Natural Theology, Its “Dwindling Probabilities” and “Lack of Rapport”

Faith and Philosophy 21 (4):533-546 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX


This paper comments on the other papers in this special issue of ’Faith and Philosophy’ on natural theology. It claims that most people today need both bare natural theology (to show that there is a God) and ramified natural theology (to establish detailed doctrinal claims), and that Christian tradition has generally claimed that cogent arguments of natural theology (of both kinds) are available. Plantinga’s "dwindling probabilities" objection against ramified natural theology is shown to have no force when different pieces of evidence are fed into the arguments at different stages. But showing the cogency of arguments of natural theology involves the lengthy process of helping people to see the correctness of certain moral views



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,323

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Revisiting the ‘Reformed Objection’ to Natural Theology.Michael Sudduth - 2009 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 1 (2):37-62.
Natural Theology and the Uses of Argument.John M. DePoe & Timothy J. McGrew - 2013 - Philosophia Christi 15 (2):299-309.
Newman and Natural Theology.Patrick J. Fletcher - 2008 - Newman Studies Journal 5 (2):26-42.
Rediscovering the natural law in Reformed theological ethics.Stephen John Grabill - 2006 - Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co..


Added to PP

88 (#194,369)

6 months
9 (#317,960)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

Dwindling Confirmation.William Roche & Tomoji Shogenji - 2014 - Philosophy of Science 81 (1):114-137.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references