My basic position is that it is epistemologically invalid to accept the existence of God from the existence of logic.
Speaking with Christians often yields the idea of a personal experience as the basis of faith. It is very hard to argue against this kind of thing, and it is often presented as an alternative “proof” for Christianity. After all, so many Christians claim this type of experience, and so where there is smoke there must be fire. But it is very easy to have smoke without fire, and many poor proofs do not add up to one good one. I would contend that these experiences just constitute another piece of evidence, and that, like other evidence we have looked at in this book, we should consider this evidence objectively before being persuaded by it.
My basic argument can be summed up in five words: “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” This phrase, popularised by Carl Sagan…
Photo Thomas Bresson, CC BY 3.0., via Wikimedia Commons There was a quote in our order of service this week, by…