I have it!

[Rival]

This is so expensive, but I found it relatively cheap second-hand today How good this is to someone on a Theology course you will never know.

 

[Rival]

 

[YmirGF]

Cool beans!

 

[Aupmanyav]

William Lane Craig says it all. Hope your intelligence survives the completion of the course.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I found the the Aron Lucas Review to be more than a little daunting. I hope, for your sake, that the book proves less so.

 

[Rival]

William Lane Craig says it all. Hope your intelligence survives the completion of the course.

He is a well-regarded philosopher. He does well in his field.

I found the the Aron Lucas Review to be more than a little daunting. I hope, for your sake, that the book proves less so.

It has many good reviews, but I'll find out for myself. Some books are good, some bad. Given it has different contributors it's probably going to be a mixed bag. Our teacher is good so he'll probably be responsive to criticism on this book.

 

[Left Coast]

He is a well-regarded philosopher. He does well in his field.

Indeed. Anyone who thinks that guy isn't bright has never heard him talk.

 

[Yerda]

Indeed. Anyone who thinks that guy isn't bright has never heard him talk.

He's the bogeyman to a lot of online atheists. Seems very bright and articulate and defends his positions with care, imo. I always enjoy his talks and debates even if I don't think his arguments get him over the line (not that I'm particularly qualified to judge).

 

[syo]

Good luck. You'll need it.

 

[exchemist]

Thank goodness there is no "argument from design" chapter here.

But the fine-tuning one will be pretty suspect, I should imagine.

The others sound more interesting.

 

[Yerda]

But the fine-tuning one will be pretty suspect, I should imagine.

The author of the chapter expresses it in short,

Premise 1. The existence of the fine-tuning is not improbable under theism.

Premise 2. The existence of the fine-tuning is very improbable under the atheistic single-universe hypothesis.

Conclusion: From premises (1) and (2) and the prime principle of confirmation, it follows that the fine-tuning data provides strong evidence to favor of the design hypothesis over the atheistic single-universe hypothesis.


Which I don't think should change anyone's mind, but I do think is a reasonable way of looking at it.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Thank goodness there is no "argument from design" chapter here.

But the fine-tuning one will be pretty suspect, I should imagine.

The others sound more interesting.

Agree. Fine tuning certainly doesn't fly with me in general.

At least as it applies to the suggestion ID is involved, with some exception made for natural forces and living matter in creating a temporary stable environment.

 

[Heyo]

He's the bogeyman to a lot of online atheists. Seems very bright and articulate and defends his positions with care, imo. I always enjoy his talks and debates even if I don't think his arguments get him over the line (not that I'm particularly qualified to judge).

He sure knows how to talk. And for an apologist he's very careful to not obviously commit to many logical fallacies. But he recently put his foot in his mouth and the nickname that he earned with it will probably stick.