Christian Theological/Philosophical Book Club discussion
The Library - Books and Books
>
Is Richard Swinburne over-hyped?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Zachary
(new)
Dec 24, 2017 09:23AM
I’ve heard good things about Swinburne, but having read two of his books (“Evolution of the Soul”, “Mind, Brain, & Free Will”) and listened to and handful of lectures on YouTube, I don’t get the hype. His arguments seem fragile and unconvincing. Have I just gotten a bad sample of his work or is he genuinely over-hyped?
reply
|
flag
I've heard of him. But I think you figured him out.
I've heard him mentioned, but have not read him. Based on this summary of one of his views -- "Christian philosopher Richard Swinburne rejects the Moral Argument for God because, he thinks, moral truths are necessarily true, and so the existence of God cannot have an effect on their truth" -- I don't have to know much more to dismiss him.
I agree, Ned. Knocking the moral argument from our apologetic is what the enemy does, not fellow believers.
can moral truths and God both be basic, i.e. necessarily true? is being necessarily true mean arguments are wrong or superfluous?
No, but you will get into serious problems regarding the euthyphro dilemma. If God wills something *because* it is good in itself, then this norm seems to be the highest authority, which is even superior to the divine will. This is only true, if the euthyphro dilemma is really a dilemma. There are apologists / philosophers who say that the euthyphro dilemma is false. Though they still come to the conclusion that the moral argument for God is valid...
William Lane Craig discusses the euthyphro dilemma in his book "On Guard"
the euthyphro dilemma was what I had in mind. what I thought Craig and others were saying is that is the basic nature of God includes His nature, which is moral/holy. iow, the basic nature of God is the basic nature of morality
The problem with euthyphro dilemma is a reflection of this age: Abbreviations and expressions without explanations. Believe it or not humans are not mind readers and we all need definitions. Rather than being puffed up with something you know that - you think - nobody knows; it's better to be a teacher of something everyone can relate to. G. Julian Walker, author of Hippie Christianity.
Are there other people who discuss this dilemma? Perhaps in more depth.
