New Intelligent Faith website coming soon!

We are proud to announce that Intelligent Faith is getting a new website! It will be much more user friendly, podcasts, video's and audio links will be available and all will be accessible directly on the site. Please stay tuned for the upgrade!!

The 7 Different Concepts of GOD: #1 - ATHEISM

Worldview #1 - Atheism:  

"There is no God!'

The word "atheism" comes from two Greek words, "a" and "theos", which mean respectively "no" and "God". So quite literal sense atheism is the definite and positive denial of the existence of God. Don't let anybody fool you into thinking that atheism is simply "the lack of a belief in any God." This is a recent attempts by some newer atheists to avoid having to justify their worldview, and explain it logically. Once properly understood "atheism" means a person claims to have positive knowledge and a definite belief that "God doesn't exist."

Some of the frequent statements of atheism in our culture, would include the following:

"No God, infinite or finite, exists!"

"Evil and suffering are strong evidence against God!"

"Miracles are not possible!"

"God is either an illusion or a psychological projection."

If we survey Atheism then, we can come up with the following summary of beliefs:  

- There is no God at all. 

- The universe came from nothing, without an ultimate cause or purpose.

- Everything that exists in reality is simply re-combined matter. 

- There is no ultimate meaning, value, or purpose to human life.

- Since the natural is all that exists, supernatural events, like miracles, are not possible.

- Science is the only reliable form of truth to teach us about reality.

- All biological life arose spontaneously, randomly, and without intelligent guidance.

- Evil and suffering are real and count as very strong evidence against God's existence.

- There really is no ultimate standard of "right and wrong" in reality.

- All human feelings, such as love and beauty, are reducible to chemicals and matter. 

- The concept of "God" is simply a psychological "crutch", invented to cope with reality.

- There is no ultimate solution to the problem of evil, except to bravely keep living.

- At the point of death, a person simply ceases to exist - period.

- Eventually, our sun will burn out, earth will be void of life, and the universe as a whole will become a cold, barren wasteland, empty of any heat or forms of life.

One of the most famous modern-day atheists is a man by the name of Richard Dawkins, who used to be the professor of biology at Oxford University. Throughout history the famously atheist would include Lucretius, Friedrich Nietzsche, and the well-known Sigmund Freud.

So if we examine the worldview of Atheism, how does it stand up?  After all, you would think that it would have to be pretty impressive intellectually with all the press and headlines that it seems to receive in the popular culture and news media, right?  Actually, as we investigate it, the worldview of Atheism is one of the weakest and intellectually absurd that there are.

First of all, there is no positive evidence at all for Atheism.  The atheistic would quickly say that a huge amount of evil and suffering in the world counts as evidence against God's existence. But in reality, "evil" presupposes that God exists. The concept of "evil" assumes that there is some ultimate end objective standard for "good and evil" and "right and wrong." But if there really is an objective moral standard within all of humanity, a universal moral law, the only thing that is a sufficient explanation for that would be the existence of an Ultimate Moral Lawgiver - God.

Once evil is moved off the table as possible evidence against God's existence, there is nothing else that the atheists could muster to prove His nonexistence. This could never happen scientifically, because no matter how you try to define or explain physical reality, you will always end up needing an explanation that is outside of reality and transcendent to it - God.

The only way this could be possible is if a person possessed absolute infinite knowledge, of all reality. Only then would a person be in a position to say with absolute certainty "God does not exist." But obviously, this wouldn't work either, because if a person possessed absolute infinite knowledge, by definition that person would be God.

In addition to this, there is strong evidence against the worldview of Atheism. Though these will be addressed in other chapters, they would include certain arguments for God's existence which are very strong and compelling intellectual evidence. These include the cosmological argument, design argument, moral argument, ontological argument, and various other arguments that appeal to the real existence of beauty, logic, mathematics and humanities "God hunger", as strong pieces of evidence that points to God's existence. For atheism to be successful as a worldview, it would have to take on each of these arguments individually, defeat them step by step, and in their place construct its own arguments proving why God cannot exist. Atheism has never been successful in doing this, and will never be.

As if this wasn't enough already, Atheism is a spectacular failure, intellectually and logically. The reason I say this is because the worldview of atheism demands that you believe certain things are absolutely against all good common sense, and solid intellectual reasoning. Here are some of the outrageous beliefs of the atheistic worldview, called by some "the 6 Miracles of Atheism":

1. Everything came from nothing.

2. All life arose from non-life.

3. Human Intelligence appeared on non-intelligent matter.

4. Human consciousness arose on non-conscious matter.

5. Immaterial realities (information, logic, math) arose from simple matter.

6. Complex Order and Beauty arose from Chaos.

Not only do these "Miracles of Atheism" go against our common human experience, but they also violate many well-known and accepted laws and principles of logic, science, and will be generally perceived to be true about reality. If believing such things is the "intellectual price tag" of Atheism, then I'm afraid it's too expensive for my tastes. I prefer my worldview to be intellectually strong, logically sound, and not an outrage against my common sense perceptions of reality!

Finally, many of the world's most famous and renowned atheists have admitted their private "hunger" for God and the eternal. This would include Albert Camus, Jean Paul Sartre, and Auguste Comte.  Some of these thinkers, such CS Lewis, Lee Strobel, or Henry Morris, after having examined the evidence of God's existence, the proof of the Bible's reliability and inspiration, and historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, have since become committed followers of Christ. 

When examined as a worldview, although it presents a strong face in our current culture, Atheism possesses no positive evidence to show itself true, has very strong arguments against it, and  even commits incredible logical and philosophical blunders.  For these reasons, Atheism has frequently been abandoned by many of it's strongest thinkers in recent years, such as Dr. Anthony Flew and Dr. Francis Collins.  

For all of these reasons, and many more, I simply don't have enough faith to be an Atheist!

- Pastor J. 

Is Molinism as Depressing as Calvinism?

I had a question regarding God's Foreknowledge which is a topic that consistently eats away at my heart.

I was looking at an article Dr. Craig wrote on middle knowledge and I was wondering:

How does middle knowledge take us away from the idea of determinism? If God picks which world is created and in that world someone I know is not saved and cannot be saved...is this suggesting that in no such world would that person ever be saved? Do we then just assume that God has created a world in which everyone who can be saved in ANY world will be saved and ANY who can't be saved, won't be? And if that's the case, what good is human prayer in this situation? Doesn't it kind of just make it so that anyone who prays for what God has already done is going to have his/her prayer "answered" and the others wont? I would have thought the answer would be that God would have factored human prayer into His decision making and plan for the world (not that we change God's mind, per se) but it seems like if God's creation decree already established salvation/damnation...does it matter?

When I try and ponder God's foreknowledge and my life, I have horrible doubts. I feel incredibly depressed and guilty because my mind cannot reconcile it all. I feel like Calvinism suggests that God predetermines everything and we are all following a script which makes everything seem meaningless to me (and to Dr. Craig, as he says in his answer)...but middle knowledge seems to suggest that God predetermines us by choosing which world we exist in, so it seems like it's not too different from calvinism, it's just a step higher (I would love clarification here)...and then armenianism suggests that God draws all to Him, but not all are saved, yet God does things in the world that bring people to salvation and yet does not do them to some other people, which suggests either arbitrary behavior or some form of higher knowledge.

I genuinely hate it because I have always been a relatively strong Christian but I have opened this pandoras box that I cant figure out how to shut.

I know this question was a bit "rambly" and I know that someone other than Dr. Craig is probably going to answer, which is cool, but ....I guess my final question is...How do you live life with joy? How do you not fear that maybe someday something might happen that brings doubt into your heart and then you start to wonder like "what if I'm one of those people who could never be saved and just thought I was?" I know it sounds ridiculous, but I worry myself about this kind of thing and am genuinely seeking the advice of fellow Christians on this matter. I never thought about this kind of stuff until I got into the whole foreknowledge debate. Unfortunately this kind of discussion goes way beyond the current level of understanding of the members of my church and I can't really have this kind of discourse.

Thanks very much for any and all input.

Mike


United States


Click HERE to read Dr. Craig's answer

Question #2: "Can Atheism Explain the Beginning of the Universe?"

How Did The Universe Begin to Exist?

(pt.3) In this episode of our series "GOD: The Best Explanation?", we begin to investigate if the scientific fact of the beginning of our universe can be adequately explained by the existence of God.

Amazingly, in the 20th century alone, we have discovered at least 5 different ways in which we can demonstrate scientifically that the universe had a definite point of beginning a finite time ago, and is not eternal in the past. This of course cries out for an answer to one of the deepest questions of humanity "Where did the universe come from, and how did it begin?"

For more interesting videos and apologetic resources, you can send us your questions to intelligentfaith315@gmail.com . Also, check out our iTunes podcasts entitled "Reason To Believe" and "Intelligent Faith - Radio Podcast."

- Pastor J.

The 7 Different Concepts Of God

Are there different concepts of God today? 

What are they?

The Short Answer:  

Yes, there are many different "worldviews", which all see God very differently.

The seven major worldviews are Atheism, Pantheism, Panentheism,

Polytheism, Finite Godism, Deism,

and Theism.

The Long Answer:   As stated in the short answer above, there are many different worldviews that people choose from to think about reality. This is what is known as a "worldview", although some people refer to it as a "philosophy of life" or a "personal perspective on reality." Although either of these phrases can be used, I choose to refer to this way of viewing life and reality as a "worldview."

You may be asking yourself "What in the world is a 'worldview'?". A worldview is simply a way of viewing the world. It's also the mental glasses through which a person views reality. It's the "lens" you look through to understand the world around you. A worldview is the intellectual framework we use to make sense of everything around us, whether we realize it or not.

No matter who you are, where you've come from, which religion you subscribe to, or what cultural background you come from, you have a worldview about reality. The central questions are these:

1."Which worldview do you subscribe to?" 

2. "Is your worldview logical and compatible with reality?" 

Even if a person were to say "I don't have a philosophy of life", they just told you their philosophy about life. Every human being on earth possesses a philosophy or worldview about the universe we live in.

For this very reason, the renowned Christian author and thinker CS Lewis stated the following:

"... good philosophy must exist if for no other reason,

 than bad philosophy needs to be answered."

What makes for a good worldview? Well, it would seem for a worldview to be strong enough to devote oneself to it should be able to perform some very important functions. Here is a small list of features is strong worldview will possess:

1. Compatibility - A strong worldview needs to match up with what we know to be true about reality. This would include being in agreement the laws of logic, laws of morality, and other ways in which we know the universe functions.

2. Testability - A good worldview needs to be able to be tested, and even able to be proven wrong (falsifiable). This would mean that the worldview needs to be open to historical investigation, scientific and empirical testing, archaeological verification, and even manuscript authentication to see if the "holy book" in question is at all reliable.

3. Livability - A worldview also needs to be able to be lived out in daily life. This means that the worldview cannot violate the natural and innate truths that we live with every day, such as objective moral truths, or even logical truths.

4. Coherency - A strong worldview also needs to be internally consistent and coherent. This means that the worldview cannot commit self contradictions or self-defeating statements within its beliefs. Entire worldview and belief system must be in agreement and self consistent.

5. Plausibility - Finally, a good worldview needs to be more plausible than the alternative. Although it may not be easy for some to believe or accept, the worldview needs to be the best plausible option available, not possess "ad hoc" beliefs that wildly stretched the truth, in order to make a worldview more acceptable intellectually.

As we stated above the seven major worldviews are Atheism, Pantheism, Panentheism, Polytheism, Finite godism, and Deism. Now that we've defined with a worldview is, let's examine the seven major worldviews that exists on our planet today, looking for any inherent weaknesses, self contradictions, logical incoherencies, or absurdities. Obviously, these are found to be present within the worldviews we examine, then those worldviews aren't good choices for a person to hold to.

In our next series of articles on this topic, we will be examining the seven major worldviews that people hold to today, to see if they will hold up to intellectual and logical scrutiny.  For further study, download Dr. Norman Geisler's presentation on this topic here.

Have an Intelligent Faith!

- Pastor J. 

God and Infinity

Dear Dr Craig

I am a devout Christian and I read your Q&A every week. I have read Q#323 today and I was totally surprised by it because it is basically exactly what I have been thinking about for the last couple of days. Infinity is a concept that has been driving me nuts as I cannot completely fathom it. A few comments I want to make:

1. Is it possible that God could have counted the whole set of natural numbers? The answer according to me is no. Why? Because the set of natural numbers is infinite. You will never stop counting. So even though God is almighty, He cannot do things like these. It simply doesn't make sense. It's like saying God can create a rock that He cannot lift. It's a logical incoherent statement.

2. Regarding the existence of abstract objects: One thing that has bugged me about this is the whole thing about infinity. Does it exist? I have read some of your comments on this, namely that you say that infinity is a mere concept of the mind that doesn't exist in the real word. This makes sense to me. So if there are an infinite amount of natural numbers, how could they all exist? Well I believe numbers exist in two to three ways:

a. Since numbers are mere concepts, they exist in our minds as we think about them.

b. Numbers exist conceptually as real world objects represent them. I.e. the number of planets in the solar system.

c. They exist conceptually as symbols on a piece of paper (or computer screen).

Because only a finite amount of thoughts, objects and written symbols exist, it follows that only a finite amount of real numbers exist in the real world.

3. Abstract objects aren't limited to numbers. It includes things like music, literature and other forms of art. Now there are an infinite amount of songs that can be composed. Do they all exist? Again the same line of reasoning goes. A tune lives in the mind of the one that composed it and the ones who hear it. It is a concept, an idea which didn't exist before someone thought about it. So there are only a finite number of art forms in the real world and always will be even though the number increases all the time.

4. Now I want to say something about the future. God as we know can foresee the future. This is what makes prophecy possible. We know that the world has a beginning, and it will have an end in this age as the Bible predicts, but the age to come will have no end. So the number of future events counts up to infinity. Now is it possible for God to know everything in the future? Again as explained above this is impossible. One cannot know an infinite amount of things. It is simply an illogical thing to ask from someone like God, even though He is almighty, and I am not trying to limit Him in any way. So God knows the future. How much and how far? Well as much as He chooses or as far He deems necessary.

These are my comments. I therefore believe God is almighty, but He cannot do illogical things, or know things that do not exist. Thanks for reading and please let me know if you agree with my views. Also please tell me of articles I can read which might give me more insight into these things.

Finally I want to thank you for the work you're doing. I think you're making a big difference in many people's lives.

Regards.

Hardus

South Africa

Click HERE to read Dr. Craig's answer

Question #1: "Can Atheism Explain the Existence of our Universe?"

(pt.2) In this second installment of our new miniseries, "GOD: The Best Explanation?", we begin to investigate whether a personal Creator God might or might not be a good explanation of the features we observe about our universe and reality in general.

In this video we will take a look at Feature #1 that needs to be explained by any good worldview: the existence of the universe. Why is there anything rather than nothing? What is the best explanation for this fact of existence - Atheistic Naturalism? That the universe caused itself? Perhaps it is unexplained?

I hope you will join me for a look at this intriguing feature of our universe, and hope it will serve to stimulate your thinking in this area as well. 

Feel free to send us your questions or comments to IntelligentFaith315@gmail.com and to check out our Itunes podcast "Reason To Believe".

- Pastor J. 

GOD: The Best Explanation Of Our Reality?

What is the most plausible way to explain 

the features that we observe about our universe?

In this first installment of our new miniseries, "GOD: The Best Explanation?", we begin to investigate whether a personal Creator God might or might not be a good explanation to the variety of features we observe in our Reality.

In this video we also discuss 4 features of a strong worldview that need to be present:

- Explanatory Power
- Explanatory Scope
- High Degree of Plausibility
- Minimal Ad Hoc

We also examine 3 different types of reasoning that we can employ as we think about these fundamental issues:

- Deductive Reasoning - Used in philosophical argumentation.
- Inductive Reasoning - Used in scientific investigation.
- Abductive Reasoning - Used in medical/forensic examination.

For more information visit our site at www.intelligentfaith315.com or send us your questions or challenges to intelligentfaith315@gmail.com.

Gratuitous Evil and Moral Discernment

Dear Dr. Craig,

I should admit upfront that I am an atheist, as well as a Nietzschean and a deep moral sceptic. I find Hume's Is-Ought Gap convincing and, while I do not deny that I have moral feelings, I think it is more sensible to explain them as human psychological experience, not as "perceptions" of objective moral norms.

My question is about your response to the problem of gratuitous natural evil. In your debate with Walter Sinnott-Armstrong you responded to his hypotheticals about babies dying of painful diseases by saying that we lack the full scope of understanding to evaluate the moral rightness of God's non-intervention. Your argument makes perfect sense. We lack God's omniscience so we cannot judge whether allowing a baby to die of a horrible disease will somehow prevent a terrible evil or enable a great good. In fact, there are probably many constraints on our moral judgment in comparison to a perfectly good being!

But your response to the problem of gratuitous natural evil seems to create a problem for people who want to be moral. I perceive a baby dying of a painful disease as a moral evil and I judge God to be an immoral monster for allowing that to happen. But your response suggests that my judgment is in error: how do I know God does not have some greater reason for allowing that suffering? But doesn't that mean that all of my moral judgments are possibly in error? If I lack the knowledge and scope of cognition to judge God as immoral for allowing a baby to die of a horrible disease, am I not similarly unqualified to judge a human who can cure a dying baby, but chooses not to? Going even further, if I see someone about to die in a tsunami, should I try to save them? What if God is trying to accomplish some greater good by allowing that person to die?

In short, if we are in no position to judge the morality of God's actions or inactions, how are we in a position to judge each other's moral actions or to even make moral decisions in the first place? As the disease-stricken baby shows, my moral judgment can err. How can I know, then, when my moral judgment is in error? If I assume your response to the problem of evil is correct, then my moral sense errs quite frequently, usually in response to all the horrible natural evil surrounding us. Does this not render attempting to behave morally absurd?

Best,

Nick


United States


Continue Reading --->

Do Atheists Have a "God-Hunger" and a "thirst" for the eternal?

Unbeknownst to most people, many of the world famous atheists of the past (Jean Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Auguste Comte,etc...) have made incredible admissions in their writings, that they too, have a hunger for the eternal and transcendent.

As Ecclesiastes 3:11 states, God seems to have put a hunger for eternity into the hearts of men, even the Atheists.  Watch this video, and see how man's hunger for God, points back in a powerful way to his Creator and Maker....

- Pastor J.

Famous Atheists Admit They Hunger for God?

Has Jean Paul Sartre ever admitted his personal

need for the eternal?

Did Aldous Huxley or Auguste Comte evidence a longing 

for the transcendent and spiritual?

Well, as we look at their writings and letters, this is exactly what we find.  Tune it to part 3 of our "Anthropological Argument for God's Existence" and read for yourself that even the most famous atheists of modern history have betrayed their hunger, longing, and need for God and the eternal.

Also, if you haven't seen our new Itunes podcast "Intelligent Faith", take a second to check it out and feel free to subscribe to it.  Follow along with us in the future, as we continue to discuss many of the most important apologetic and evidential topics for Christians in today's society.

Keep growing in your passion to defend the Christian Worldview...and have an Intelligent Faith!

- Pastor J. 

The Concept of God

Firstly, I would like to say that, despite the fact that I'm agnostic, you are one of my heroes. In all of the debates that I've watched, you've been the sole provider clarity and rigor to the discussion.

My question regards whether or not your definition of "God" is a proper definite description. Among other things, he's posited as a being which is omnipotent and omniscient. However, is there good reason to think that there are upper-bounds on power and knowledge, so as to allow this to be feasible?

Let's look at one area in which any being's abilities and knowledge is necessarily finite and incomplete. For example, it is obvious that there's no greatest natural number, as this set is an infinite one. Now, we know that no possible being can know all of the elements of this set, since it's uncountable. We can also say that if one being knows or can know more natural numbers than another, then that being is more knowledgeable or capable, respectively, in this area. This means that since the set of natural numbers is infinite, there cannot, in general, be a single greatest-possible being, because we can always conceive of a being with greater cognitive capabilities or knowledge (i.e, the ability to know n + 1 elements of the set). Since there are certain areas pertaining to knowledge and power which do not have an upper-bound, it is necessarily the case that any possible being's net knowledge and capabilities are limited and imperfect. Hence, there cannot be a being possessing the properties that are ascribed to God.

Thank you,

Ian

Canada

Click HERE to read Dr. Craig's answer

"Why Does God Allow Evil? - The Atheist's Best Question

"How can an All-Good, All-Powerful, and All-Knowing God allow evil and suffering in the world?"

There are basically 2 components to the question of "Evil and Suffering": 

1. The Emotional Response - This involves loving, caring, praying, counseling someone who is going through a tragedy.
2. The Intellectual Response - This involves the logical answers raised by the existence of evil and suffering in a world that has been created and is sustained by an All-powerful, All-loving, All-knowing God.  This is the version of the problem that I will give you some answers to below.  If you are seeking help regarding the emotional aspect, please come talk with me at Calvary and I'd love to pray for you, ok?

In regards to your question about Sudan/Darfur/Egypt, here are some of the answers that we know to be true from the Scriptures and solid Christian Theology/Philosophy:

• "Evil" isn't an actual thing, in and of itself -  "Evil" isn't a substance, but rather the lack of good substance; "Evil" is simply "the absence/corruption of a good that should be there."  This is the view of St. Augustine based upon Scripture.
• "Evil" actually demonstrates the existence of an All-Good God - The idea of "evil" implies an objective, transcendent Moral Law, the violation of which is "evil."  But there could never be an objective, transcendent Moral Law unless there was a transcendent Moral Lawgiver - God.  Therefore, our perception of "evil" implies the existence of the Moral Lawgiver, God. 
• "Good" could never exist, unless the possibility for "Evil" did as well - For example, unless a life-threatening situation existed, the good of self-sacrifice and heroism would never come to be.  If there was not potential for "evil" there would likewise be no potential for the "good".  
• Evil human choices MUST be allowed by God - Even God can't do anything (sin, evil, lie), especially that which is logically contradictory such as creating a "square circle" or a "married bachelor".  Making someone freely choose Him, or forcing someone to freely choose to do good are both logically incoherent and contradictory.  Therefore, if God is truly Perfect and Good (which He must be) He cannot force people to do good.  This creates the possibility for evil and suffering in the world.  This is known as the "Free Will Defense" by Dr. Alvin Plantinga, a renowned Christian Philosopher.  As God is the Sovereign of the Universe, He has created us in His Image with human sovereignty as well (Genesis 1:26,27).
• Some evils are permitted in order to produce a greater good  - Some goods would plausible never come to be unless a certain amount of evil was permitted.  For example, a child experiences a bit of pain in order for them to receive a shot of vaccine in order to prevent their infection and death.  God may allow temporary pain, if it is the only thing that will lead a person to an everlasting relationship of peace and joy with him.  The eternal good outweighs the temporary pain (2 Cor 4,5)
• Some evils are permitted in order to prevent an even greater evil - The above example will function here as well.  In order to prevent the countless billions of humanity spending an eternity apart from Him, the Lord allowed one Man Jesus Christ, to suffer the evil that they rightly deserved.  It is better to spank a child and so teach him to obey authority, that to never correct him, and allow him to grow up and become a law-breaking criminal, inflicting pain upon others and himself in the process.
• Just because God has not stopped evil yet, doesn't mean He never will - This kind of thinking imposes an unjustified time constraint upon God.  Who is to say that He must stop evil by this day or that day?  We do know that if He is a Good and Perfect God (which He is) that He MUST step in eventually and vanquish evil and suffering.  The Scriptures actually tell us that this will happen, and then the final triumph of the Perfect and Good God over the forces of Evil will be complete (Rev 19-22).
• God, being Perfect and Loving, is being Merciful in tolerating evil presently - Although this is not usually mentioned when this issue of "Evil and Suffering" is discussed, it is very relevant.  If the complaint is that God needs to wipe out all evil in order to show His existence and reality, then this puts the questioner in a very awkward position - the questioner himself would thereby be eliminated!  The reason for this is that every human being is morally imperfect, and has violated objective morality in some way.  This is what the Scriptures refer to as "sin", coming from the old English word meaning "to miss the mark."  We have all missed the mark of God's Moral Perfection, whether it is Mother Theresa or Adolf Hitler, and therefore all of humanity deserves God's wrath for our "cosmic crimes" against him (Romans 3:23, 6:23, 5:8, 10:9,10).  It is only in his mercy and longsuffering that He has not yet destroyed all evil.  He is graciously extending His grace and patience to humanity, hoping that we will come to our senses and return to our Creator, through the God-Man, Jesus Christ. 

These 8 answers are but a small number of the intellectual responses to the problem of Evil, that we can offer from the Christian Worldview.  There are many more answers and possibilities we can give in addition to these mentioned here.

Also, please remember that it is not only the Christian that must answer the Problem of Evil, but also the other 6 Worldviews that people may hold to: Atheism, Pantheism, Panentheism, Finite Godism, Polytheism, or Deism.  Other than Christian Theism, no other Worldview or philosophy can give as coherent, comprehensive, and intellectually compelling response to this problem of suffering and pain within the world.

Emotionally, this problem is always difficult and painful for all of us as people.  If we will turn to the One True God, in the Person of Jesus Christ, He can comfort and strengthen us in the midst of our trials, tribulations, and pain (2 Cor 4,5; Romans 8).

Intellectually, the Lord has made possible for us to navigate these evils in the world, having provided us with a great variety of possibilities that may be the reason for some pain or suffering.  As we get the know the Persons and Nature of the Father, Son, and Spirit, we can logically and relationally trust that the Lord has good, moral, reasons for allowing some pains in our lives and in the world around us.

For further research I encourage you to search our site under the word "evil" and examine that articles that we've already posted in the past on this subject.

Feel free to send me you questions or comments to our "Intelligent Faith 315" Email.

- Pastor J. 

What is the "Genetic Fallacy"? - Interview with Dr. William Lane Craig

" You only believe Christianity 

because you were raised in America!"

"The only reason that you believe in Jesus 

is because you parents are Christians!"

These are textbook examples of the "Genetic Fallacy", a well know informal logical mistake, which means to disbelieve something based upon where the belief originated from.  No matter whether it comes from a comic book or from a Phd professor, the truth is the truth.  Listen to Dr. Craig as he gives a concise description of the "Genetic Fallacy", and hopefully it will help you to spot it the next time it is thrown at you.

- Pastor J. 

The First Cause

A number of theories have been proposed to explain a materialistic origin of the universe.

Self-creation

Some materialists have claimed that the universe created itself. As Stephen Hawking argues, "Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing." But for anything to create itself, it would have to exist before it was created. Most people would agree this is logically absurd. Oxford mathematician John Lennox observes that Hawking confuses physical laws -- which merely describe how the universe works -- with ultimate explanations:

The laws of physics can explain how the jet engine works, but someone had to build the thing, put in the fuel and start it up. The jet could not have been created without the laws of physics... Similarly, the laws of physics could never have actually built the universe. Some agency must have been involved. What options are left for materialists? Since they are unwilling to accept intelligent design as a first cause, materialists hold that ultimately the universe came into being by chance for no reason at all.

Betting on Chance

Oxford University scientist and author Peter Atkins parodies the book of Genesis with a summary of the materialistic view:

Continue reading --->

Critical Questions

Dear Dr. Craig,

I am an atheist from, and living in, the United Kingdom, a place where Christianity is in pretty sharp decline at the moment. I have viewed some of your debates online with some curiosity. I would like to ask you some critical questions.

1) Don't you agree that the whole time-limit debate format is an extremely poor way of determining the truth? There are numerous flaws. For instance, the fact that a debate can be "won" by tactics and rhetoric alone does not make this seem like a very constructive use of time. Also, the fact that timing is such an important factor means that certain points raised aren't answered by one's opponent, not because they cannot answer them, but because they don't have time to, which gives the audience a misleading impression. Also, heck, anyone who thinks a question like the "existence of God" can be answered in just 2 hours seems pretty dashed overconfident to me!

2) Aren't you a little too arrogant in your approach to atheism and non-Christians? I've seen you describe followers of Dawkins and Hitchens as "ignorant and arrogant" (a little ironic, as some of your acolytes wouldn't exactly qualify for Mensa membership), I've heard you dismiss atheistic arguments as "unimpressive", and I think I've also heard you affirm that there are "no good reasons to disbelieve in God". To me, this sounds like extreme over-confidence. If all of this is true, then why do so many perfectly intelligent and reasonable people disbelieve in God's existence? Arrogance is a luxury you can ill afford if you want your religion to survive nowadays, given the huge increase in intellectual scepticism about theism in Europe and elsewhere. I think you could do with being a little more civil and courteous in your discourse sometimes.

3) Is philosophy ultimately a waste of time? I've heard you say that, even if all the arguments for God's existence fail, God may still exist. This is perfectly correct, and is also true the other way around; they may all be perfectly logical and God may still not exist. So, why bother with philosophical arguments at all if it's so inconclusive? Why not just stick with the facts of science?

4) Is the alleged rise in Christians in philosophy as significant as you think it is? Irreligion is on the rise in the population as a whole, and the statistics indicate that atheism and agnosticism are the majority viewpoint in science, lest we forget.

I ask these questions, not out of pure hostility, but out of concern and a genuine desire to understand where you are coming from. I just worry that your approach will create more division and anger rather than constructive discussion.

Yours sincerely,

Adam

United Kingdom

Click HERE to read Dr. Craig's answer