Half Audio: Jay on Atheism, W.L. Craig, Jim Holt, Transcendental Arguments

I had numerous requests for more theology, mathematics and metaphysics, so here you go. In this latest audio, I talk over William Lane’s talk over a Ted Talk. I thought it illustrative of both the errors I see in Dr. Craig’s approach, as well as the errors in the atheist and agnostic approaches of modernity, exemplified in Jim Holt’s TedTalk.  I discuss the flaws of the classical approaches to arguments for God’s existence, as well as critiquing and appraising Dr. Craig.  Topics include transcendental arguments as distinguished from classical arguments, advanced metaphysics, Platonism, medieval ontology, atheism and the approach of Eastern Orthodox theology.  The first half of this talk is free, while paid subscribers get full weekly podcasts for 4.95 a month.  Enjoy!

As referenced in the talk:

The Philosophy of Creation, Darwinian Evolution and the Absolute

Numbers Prove God

Some Problems for the Ontological Argument: Metaphysical, Epistemic and Theological

Introduction to Transcendental Arguments Audio

Logic and the Absolute

Dr. Craig’s talk: Exploring Meaning and Nothingness

Jim Holt’s Ted Talk: “Why Does the Universe Exist?”

Apophatic Theology

Process Theology

Subscribe to JaysAnalysis here:

4 Comments on Half Audio: Jay on Atheism, W.L. Craig, Jim Holt, Transcendental Arguments

  1. thetruthisstrangerthanfiction // March 11, 2015 at 5:49 pm // Reply

    Reblogged this on thetruthisstrangerthanfiction.

  2. I was at an airport and they had all these iPads for people to use at the gates, with mind-numbing entertainment and their bogus “complementary” (slow, ad-ridden) Internet. Truly, society is a giant shopping mall. I sat down to use one and, after clicking through the advantages of being a member of X and Y club, navigated to your site. Now it’s in the browser history. God help the poor sod that will stumble upon it. He’s about to find out that the only difference between ESPN and Lifetime is the gender of the target audience. And if he’s not a complete dolt, he may even start asking questions.. *shudder*

  3. Speaking of the ontological argument, I take it you’ve read Descartes’ Meditations. After reading up on Gnosticism in recent years, I now wonder if Descartes’ Meditations aren’t, at the “esoteric” level, intended as a refutation of Gnostic ideas and the kinds of esoteric systems that were circulating among the educated elite in Descartes’ day. Leibniz, Boehme, Paracelsus, et al would have been, presumably, familiar to Descartes. So, what are the chances that when Descartes developed his Evil Demon hypothesis to begin his presentation of what today is referred to as foundationalism in epistemology, he wasn’t also attacking the idea of the Demiurge of the Gnostics? Any thoughts? Was this Descartes way of taking on the occult systems that were floating around among the educated elite?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: