterton, he says, “We cannot go back to an ideal of reason and sanity. For mankind has discovered that reason does not lead to sanity.”
I think what he means here, is that superficial or the popular conception of “reason” does not lead to sanity. That reason which says, “I believe in only what I can see.” Such a statement begs the question, “Where did all that you see come from.” And we are led by that question to Hebrews 11:13, “By Continue reading
This is a brief statement of the Transcendental Argument from Carm.org:
Logical absolutes exist. Logical absolutes are conceptual by nature, are not dependent on space, time, physical properties, or human nature. They are not the product of the physical universe (space, time, matter), because if the physical universe were to disappear, logical absolutes would still be true. Logical Absolutes are not the product of human minds, because human minds are different, not absolute. But, since logical absolutes are always true everywhere, and not dependent upon human minds, it must be an absolute transcendent mind that is authoring them. This mind is called God. Furthermore, if there are only two options to account for something, i.e., God and no God, and one of them is negated, then by default the other position is validated.