Here is another example of just how silly things can become when you try to take a case for the compatibility of religion and science to the extreme. This is what gives religious apologetics such a bad reputation. I prefer my own personal view of Bible as allegory to any wacky nonsense like Plantinga.
Theologians don’t get more sophisticated than Alvin Plantinga, philosopher of religion (emeritus) at Notre Dame and Calvin College. He’s loaded with honors, and was once president of the Western Division of the American Philosophical Association. He’s written a gazillion books, many of which say the same thing, and I’ve posted about his bizarre defenses of Christianity several times before (e.g., here, here, and here).
My latest incursion into Sophisticated Theology™ involves reading Plantinga’s new book, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism (2011, Oxford University Press). His thesis is, as usual, that there is no conflict between science and religion, but a profound one between science and naturalism. I won’t reprise his argument except to say that involves the specious claim that natural selection could not have given us senses that enable us to reliably detect the truth, so that ability must have…
View original post 859 more words