GDPR Cookie Consent by Free Privacy Policy
You can dismiss the support request pop up for 4 weeks (28 days) if you want to be reminded again. Or you can dismiss until our next donations drive (typically at the beginning of October). Before you dismiss, please consider making a donation. Thanks!
One Time
$5/month (US)
$10/month (US)
Support II via AmazonSmile Internet Infidels Needs Your Support!
dismiss for   28 days   1 year   info
Support the Secular Web

Philip Kuchar

God, Atheism and Incompatibility: The Argument from Nonbelief (2001)

Kuchar defends an Argument from Nonbelief against God's existence (ANB) similar to that argued by J. L. Schellenberg, which differs in some respects from that argued by Theodore Drange. In short, the mere existence of nonbelievers or the presence of sufficient evidence for nonbelief in God's existence is incompatible with God given a certain description of him.

A Rebuttal to Pardi's Criticism of ANB (2004)

"I argue that Pardi's criticisms of Drange's version of the argument from nonbelief (ANB) do not refute ANB, although they may or may not require peripheral corrections or clarifications on Drange's part. I focus not so much on Drange's formulation, but on what I take to be the central intuitions of ANB and on the inadequacy of Pardi's objections. I assume some familiarity with Pardi's paper and with ANB, although I present what I consider to be ANB's central claims."


Featured Editorials:

Double-Talk in Defense of the Dubious (2000)

Here are two questionable propositions the theologian repeatedly offers. (1) God respects our free will so much that he allows non-believers to do their own thing for eternity in hell. (2) God loved us so much that he forgave our sins by punishing Jesus instead of sinners. Both propositions have the same problem: the language used refutes itself.

The Incoherence of Original Sin and Substitutive Sacrifice (2000)

Christianity is based on the unusual idea of sacrificial punishment. The atonement has been interpreted in different ways, but the explanation stemming from some of the more vocal apologists is that of substitution. Curious concepts are employed to make sense of the central idea. When examined, these explanations turn out to be incoherent, a fact which casts doubt on the truth of Christianity's central concept, that Jesus' death was a sacrifice.

Privacy and Cookie Policy