a citizen of some other place.: Attention: Self-Proclaimed Critical Thinkers
There are very few things about the internet more annoying than the “Lists of Over Nine Thousand Bible Contradictions.” This is not because I’m a sheltered Christian who’s afraid of them. I am willing to admit there are some contradictions in the Bible. Not 5,000. Not 1,000. Not even 300. But…
Why Not Atheism?
In an interview with philosopher Douglas Groothuis, who spent more than 8 years producing his 752-page tome Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith, Lee Strobel asks the following question:
Q. You offer a compelling case for the resurrection of Jesus. What’s the strongest counter-argument to him rising from the dead? And why does that alternative fail?
To which Groothuis replies
A. None of the counter-arguments are as rationally strong as the claim that Jesus left an empty tomb and rose from the dead in space-time actuality. The naturalistic accounts all fail to explain key elements of what we know from history.
However, in recent years, the hallucination theory has generated the most attention, as Gary Habermas has pointed out. This theory affirms that Jesus did not objectively rise from the dead; instead, his followers subjectively hallucinated a resurrection and subsequently built their movement on this delusion. While this counter-argument may be “the best of the bad,” it is still very bad indeed.
First, hallucinations are not group phenomena, but rather individual experiences. But we have well-attested records that many people in their right minds observed the risen Jesus at the same time, as well as other individual appearances (as to Paul).
Second, if many people were deluded about Jesus and began a movement in his name, the Roman government could have put a stop to the young Jesus movement by producing his corpse publicly. They had both the means and the motive to do so. But we have no record of anything like that.
Third, Jesus’ followers did not expect him to rise from the dead. This was not part of their theology and they did not understand Jesus when he made reference to this fact before his resurrection. N.T Wright strongly argues for this. But hallucinations usually involve some form of wish fulfillment: people strongly desire something, and then hallucinate about it. This does not fit the objective historical evidence about Jesus’ followers at all.
Read the full interview for more answers for “why not?”
Darwin’s Heretic: Did the Co-Founder of Evolution Embrace Intelligent Design?
The Ghosts of Atheism
Atheists don’t believe in the supernatural so they naturally don’t believe in ghosts.
Well as Robert Velarde demonstrates in his article, Ghosts for the Atheists even atheists have ghosts.
It’s not that they don’t exist, it’s just that like so many other things, they simply try to deny their existence.
'fulfilled covenant': What's Left of Atheism
I’ve received various responses to my posts on ‘Science and Faith’ (unlike certain atheists who are concerned with nothing more than exercising their photoshop skills on Tumblr, some have actually engaged in something like a rational dialogue). I think most of these responses understand what I’ve…
Good word
The Unfriendly Atheist: Reason
At the heart of unbelief is not reason, but the desire to self-determine right and wrong in order to justify sin. Press a person hard enough and you’ll quickly see that it’s not a matter of intelligence that they don’t believe, but that they don’t like a particular teaching or command of God. If there is no God, there is no reason not to do whatever I want.
The appeal of unbelief is not reason but sin.
Alright kids, what logical fallacy is this? Strawman argument, giving a false definition behind something and then arguing against it from this false definition?
At the heart of belief is not reason, but the desire to self-determine right and wrong in order to justify human rights violations. Press a person hard enough and you’ll quickly see that it’s not a matter of intelligence that they believe, but that they don’t like a particular minority or group different than themselves. If there is a personal deity, there is suddenly supreme justification for whatever I want.
The appeal of belief is not reason but bigotry.
So is what you’re saying similar or different to what’s going on with the Chinese government and the Christian Church?
I find it conveniently overlooked that while secular humanists are busy accusing Christians of the inquisition, which we repeatedly deplore, the humanistic Chinese government has been just as busy persecuting the Christian church. The same happened in the former USSR.
Christians are often called bigots who are simply opposed to minority groups that don’t share their same beliefs. This is a convenient argument if you wish not to address any facts, but would rather create smokescreens to persuade the gullible.
Sounds like you’d like a society that simply consists of people who think exactly like you and you’ll do whatever it takes to get it.
How are you different?
Making sense of how an atheist is made
Interesting article on the book, The Making of an Atheist. A few quotes in particular:
The problem of evil, and issues of science are largely smokescreens that mask atheist’s immorality and guilt.
When atheism fully sets in, what results? “Spiritual deadness ensures that we can’t discover our spiritual deadness” (p. 90). Further, “it is difficult for theists to reason with atheists about worldview matters when such basic features of spiritual life are so denigrated. For this reason, we should not expect atheists to respond positively to rational arguments” (p. 101). But Spiegel balances this perspective with the admonition to always be ready to give a reason to everyone who asks.
The Reason Rally
Long article but great insight on how ridiculous Richard Dawkins, et al. really are.
Second, although Eagleton isn’t sure about how far to take biblical stories such as the fall in Eden as actual history, he confesses to having found its narrative of creation and the fall as “far more radical” and compelling than the cheerful myth of perfectibility and progress, “with its eminently suburban, smugly sanguine trust in the efficacy of a spot of social engineering here and a dose of liberal enlightenment there.” At the heart of Christian theology, Eagleton observes, is a humanism more radical than atheists can muster and an appreciation for the tragedy of the human condition that they are emotionally opposed to even considering. Christianity is the sort of faith expressed “by a human being at the end of his tether, foundering in darkness, pain, and bewilderment, who nevertheless remains faithful to the promise of a transformative love.”
A Sceptical Student encounters Jesus
