![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Athiest, or, How to Prove God Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (Part 1)
Oh, what a relief it was this weekend to have a book to read that not only affirmed the truth of the Gospel but actually and unashamedly considered it factual that the Christian God is real! You see, on Thursday, Troy took me to Barnes and Noble to let me pick out a book. My boy is so good to me - he knows there's nothing I like more than going into a bookstore and getting to wander around and pick out my own book, rather than have someone pick it out for me (not that I would ever turn down the gift of a book, but half the fun of it is getting to go to the bookstore to begin with). So it was incredibly sweet of him to do that for me on my birthday. But I digress.
The book I finally selected is called I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist and is by Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek. Its title is a claim that I have also made many times, and its premise is that it takes more faith to be an atheist, or subscribe to any other religion, than to believe in Christianity. Put another way, there is sufficient rational proof for the existence of God, and specifically the God of the Christian faith, as to make it the most probable explanation for the world in which we now live. And, because I am so impressed with the logic of the argument (Mr. Spock would be proud), I will reproduce it here, in miniature, though of course with many important elements removed (as I can't exactly repeat the whole book here).
tiredThe book I finally selected is called I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist and is by Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek. Its title is a claim that I have also made many times, and its premise is that it takes more faith to be an atheist, or subscribe to any other religion, than to believe in Christianity. Put another way, there is sufficient rational proof for the existence of God, and specifically the God of the Christian faith, as to make it the most probable explanation for the world in which we now live. And, because I am so impressed with the logic of the argument (Mr. Spock would be proud), I will reproduce it here, in miniature, though of course with many important elements removed (as I can't exactly repeat the whole book here).
To begin with, we must discover whether or not the truth can be known - if it cannot, there is no point in discussing issues of truth and the argument can stop before it begins. However, the claim that "there is no objective or ultimate truth" defeats itself - it is, in fact, a statement of objective and ultimate truth: that there is no objective and ultimate truth. If we substitute the phrase "objective and/or ultimate truth" with the letter "A," we see quite clearly that the argument is in the form of "Both A and Not A" which is, of course, nonsense. So objective truth can exist, or at the very least we must proceed as if it does for that is the only way in which we can function in this world. Because this truth is objective, it is not dependent on our feelings or preferences - the sky is blue however much we might wish (or even believe) that it is purple. Additionally, it is not true that all world religions are equally true, because they teach contradictory doctrines. For example, while Christians teach that Jesus Christ was crucified, Islam teaches that he escaped that punishment. Therefore, while it is possible that none of the world religions are true, it is not possible that all of the world religions are true because they contain mutually exclusive doctrines. This matters because most religions make serious claims about our eternal fate, and the consequences of choosing the wrong religion could be eternal and damning.
So, it remains to us to discover which, if any, of these religions are true. The way in which we determine which statements are true and which are not is through logical reasoning - therefore, it is best to approach the question of religious truth from a logical standpoint. (And before someone brings up that stupid "western logic vs. eastern logic" argument, well, the example given in the book is that, even in India, people look both ways before crossing the street, because it's EITHER me OR the bus - there's no "both-and" argument there!) Now, while some argue that the ONLY way to know anything is through observation, they cannot prove that argument with observation, invalidating that argument and others like it - there are other ways of arriving at truth than through direct observation. Furthermore, as with gravity or wind, while we cannot see God, we can see the effects he has on the world (if any) and draw conclusions from those.
What evidence can we observe? The beginning of the universe is a good place to start. Scientists now believe that the universe was created in what is commonly known as the Big Bang, in which all space, time and matter exploded into being. Current theories hold that, prior to this (if it can be considered such - as time did not exist it would be more accurate to say "beyond" or "outside of" this), there was nothing. No matter, no space, no time. Now, things that had a beginning have a beginner - there has never been observed in all of human experience something which began with true spontaneity - and much of science is the search for causes to observed phenomena, presupposing that such causes exist. Nothing comes from nothing, as the song goes - that's perfectly logical. The Beginner which began the universe had to be outside of, or other than, the things which were to come into being, namely space, time and matter, in the same way that a painter must be outside of, or other than, his painting. Therefore, the Beginner is eternal, outside of time; and transcendent, outside of space and matter; in all, he is infinite, as otherwise he could not have created the finite.
The universe also has every appearance of design. I have discussed Intelligent Design on my blog before so I won't go into great detail here, but the anthropic constants (15 of which are discussed in this book and can be found here), the irreducible complexity of life, the intelligible codes in our DNA which contain enough information to fill hundreds of thousands of books, the complete lack of evidence for evolution, and the general precision with which our universe has been designed to support life on this particular planet all prove beyond a reasonable doubt that some intelligent force is behind the creation of our universe - the evidence simply does not lend itself to an atheistic world view. Furthermore, since we have determined from the beginning of the universe that this Creator is infinite, there can be only one of him. This is because an infinite being cannot, by definition, coexist with another infinite being, or it would no longer be infinite (it would end in the place where the other being existed). So we have deduced that there is an intelligent God who created the universe and all that is in it but who is separate from it. This rules out atheism, pantheism, and polytheism (and henotheism, which is essentially a variation of polytheism for these purposes), leaving only monotheism as a logical explanation for the way the world as we know it is. The only religions which teach monotheism are Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, meaning that one of those three must be correct.
And on that note, we'll stop for the night, because I'm really sleepy and I have class tomorrow. But let me encourage everyone to read this book if what I've said so far interests you. I found these first chapters to be some of the most interesting and exciting material in the whole book, and I am sad to have given it so short a shift, but perhaps when I'm more awake I'll come back to it. And to think, we haven't even gotten to the argument from morality, the existence of miracles, the historical accuracy of the New Testament, the proof for Jesus Christ as God, and the inerrancy of Scripture! More coming soon!
-Jaya-
So, it remains to us to discover which, if any, of these religions are true. The way in which we determine which statements are true and which are not is through logical reasoning - therefore, it is best to approach the question of religious truth from a logical standpoint. (And before someone brings up that stupid "western logic vs. eastern logic" argument, well, the example given in the book is that, even in India, people look both ways before crossing the street, because it's EITHER me OR the bus - there's no "both-and" argument there!) Now, while some argue that the ONLY way to know anything is through observation, they cannot prove that argument with observation, invalidating that argument and others like it - there are other ways of arriving at truth than through direct observation. Furthermore, as with gravity or wind, while we cannot see God, we can see the effects he has on the world (if any) and draw conclusions from those.
What evidence can we observe? The beginning of the universe is a good place to start. Scientists now believe that the universe was created in what is commonly known as the Big Bang, in which all space, time and matter exploded into being. Current theories hold that, prior to this (if it can be considered such - as time did not exist it would be more accurate to say "beyond" or "outside of" this), there was nothing. No matter, no space, no time. Now, things that had a beginning have a beginner - there has never been observed in all of human experience something which began with true spontaneity - and much of science is the search for causes to observed phenomena, presupposing that such causes exist. Nothing comes from nothing, as the song goes - that's perfectly logical. The Beginner which began the universe had to be outside of, or other than, the things which were to come into being, namely space, time and matter, in the same way that a painter must be outside of, or other than, his painting. Therefore, the Beginner is eternal, outside of time; and transcendent, outside of space and matter; in all, he is infinite, as otherwise he could not have created the finite.
The universe also has every appearance of design. I have discussed Intelligent Design on my blog before so I won't go into great detail here, but the anthropic constants (15 of which are discussed in this book and can be found here), the irreducible complexity of life, the intelligible codes in our DNA which contain enough information to fill hundreds of thousands of books, the complete lack of evidence for evolution, and the general precision with which our universe has been designed to support life on this particular planet all prove beyond a reasonable doubt that some intelligent force is behind the creation of our universe - the evidence simply does not lend itself to an atheistic world view. Furthermore, since we have determined from the beginning of the universe that this Creator is infinite, there can be only one of him. This is because an infinite being cannot, by definition, coexist with another infinite being, or it would no longer be infinite (it would end in the place where the other being existed). So we have deduced that there is an intelligent God who created the universe and all that is in it but who is separate from it. This rules out atheism, pantheism, and polytheism (and henotheism, which is essentially a variation of polytheism for these purposes), leaving only monotheism as a logical explanation for the way the world as we know it is. The only religions which teach monotheism are Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, meaning that one of those three must be correct.
And on that note, we'll stop for the night, because I'm really sleepy and I have class tomorrow. But let me encourage everyone to read this book if what I've said so far interests you. I found these first chapters to be some of the most interesting and exciting material in the whole book, and I am sad to have given it so short a shift, but perhaps when I'm more awake I'll come back to it. And to think, we haven't even gotten to the argument from morality, the existence of miracles, the historical accuracy of the New Testament, the proof for Jesus Christ as God, and the inerrancy of Scripture! More coming soon!
-Jaya-
Sounds like a good one...
If you're ever in the apologetics mood again I'm like 3/4ths of the way through Tim Keller's new book "The Reason For God," and so far it's really compelling.
Re: Sounds like a good one...