Just got me a new edition of C. Stephen Evans Philosophy of Religion second Edition. Don't know if it's the best but it's one of my favorite. It includes new material on arguments and new material on Divine foreknowledge and human freedom and Reformed Epistemology. What's of most intrest to me is the new updated material on the problem of evil and suffering that adds a discussion on the problem of hell. There's also a discussion that covers new developments from cognitive psychology and naturalism as well as the fine-tuning of the cosmos.
Philosophy Of Religion, Second Edition. Thinking about Faith
I'm not so sure about the first one from Plantinga, it may be the most significant work of the decade but putting it on #1 makes people feel it has some merit, it doesn't. A comment there says: ----- Kyle: I’m curious. Does this make you want to revise your opinion of reformed epistemology as dumbest idea of the century? ----- I think the same.
Piratefish, my point was that maybe those who think reformed epistemology is so weak should reconsider whether they have understood it properly because it is taken seriously by a lot of professional philosophers - even if it hasn't convinced many of them.
Why do you think it is significant but without merit?
Jesus Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium by Bart D. Ehrman
Great book. He show that Jesus was an appocalypticist. In Mark 9:1, Jesus states "Verily I say unto you, there will be some of you still standing when my Father arrives in glory in his Kingdom." You see, it was supposed to happen then not milleniums later. God's Kingdom was going to come down to earth and the downtrodden were going to be lift up into this Kingdom and the powerful were going to be destroyed. It didn't happen, which, to me, means that Jesus was simply another failed prophet.
Kyle> I didn't come to the site last few days and didn't know someone responded.
I think RE is significant but without merit for the same reason as Anselm's ontological argument, one creates god out of thin air and the other creates believing in god the same way. RE was significant not because it was solid, but because there wasn't any other significant works in that same period, so that tells you something about these philosophies of religion.
These are all philosophers' delights just as you can argue an invisible little gremlin lives in my garage, or the glass of water in front of me now doesn't exist. These are all possible, but are they probable or acceptable? Before you want to argue further I can pretty much tell you how it'll end, we'll come away from this discussion standing right where we both started. The bottom line is your theistic worldview affects how you see RE, which atheists don't have that constraint, so if you want a discussion go ahead, but just as you do this think of the thousands of similar discussions going on on the internet this very moment, it may be just as fruitful seeking out some good counter arguments and just look at them than wasting valuable time. My opinion is that RE may not be the dumbest idea of the century, but it sure is one of the dumbest.
6 comments:
Just got me a new edition of C. Stephen Evans Philosophy of Religion second Edition. Don't know if it's the best but it's one of my favorite. It includes new material on arguments and new material on Divine foreknowledge and human freedom and Reformed Epistemology. What's of most intrest to me is the new updated material on the problem of evil and suffering that adds a discussion on the problem of hell. There's also a discussion that covers new developments from cognitive psychology and naturalism as well as the fine-tuning of the cosmos.
Philosophy Of Religion, Second Edition. Thinking about Faith
C. Steven Evans & R. Zachary Manis
I'm not so sure about the first one from Plantinga, it may be the most significant work of the decade but putting it on #1 makes people feel it has some merit, it doesn't. A comment there says:
-----
Kyle:
I’m curious. Does this make you want to revise your opinion of reformed epistemology as dumbest idea of the century?
-----
I think the same.
Christopher Hitchens' God Is Not Great
Piratefish, my point was that maybe those who think reformed epistemology is so weak should reconsider whether they have understood it properly because it is taken seriously by a lot of professional philosophers - even if it hasn't convinced many of them.
Why do you think it is significant but without merit?
Jesus Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium by Bart D. Ehrman
Great book. He show that Jesus was an appocalypticist. In Mark 9:1, Jesus states "Verily I say unto you, there will be some of you still standing when my Father arrives in glory in his Kingdom." You see, it was supposed to happen then not milleniums later. God's Kingdom was going to come down to earth and the downtrodden were going to be lift up into this Kingdom and the powerful were going to be destroyed. It didn't happen, which, to me, means that Jesus was simply another failed prophet.
Kyle>
I didn't come to the site last few days and didn't know someone responded.
I think RE is significant but without merit for the same reason as Anselm's ontological argument, one creates god out of thin air and the other creates believing in god the same way. RE was significant not because it was solid, but because there wasn't any other significant works in that same period, so that tells you something about these philosophies of religion.
These are all philosophers' delights just as you can argue an invisible little gremlin lives in my garage, or the glass of water in front of me now doesn't exist. These are all possible, but are they probable or acceptable? Before you want to argue further I can pretty much tell you how it'll end, we'll come away from this discussion standing right where we both started. The bottom line is your theistic worldview affects how you see RE, which atheists don't have that constraint, so if you want a discussion go ahead, but just as you do this think of the thousands of similar discussions going on on the internet this very moment, it may be just as fruitful seeking out some good counter arguments and just look at them than wasting valuable time. My opinion is that RE may not be the dumbest idea of the century, but it sure is one of the dumbest.
Post a Comment