hosted by John DeRosa
Summary What place to animals have in God’s creation? Might some animals be redeemed? Why have some theologians moved beyond the traditional Thomistic framework? Can these newer answers help with the problem of evil...
Summary What problems of evil have been proposed that focus on animal suffering? How might a Thomistic theist respond to these arguments? If faced with the apparently gratuitous suffering of a fawn trapped and...
Summary What is an abductive argument as opposed to an inductive one? How can one make an abductive cosmological argument for the existence of God? Does this argument lead us to believe the cause...
Summary Pat Flynn joins the podcast again to present his 5-step argument for God’s existence. In his new eBook How to Think About God, he lays out a philosophical case for the God of...
Summary Are there any successful philosophical arguments against the infinite past? St. Thomas Aquinas did not think so. Nonetheless, several contemporary philosophers have produced new paradoxes and arguments of which Aquinas was not aware....
Summary The “Bad Apologist” joins us to discuss a contingency argument for God’s existence. After that, we discuss the burden of proof debate and how it relates to conversations about atheism/theism. He also shares...
Summary Dr. Anderson outlines and defends an argument for God from logic. First, he argues that the laws of logic are necessary truths that really exist. Next, he proceeds to the conclusion that the...
Summary How can Pascal’s Wager possibly work if there are so many religions to choose from? Also, how is it supposed to work when multiple religions offer infinite value? Plus, isn’t there a worry...
Summary Does the Kalam Cosmological argument depend on the A-theory of time? Is it possible that it can also work on B-theory? In this episode, Curtis Metcalfe defends a version of the Kalam argument...
Who has the burden of proof: atheists or theists? What considerations go into answering this question? What did Anthony Flew use to argue that the burden of proof was on theists? How can we respond to Russell’s teapot? What should we think about evidentialism and Reformed epistemology? How does Pascal’s wager fit into this discussion?
Dr. Tomas Bogardus joins us to tackle these issues in detail. He has done a lot of thinking about this question and distills some of the most important ideas needed to answer those questions.
