World Religions and Cults (vol 2)
Along with numerous other authors including Don Landis, Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson,
Timothy McCabe contributes analyses of various world religions and cults in this volume
from Master Books.
Purchase the book from Amazon
Does God make us sin?
If God made everything, does He make us sin? Recognized as one of the most critical aspects of
the philosophical question known as “the problem of evil”, responses to this question from
Christians have been both incredibly diverse and strenuously adamant. And often,
Read more at church.org
If God knows the future, do I have a choice?
There are many who insist that a choice, a true choice, cannot be foreknown. The outcome cannot be
predetermined, or it isn’t really a choice. They recognize that if the outcome is predetermined,
then the one who chooses could never have chosen otherwise...
Read more at church.org
Deductive Proof of a Rational God
Is it really possible to deductively prove the existence of a rational God? The answer, believe it
or not, lies in the question itself. Is it possible to prove anything at all? Where to we get the
idea of proof from? What is our framework for thought, and is it actually rational?
Read more at linkedin.com
"You say past time can't be infinite or we would never get to the present. Isn't that just Zeno's Paradox?"
No. Zeno's Paradox takes several forms. I'll just examine one of them -- the one that appears to me to be most pertinent to the question asked. According to Aristotle, "That which is in locomotion must arrive at the half-way stage before it arrives at the goal". Imagine your house is sixty miles from your office. Before you can go sixty miles, you must first go thirty. But before you can go thirty, you must first go fifteen.
"Since there can be no evidence for something that can't be measured, is it at least fair to say that there is no empirical evidence for god, and therefore no reason to believe he exists?"
If there is no reason to believe something that can't be measured, why would anyone believe that "there is no reason to believe something that can't be measured"? This argument is self-defeating. If we accept it, we must apply it to itself. Once we apply it to itself, we see that it does not meet its own criteria. Then, we must reject it. In other words, if we accept your argument, we must reject your argument on its own terms. I hope this is clear. God bless.