
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


In this final episode on the teleological argument, I look at a number of objections that have been raised against the argument and demonstrate why none of them successfully undermine it.
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
Having previously established four levels of fine-tuning in the universe, I set out to explain the cause of that fine-tuning. I explore chance and physical necessity and conclude that both are inadequate. The only adequate explanation also happens to be the best explanation: design. Who or what is the source of that design? I conclude that it must be a personal agent and necessary being like God. Finally, I conclude with six tips for sharing the teleological argument with others.
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
I provide a number of examples for the last two levels of fine-tuning: the physical constants and our local solar system. Both exhibit jaw-dropping levels of fine-tuning that beg for an explanation.
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
I begin my mini-series on the teleological argument by defining what scientists mean when they describe a feature of our universe as "fine-tuned," give examples to show that most scientists affirm the reality of fine-tuning, and then explore two levels of fine tuning (the initial conditions of our universe, natural laws).
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
The teleological argument - or design argument - for God's existence hold that that there is evidence of design in the universe, and this design is best explained by theism. I summarize the argument and respond to a couple of common objections in this 1-N-Done episode. Next week, I'll begin a mini-series on the argument that goes into more detail.
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
I examine eight more objections to the moral argument and provide a response.
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
I offer five tactics for presenting the moral argument. Then, I respond to three objections against the moral argument:
(1) One doesn’t have to believe in God to be moral
(2) If you would still be good if God didn’t exist, then God is irrelevant to morality
(3) Is something good because God wills it, or does God will it because it is good (Euthyphro Dilemma)?
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
I provide six aspects of our moral experience that are best explained by a theistic God. This is the heart of the moral argument for God's existence.
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
I round out my critique of non-theistic explanations for morality, including the view that morality is a brute fact, the view that logic can ground morality, the view that science can explain morality, and the best of all non-theistic explanations: moral Platonism.
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
Spent the entire episode offering 11 critiques against the most popular non-theistic account of morality: Evolutionary Ethics.
Web: ThinkingtoBelieve.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: facebook.com/thinkingtobelieve
Twitter & Gettr: @thinking2believ
Truth: @ThinkingToBelieve
Parler: @thinkingtobelieve
From the publisher's feed