Motal Principle of Reason - Is That Enough?

After we finished recording this 4-part series, I had the sense that this was going to be one of the most important things we’ve ever done. Actually, I had that sense before we even recorded. We’re in the middle of a 4-part series on the argument from contingency. It’s the absolute best argument for God’s existence. Well at least in the mind of one lowly photographer. I really like it. Makes a lot of sense, I know of very few good objections to it. Each episode I mention that the contingency argument is split into two stages. Stage 1 is about establishing that a necessary being exists, while Stage 2 argues that this necessary being is God. The previous two episodes, 14 and 15, were devoted to Stage 1, and now we’re beginning our discussion of Stage 2. Sometimes Stage 2 is referred to as the “Gap Problem” in the literature. This conversation blew my mind in all sorts of ways. I’m sure you’ll know what I mean when we get there. Here is part 3 of our series on the argument from contingency, Stage 2 with Dr. Josh Rasmussen. Website: www.capturingchristianity.com To gain early access to podcast episodes: www.patreon.com/capturingchristianity