Navigate
  • Home
  • Our Story
  • Categories
    • Articles
    • Book Reviews
    • Interviews
    • Live Discussions
    • Podcast
    • Talks
  • Topics
    • Apologetics
    • Epistemology
    • Free Stuff
    • God
    • Moral Argument
    • Naturalism
    • Reformed Epistemology
    • Science
    • Street Epistemology
    • Theology
  • Events
    • Conferences
    • Events
  • Shop
  • Free Resources
  • FAQ
  • Get in Touch
  • Testimonials
  • Donate?
  • Follow Us
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • SoundCloud
    • YouTube
Capturing Christianity
0
0
374K
0
Capturing Christianity Capturing Christianity
  • Home
  • Our Story
  • Topics
    • Apologetics
    • EAAN
    • Epistemology
    • Faith
    • Interviews
    • Live Discussion
    • Moral Argument
    • Naturalism
    • Science
    • Street Epistemology
    • Theology
    • Reformed Epistemology
  • Events
    • Conferences
    • Events
  • Shop
  • Info
    • FAQ
    • Testimonials
  • Get in Touch
  • Donate
0
  • Interviews

Is the Ontological Argument Sound? An Interview with Dr. Ben Arbour

  • April 17, 2018
  • 4 comments
  • 2 minute read
  • 5.2K views
  • Cameron Bertuzzi
Total
0
Shares
0
0
0

The Ontological Argument is another one of those arguments I have a love/hate relationship with. More love these days than hate, but still. In this interview with Dr. Ben Arbour (more on him below), we discuss the structure of the argument, how it works, and many of the most popular objections to the Ontological Argument.

The Ontological Argument is actually simpler than it sounds. It says basically that if it’s even possible that God exists, then God must exist. It might surprise you to learn that the step from possibility to actuality is relatively non-controversial. That’s because God is by definition a necessary being. That is to say, if God exists, then He exists in every possible world (including the actual one). The real question is whether it’s actually possible that God exists. That question and more are discussed in the interview.

Ben Arbour

Ben holds a Ph.D from the University of Bristol, and he is an adjunct professor at Weatherford College.  His philosophical research focuses on the intersection of  analytic metaphysics (especially systematics and the nature of time) and Christian theology, particularly as these relate to Anselmian understandings of the doctrine of God.

Ben is also just a swell guy. His love for the Lord is contagious. The same could be said about his philosophy. I think that comes through in the interview (especially toward the end). Discussions with him have been mind expanding. Really excited to see where he goes with his research interests!

Portraits

Here are a couple of my favorite portraits from our short session after the interview. His personality really comes through on the last one. That grin!

Interview

The interview runs a total of 40 minutes. While I had a few questions prepared, the conversation was pretty free-flowing. My favorite part came at around the 17 minute mark. That’s where I asked him about Reverse Ontological Arguments. He gave two responses; the second was some of his own work on the subject. Really good stuff!

Once again, big shoutout to Raleigh and his wife for filming and editing this interview (as well as putting up with my directives). I plan on turning it into a podcast episode, so if you prefer to listen that way, be on the lookout. Special thanks to Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary – Houston for allowing us to use their facilities for the interview.

If you enjoyed this interview, consider supporting us on Patreon!

Total
0
Shares
Share 0
Tweet 0
Pin it 0
T A G S
  • Apologetics
  • Interviews
  • Ontological Argument
Cameron Bertuzzi

Cameron is a professional photographer and founder of Capturing Christianity, a ministry aimed at exposing the intellectual side of Christian belief. He is a writer, speaker, and uses his ministry to host discussions and interviews on Christian Apologetics. Cameron is married to a beautiful wife and is the father of two adorable children.

SUBSCRIBE. BE AWESOME.

Get updates on new posts, upcoming live discussions, and more.

You May Also Like
View Post
  • Interviews

The Moral Character of the Christian Apologist with Dr. Douglas Groothuis

  • Cameron Bertuzzi
  • January 31, 2019
Pascal's Wager
View Post
  • Interviews
  • Podcast

CC013: Is Pascal’s Wager Sound? with Dr. Michael Rota (Part 2)

  • Cameron Bertuzzi
  • November 26, 2018
View Post
  • Interviews
  • Podcast

CC012: Is Pascal’s Wager Sound? with Dr. Michael Rota (Part 1)

  • Cameron Bertuzzi
  • November 12, 2018
View Post
  • Interviews
  • Podcast

CC009: Was Jesus Copied From Pagan Myth?

  • Cameron Bertuzzi
  • August 21, 2018
View Post
  • Interviews
  • Podcast

CC008: Tim McGrew and I Critique Street Epistemology

  • Cameron Bertuzzi
  • July 20, 2018
Jerry Walls
View Post
  • Interviews

Answering 5 Big Objections to Christianity with Dr. Jerry Walls

  • Cameron Bertuzzi
  • July 7, 2018
Richard Swinburne
View Post
  • Interviews

My Interview and Portraits of Richard Swinburne

  • Cameron Bertuzzi
  • March 14, 2018
View Post
  • Interviews

My ‘Street Epistemology’ Interview on Hey Pastor

  • Cameron Bertuzzi
  • February 16, 2018
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

guest

4 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tommy
Tommy
6 years ago

Loved the interview even if there were times where Dr Arbour hand waived himself passed some of your questions – in particular his first response/objection to the the reverse MOA. It didn’t make any sense to me… however, the second response was great! Now, to my question (somewhat related to S5), and something I still find hard to resonate with: If there is a maximally great being (MGB) in some possible world, I don’t see why that MGB must be possible in ALL worlds…? I do understand the reasoning behind the conclusion (that if MGM is not present in world… Read more »

0
Reply
Darren
Darren
4 years ago

We know that a necessary being can’t exist. So the first premise of the modal ontological argument is false. It isn’t possible for a maximally great being to exist.   Modal logic only requires logical consistency. And the phrase God does not exist is not self contradictory since you can’t define something into existence by just claiming that god is defined as existing, so therefore exists. All you can do is say IF he exists necessarily, but we already know he can’t exist necessarily.   It is also baked right into the first premise, IF god exists… which by its… Read more »

0
Reply
Dave
Dave
4 years ago

Although I disagree with Darren’s objections, I have a concern of my own. Isn’t this argument just an appeal to ignorance?

1
Reply
Ryan Clark
Ryan Clark
3 years ago

I’ve been a pretty hardcore atheist/skeptic/physicalist type since I was twelve, but about ten years ago when I was 35 or so, I had an epiphany about conscious experience. Don’t know why I didn’t see it before, but suddenly out of the blue, I realized that there really is a seemingly inexplicable (under physicalism) explanatory gap. Anyway, this realization has really softened my views about things like souls and God. I remember learning about the Ontological Argument in college and thinking it was an absolute joke. But not long ago, some philosopher (can’t remember who it was) on Closer to… Read more »

0
Reply
about
Free 60-page eBook!
Join our super cool email list to receive a copy of our free 60-page eBook (and other cool stuff). Btw, Christianity is true.
Subscribe!
Support
If you find value in our content, prayerfully consider supporting us monthly on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!
Follow Us!
Facebook 0
Twitter 0
YouTube 374K
Instagram 0
Capturing Christianity
  • Home
  • Free Stuff
  • FAQ
  • Testimonials
  • Contact
  • Donate?

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

wpDiscuz