Thiesm in the 21st Century

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 09 – God 1 (Theism) – Part 7: Summary – What’s your favorite color?

by

The question isn’t whether we believe in God, but whether we recognize that God believes in us. Whether we’re believers or nonbelievers, the idea of God shows up in our values, our sense of meaning, and our relationships. The light doesn’t vanish because we describe it differently; it shines through in our actions, our resistance to meaninglessness, and our capacity for love. Whether we pray, doubt, or live quietly, the essence of God might not be in belief, but in the life we create and the love we give.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 09 – God 1 (Theism) – Part 6: What’s love got to do with it?

by

Love isn’t a necessity for the universe to function, but it persists anyway. It disrupts the cold efficiency of survival and adds something deeper, more tender, to the story of existence. Metaphysics and philosophy ask whether love is a fluke of chemistry or a clue that the universe is more than machinery—it might be the very force that holds the system together, a source of connection, meaning, and goodness that can’t be explained away.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 09 – God 1 (Theism) – Part 5: Feeling lucky?

by

Pascal’s wager isn’t about proving God’s existence—it’s about recognizing that life is already a gamble. Whether we believe or not, we’re staking our time, values, and energy on something. Pascal argues that, given the stakes, betting on God is the most rational choice because it offers the highest possible payoff with the least risk. Philosophy invites us to consider: what are you already betting on, and what do you stand to gain or lose?

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 09 – God 1 (Theism) – Part 4: Who put this together?

by

The teleological argument invites us to consider purpose in the universe. When we see design, we assume a designer. Whether it’s the intricacy of the eye or the precision of the physical constants, the universe seems to behave as if it’s aiming toward something. But does this point to a creator, or just a vast system of function? Philosophy asks: if the universe is designed, then for what? Is it for life, for consciousness, or for something else entirely?

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 09 – God 1 (Theism) – Part 3: Which came first – the chicken or the God?

by

The cosmological argument begins with an undeniable intuition: everything that begins has a cause. From the origins of the universe to the first domino falling, there must be a first cause – a push that set everything else in motion. This first cause, while not necessarily a personal deity, is where we begin to speak of “God.” The argument doesn’t prove a personality or intention; it simply points to the necessity of something that began the chain. The question is: what does that uncaused cause look like?

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 09 – God 1 (Theism) – Part 2: Do you believe in triangles?

by

The ontological argument asks us to consider God not through evidence or faith, but through the logic of the definition itself. By defining God as the greatest possible being, the argument asserts that existence must be a necessary quality, because a being that exists only in the mind cannot be the greatest possible being. Philosophy invites us to question not just the existence of such a being, but what qualities make something great in the first place, and who gets to decide.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 09 – God 1 (Theism) – Part 1: Introduction: Where do babies come from?

by

existence. Philosophy of religion asks us to pause before the doctrines and definitions, and return to the moment of awe that first gave rise to the word. Before belief, before systems, before certainty, we were simply standing at the edge of understanding, asking: Why is there something instead of nothing?

Read the letter →