Please consider supporting my work via the following link. Or rather, consider supporting it utilising your brain and if you feel motivated to do so then click the link! http://www.patreon.com/noelplum99
The fifth part in a response to John Lennox “Answering New Atheist Objections and Fallacies | John Lennox, PhD ”
In this part John Lennox attempts to make two arguments as to why nature evidences god, broadly along the following lines:
1) Lennox makes the claim that, for some unexplained reason, a universe that was not created by a god or gods would be of a type that would be scientifically unexplorable or explainable. Our universe is explorable and explainable (ie “science works”) therefore God.
2) That, in a bastardisation of Plantinga’s EAAN, without deistic action all we would be left with to account for our ability to perceive the universe would be our evolutionary origins and Lennox claims that this is incapable of providing cognitive faculties that truthfully represent our universe. Lennox implies that our cognitive faculties DO truthfully represent the universe ergo God.
Part 1 of my response:
Part 2 of my response:
Part 3 of my response:
Part 4 of my response: