Argument from apologetics

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(addl. wikif.)
Line 1: Line 1:
The argument from apologetics is a variant of the [[Argument from inconsistent revelations|argument from existence of atheists]]:
+
The '''argument from apologetics''' is a variant of the [[Argument from inconsistent revelations|argument from existence of atheists]]:
  
If [[God]] exists, there should be evidence for this. If theology is a valid field of inquiry, then there ought to be good, nearly universally accepted arguments for the existence of God. Since there aren't, it is more reasonable to believe that God does not exist.
+
If [[God]] exists, there should be evidence for this. If [[theology]] is a valid field of inquiry, then there ought to be good, nearly universally accepted [[arguments for the existence of God]]. Since there aren't, it is more reasonable to believe that God does not exist.
  
 
==Example==
 
==Example==
It is widely accepted among theists that there is no physical evidence for the existence of God. One apologetic is that God wants us to believe in him on faith alone. However, this is an untestable assertion: it might be true, or it might merely be an excuse for the lack of evidence.
+
It is widely accepted among [[theist]]s that there is no physical evidence for the existence of God. One apologetic is that God wants us to believe in him on [[faith]] alone. However, this is an untestable assertion: it might be true, or it might merely be an excuse for the lack of evidence.
 +
 
 
[[Category:Arguments]]
 
[[Category:Arguments]]
 
[[Category:Arguments against the existence of God]]
 
[[Category:Arguments against the existence of God]]
 
[[Category:Empirical arguments]]
 
[[Category:Empirical arguments]]

Revision as of 18:06, 22 August 2007

The argument from apologetics is a variant of the argument from existence of atheists:

If God exists, there should be evidence for this. If theology is a valid field of inquiry, then there ought to be good, nearly universally accepted arguments for the existence of God. Since there aren't, it is more reasonable to believe that God does not exist.

Example

It is widely accepted among theists that there is no physical evidence for the existence of God. One apologetic is that God wants us to believe in him on faith alone. However, this is an untestable assertion: it might be true, or it might merely be an excuse for the lack of evidence.

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox