An Agnostic Defends God

This book contains a unique perspective: that of a scientifically and philosophically educated agnostic who thinks there is impressive—if maddeningly hidden—evidence for the existence of God. Science and philosophy may have revealed the poverty of the familiar sources of evidence, but they generate their own partial defense of theism. Bryan Frances, a philosopher with a graduate degree in physics, judges the standard evidence for God’s existence to be awful. And yet, like many others with similar scientific and philosophical backgrounds, he argues that the usual reasons for atheism, such as the existence of suffering and success of science, are weak. In this book you will learn why so many people with scientific and philosophical credentials are agnostics (rather than atheists) despite judging all the usual evidence for theism to be fatally flawed.

This book contains a unique perspective: that of a scientifically and philosophically educated agnostic who thinks there is impressive—if maddeningly hidden—evidence for the existence of God. Science and philosophy may have revealed the poverty of the familiar sources of evidence, but they generate their own partial defense of theism. Bryan Frances, a philosopher with a graduate degree in physics, judges the standard evidence for God’s existence to be awful. And yet, like many others with similar scientific and philosophical backgrounds, he argues that the usual reasons for atheism, such as the existence of suffering and success of science, are weak. In this book you will learn why so many people with scientific and philosophical credentials are agnostics (rather than atheists) despite judging all the usual evidence for theism to be fatally flawed.

What is God? Does he exist? Can we know? The God Confusion offers a down-to-earth beginner's guide for anyone interested in these questions. It does not evangelize for God and religion or, indeed, for atheism, secularism and science. Instead, it explores in a witty yet objective and balanced way the idea of God and the strengths and weaknesses of the standard arguments for his existence. Gary Cox shows that the philosophical reasoning at the heart of these arguments is logically incapable of moving beyond speculation to any kind of proof. The only credible philosophical position is therefore agnosticism. The God Confusion defends science generally and the theory of evolution in particular. It argues that if religion is not to appear increasingly outdated and ridiculous in the eyes of free-thinking, educated people, it must accommodate science and accept that science has replaced the old God of the gaps as an explanation of natural phenomena. Concluding that God may or may not exist, on the grounds that science, philosophy and theology are inherently incapable of proving or disproving his existence, The God Confusion acknowledges that religious faith based on a deliberate commitment to live as though there is a moral God is a coherent notion and a worthwhile, even prudent enterprise. At the same time, it rejects the idea of inner certainty as mere wishful thinking, arguing that it is not a coherent basis for belief and is simply bad faith.

A new perspective. Defending religion as a cultural institution in the face of resurgent atheistic thought For centuries, the theism-atheism debate has been dominated by two positions: stringent believers committed to the "yes, there is a God" argument, and atheists vehemently driven to repudiate not only God, but also religion as a cultural institution. To date, this is the first and only mainstream book in which a nonbeliever criticizes atheism and affirms religion. An Atheist Defends Religion persuasively argues that religion is overwhelmingly beneficial for humanity, regardless of whether God exists, based on a new paradigm of 10 affirmative dimensions that make up religious experience. It also puts to rest the theory that religion is behind most of the world's sectarian violence by showing that religion becomes evil when it is politicized. Readers will learn they do not have to be fundamentalists to be believers, and about the value and benefits of religion itself.

Conversations matter. Yet, recently, good conversations about faith have been increasingly squeezed out of the public sphere. Seeking to reopen the debate, Justin Brierley began to invite atheists and sceptics on to Premier Christian Radio to air arguments for and against the Christian faith. But how has ten years of discussion with atheists affected the presenter’s faith? Reflecting on conversations with Richard Dawkins, Derren Brown and many more, Justin explains why he still finds Christianity the most compelling explanation for life, the universe and everything. And why, regardless of belief or background, we should all welcome the conversation. ‘Beautifully written, brilliantly argued, Justin’s book will thrill Christians and challenge atheists.’ R. T. Kendall, author and pastor ‘Justin has that happy knack of being able to get people of diametrically opposed opinions debating the big issues.’ John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics, University of Oxford

The Errors of Atheism is a response to the glaring gap that exists in analytical philosophy on the concept of God. While there is the large body of work that either defends or challenges orthodox Christian theistic arguments, there is a lack of analytical philosophical work articulating agnosticism as a critique of both theism and atheism. J. Angelo Corlett shows that the conceptual depths of theism must be explored beyond orthodoxy in order to re-open the debate on the problem of God. His book is an agnostic's statement on the current state of the debate about God's existence and where the discussion must go to make genuine philosophical progress instead of remaining in a dialectical stalemate.

What is agnosticism? Is it just the 'don't know' position on God, or is there more to it than this? Is it a belief, or merely the absence of belief? Who were the first to call themselves 'agnostics'? These are just some of the questions that Robin Le Poidevin considers in this Very Short Introduction. He sets the philosophical case for agnosticism and explores it as a historical and cultural phenomenon. What emerges is a much more sophisticated, and much more interesting, attitude than a simple failure to either commit to, or reject, religious belief. Le Poidevin challenges some preconceptions and assumptions among both believers and non-atheists, and invites the reader to rethink their own position on the issues. ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.

The indeterminacy of the modern concept of God has made the distinction between belief and unbelief increasingly problematic. Both the complexity of the religious response and the variety of skeptical philosophies preclude simplistic definitions of what constitutes belief in God. Making the discussion even more difficult are assertions by fundamentalists who dismiss the philosophical perplexities of religious claims as unreal pseudo-problems.Atheism & Philosophy is a detailed study of these and other issues vital to our understanding of atheism, agnosticism, and religious belief. Philosopher Kai Nielsen develops a coherent and integrated approach to the discussion of what it means to be an atheist. In chapters such as "How is Atheism to be Characterized?", "Does God Exist?," "Agnosticism," "Religion and Commitment," and "The Primacy of Philosophical Theology," Nielsen defends atheism in a way that answers to contemporary concerns.This paperback edition features a new preface in which Nielsen, showing the increasing influence of the later Ludwig Wittgenstein, Donald Davidson, the classical pragmatists, and such neopragmatists as Richard Rorty and Hilary Putnam, defends his account against some persistent and plausible criticisms, particularly against his skeptical arguments concerning the coherence and intelligibility of belief in God.