There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff — we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.
If everyone seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
| Christ died so we may|
write articles about
|A multi-chef broth|
|Devil's in the details|
|The pearly gates|
“”Well I think you make some very interesting points...
|—Alister McGrath's favorite phrase|
Alister McGrath is Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion at the University of Oxford and Gresham Professor of Divinity. He is a sophisticated theologian who spends his time
tearing off the mask of nature to stare at the face of God studying theology.
Early life and views
Arguments and refutations
Debate with Richard Dawkins
- "I think the issue of where God comes from is a very significant question, but from a Christian perspective, that isn't really the question that is to be asked. The idea is that God was there before everything..."
- Clearly a case of special pleading.
- "Again you've raised some very interesting questions, and again you've highlighted some tensions inside Christian theology, and certainly, the way of approaching things that I would want to adopt would be this: Not to begin with a predetermined or preconceived idea of God, 'God must be simple' or 'God must be complex', but rather to try and infer what god must be like on the basis of what God has done or in terms of what God has revealed Himself to be. And thus, I think the point they should make actually might be driven to some extent by a preconceived idea of what God must be like."
- Highlighted parts show how McGrath contradicts his premise in the very next sentence. This is a self-refuting idea.
- He inconsistently argues that God will choose to save some people from disasters, yet not others, but will not intervene to stop the other people from dying in the disaster.