Comments on: Book Review: The Elusive God by Paul K. Moser

By: J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick — Sat, 15 May 2010 03:46:57 +0000

Thanks for your comment. You wrote that God is the “ultimate outsider” and “unfathomable.” Can we know anything about God, on your view? I don’t think a God who doesn’t interfere in our affairs is actually better, it pushes God into a distant spectator o the universe.

By: pulavi sambhar

pulavi sambhar — Fri, 14 May 2010 22:35:06 +0000

if god were to inter-fere in our common affairs he would be like a nosey administrator (which by the way doesn’t exist except in books). we all know that a school’s principal keeps a healthy distance between himself and the affairs of the school. this only in-creases his authority and self-respect. similarly god is too great and good to come down on earth or show himself in plain view. this does not behoove him/her/it/whatchamaycallit. the nature of god (the ultimate outsider) remains unfathomable and ever so subtle. but god is definitely not malicious.

By: The Life Dialogue: Christian Presuppositions and Science «

The Life Dialogue: Christian Presuppositions and Science « — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 22:40:33 +0000

[...] (as I’ve called it)? I tied this almost immediately with Paul K. Moser’s idea in The Elusive God that philosophy should be done differently by Christians, who assume God exists, and therefore [...]

By: An Authoritative Call: Remembering that God is God «

An Authoritative Call: Remembering that God is God « — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:59:18 +0000

[...] God and the questions he raises throughout the book. I think that I will probably rewrite my review at some point, because the more I think about it, the more important I think his points are. [...]

By: God’s “Purposively Available Evidence” «

God’s “Purposively Available Evidence” « — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:55:01 +0000

[...] « Book Review: The Elusive God by Paul K. Moser [...]

By: J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:48:48 +0000

An extra note: I just reread Moser’s chapter in “God is Great, God is Good,” and he really does some up all of his important points from “The Elusive God” in the much more readable 14 pages he uses (again, alongside many other useful articles). Thus, I suggest readers who may not want to invest the amount of time needed to go through “The Elusive God” pick up the aforementioned book instead, as it really does contain all of his important points, if in a condensed form.

By: J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:56:26 +0000

To argue that “the ordering of the rules just happened with no particular directive” is only to push the problem of design back one more level. If it is the case that our universe simply “happened” then what kind of conditions lead to it happening, why, given the absolutely ridiculous odds stacked against our universe’s existence, is there something rather than nothing. Further, if everything just “happened” why doesn’t everything continue to happen? Why don’t I suddenly have a cheetah appear in my room. Why are the laws static? And if they just happened to come out static, why did they happen that way? And if the explanation of the why just happened, why did that explanation just happen? etc. ad infinitum.

By: James W Jones

James W Jones — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:34:38 +0000

The human race clearly cannot believe that either its own actions or those of some preceding super race are responsible for its own existence or the making of the material universe. Something (natural laws) or Someone (God) far more intelligent and powerful than humans will ever become, actualized the reality our consciousness inhabits by furnishing and arranging the incredible amount of energy distortions needed to set the causal chain in motion and crystallize the rules to actualize our reality. Theologians and scientists and laymen in between all agree on these premises but their conceptive descriptions of the “responsible factor” differ greatly. Serious thinkers in both camps should agree that the “responsible factor” in its simplest description is a collection of imterconnected ideas, called laws, similar to human selfhood. This divine haecceity, if indeed it exists, is a gathering of extraordinary ideas that serve to regulate reality but on an infinitely greater scale than can be conceived by humans. Or, more difficult to believe, but entirely possible, the ordering of the rules just happened with no particular directive. I am writing a book examining the arguments for and against the reality of the God-concept. The real proof lies in quantum mechanics.
Cheers,