This argument for the existence of God derives its name for the Greek word for "end" or "purpose".

Philosophy originates from the Greek translation of this phrase.

In an argument, the claim(s) that support another claim are called this.

These are the three divine attributes that are highlighted in the argument from evil.

Antony Flew accuses the believer in God as making too many of these - which can weaken a claim.

Two of three cosmological-type arguments St. Thomas Aquinas offers to prove God's existence.

This branch of philosophy deals with questions about knowledge. (What do you know?)

Reasoning to a conclusion from necessity is called this type of reasoning. Elementary my dear Watson!

A fawn that slowly burns to death in a forest fire seems to be this type of evil/suffering?

R.M. Hare calls a fundamental assumption about the world that is not subject to rational scrutiny by this name.

St. Anselm argues for the existence of God based on the idea that God is this type of being.

This branch of philosophy deals with questions about the nature of reality. (What is real?)

Valid is to a deductive argument as this term is to an inductive argument. Pump that iron!

According to a popular response to the problem of evil, evil is not God's doing. Evil, rather, is the inevitable consequence of this.

A belief that will not be given up, even in the face of the strongest counterevidence, is called this type of belief (a la Antony Flew).

360 degrees is this type of feature of a circle.

One of two charges against Socrates at his trial.

Cogent is to an inductive argument as this term is to a deductive argument. (Stop baby what's that____?)

You say that some evil is explained by human free will? That is fine! But your response fails to explain away this type of evil. So hah!

Between Antony Flew, R.M. Hare, and Basil Mitchell, the figure who seeks a compromise position.

Watch out! You are guilty of this fallacy if you argue for the existence of God based on gaps in scientific explanation.

This is a form of inquiry and discussion between individuals that involves asking questions to stimulate critical thinking and illuminate ideas.

The following argument is this type of argument.

"Since London is north of Paris and south of the North Pole, it follows that Paris is south of the North Pole."

(Three terms please).

We do not see a greater good come out of some cases of suffering. So, according to Bruce Russell, we are justified in believing there is no greater good for this SIMPLE reason. (No need to assume invisible elephants.)

The fact that Basil Mitchell's Resistance Member is responsive to this separates him from Flew's Explorer... and oh by the way, might help him avoid the charge of "irrationality".