Counter Apologetics

Naturalists, according to David Papinau, author of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on naturalism, urge “that reality is exhausted by nature, containing nothing ‘supernatural’.” Naturalism “has no very precise meaning in contemporary philosophy” beyond this, along with an emphasis on science as a means to understand the natural world. Naturalism is the view that … Continue reading What is Naturalism? – Walden Pod →

The Discovery Institute, an ID thinktank, has a list of “Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design.” On this list is an article authored by Michael Behe, alleging to prove the irreducible complexity of certain protein binding sites. However, his experiment demonstrated the exact opposite point as intended. He had to … Continue reading CA88 ID Theorist Accidentally Produces Evidence Against Intelligent Design →

watch the video version here Support at patreon.com/counter or /waldenpod Follow on Twitter @waldenpod Transcript  Linktree Answers in Reason – Ten Questions for Theists Braxton Hunter – Ten Questions for Atheists my responses to Braxton and here are links to a few of the arguments I mentioned in Question 7: Schellenberg’s argument from hiddenness Rowe’s … Continue reading 7 Questions for Christians →

We’ll be exploring what the discovery of evolution potentially means for religion. Is evolution evidence against theism? If so, why? Is it incompatible with Christianity, as some Christians maintain? What is the conceptual landscape vis-à-vis evolution and theism—as in, what is the range of potential options available to a religious believer when it comes to … Continue reading CA87 God & Evolution →

Human beings seem cosmically unimportant. Though certainly from God’s perspective, we are more important than stars, rocks, vast stretches of empty space and time, and other things that don’t seem to possess any value in and of themselves, the latter group seems to have been afforded the lion’s share of the cosmos. Human beings, presumably … Continue reading CA86 The Argument from Scale →

Today, I’m speaking with The Non-Alchemist about the trials and tribulations of deconversion, reasons for being an atheist, lacktheism, Calvinism, Christian double-standards regarding testimonial evidence, the state of apologetics, what stuff is real, and more. Here’s this interview on YouTube with video (this episode was recorded on Streamyard and originally posted on YouTube). NA’s channel … Continue reading CA85 Conversation with The Non-Alchemist: Deconversion, Atheism, and Apologetics →

Here’s my debate with Zac of Adherent Apologetics on the problem of evil, hosted by the Non–Alchemist. I focus on the problem of animal suffering and defend an argument called the teleological argument from evil. Video of the debate here linktr.ee/emersongreen Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Rate the show on iTunes here … Continue reading Debate: Is evil strong evidence against God? →

There are five reasons, broadly, why I’m an atheist:  I. We don’t need God to explain anything. II. There are few phenomena that are better explained by theistic models than by atheistic models. III. There are many phenomena that are better explained by atheistic models than by theistic models. IV. Theism is more metaphysically profligate … Continue reading CA84 Why I Am An Atheist →

Today we discuss the evergreen critique of the design argument from David Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. Hume’s skepticism is aimed at the inference to a designer on the basis of our observations of natural objects and their analogy to human artifacts. When two objects are similar effects – say a house and another house … Continue reading CA83 Hume on the Argument from Design →

Happy birthday, David Hume! I thought I’d share Hume (or more accurately, Philo) casually destroying skeptical theism in Part XI of Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. His analogy of an architect and a poorly constructed house arose in a discussion of the problem of evil between Philo and Cleanthes, two of Hume’s fictional characters in the … Continue reading Condemn the Architect: Hume’s Answer to Skeptical Theists (Bonus Episode) →

Can you be an “agnostic atheist,” or are those terms mutually exclusive? I try to explain how the famous four quadrant graph misunderstands the nature of belief, knowledge, and agnosticism. the chart in question Joe Schmid on Agnosticism and Justification [YouTube] Gettier and knowledge with Kane B and Cole Nasrallah [YouTube] What is knowledge? [SEP] … Continue reading CA82 What the ‘agnostic atheist’ graph gets wrong →

Here’s the audio from my recent debate hosted by Adherent Apologetics on the problem of evil. I argue that with respect to suffering, the world looks about as we’d expect it to look if god did not exist. Atheists can do a much better job explaining the kinds, degree, and distribution of suffering we observe … Continue reading Debate: Is evil evidence against God? Emerson Green vs. Dr. Khaldoun Aziz Sweis →

We discuss several reasons to doubt skeptical theism, including Paul Draper’s objection, phenomenal conservatism, divine silence during tragedies, Pandora’s box, and moral paralysis. linktr.ee/emersongreen Subscribe to CA and Walden Pod on YouTube here Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Rate the show on iTunes here Support on Patreon here Transcripts available at emersongreenblog.wordpress.com … Continue reading CA81 Skeptical Theism →

Non-believing Christian Philip Goff joins us to discuss religious fictionalism, literalism, religious language, Jordan Peterson, the resurrection, the spread of Christianity, the transcendent, and Christianity without theism. After the interview, I try to work through my thoughts on secular Christianity. I reflect on antitheism, fundamentalism, and what replaces religion after the death of god. Philip … Continue reading CA80 Secular Christianity with Philip Goff →

In his 1997 debate with William Lane Craig, Paul Draper considers seven lines of evidence and asks if they are more expected on theism or on naturalism. He argues that the meager moral fruits of theism, mind-brain dependence, evolution, the biological role of pain and pleasure, tragedies, divine silence during tragedies, and religious confusion are … Continue reading CA79 Paul Draper’s Case for Naturalism →