Posted on 08/01/2006 12:42:58 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback
In the first chapter of their new book, 20 Compelling Evidences that God exists, Ken Boa and Robert Bowman write, “We don’t mean to discourage you from reading the rest of this book. But in the interest of full disclosure, we should tell you that, in a sense, there is only one good reason to believe that God exists: because it’s true.”
That statement is both profound and well expressed. Unfortunately, these days it’s not the kind of statement you can make in public without having scorn heaped upon your head. As the authors jokingly point out, the popular viewpoint regarding truth is, “Anyone who believes that he is right and others are wrong is intolerant.” Now that’s self-contradictory on its face, but it’s almost certain to be thrown at you if you assert a truth claim.
That’s why Boa and Bowman have titled their book 20 Compelling Evidences that God Exists—because they recognize that for any claim to truth to be taken seriously in today’s culture, it needs solid evidence to back it up. As the authors write, “There are many such evidences, but they all have value because they help us see that the God of the Bible is real.” In fewer than two hundred pages, they clearly and concisely examine some of today’s most pervasive worldviews and their flaws. Then they present their case for God’s existence and His revelation of Himself through Jesus Christ.
What kind of evidences are they talking about? There’s an amazing variety. They don’t state it right upfront, but they are organizing their “20 compelling evidences” in a way that takes readers through the doctrines of creation, fall, redemption, and restoration—the four basic elements of the Christian worldview that I set forth in How Now Shall We Live?
They start with evidence about the universe and the origins of life. And they talk, for example, about how finely our solar system and our planet had to be calibrated to support life. At “an extremely conservative estimate,” they say, the probability of our planet being capable of sustaining us is about one in a billion. It had to be at just the right place in the solar system, which had to be at just the right place in the galaxy. Even the expansion of the universe had to happen at just the right rate in order for all of us to be here today.
From evidence about the universe, the authors move on to evidence of humanity’s sinful nature; then evidence of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection; and finally, evidence of those who have lived and died for Christ. Examining concepts ranging from Greek philosophy to archeology to the Big Bang theory to postmodernism, the authors make a powerful case for the existence of a loving Creator.
In short, I highly recommend Boa and Bowman’s book. They provide in a very readable form an excellent apologetic resource for Christians wondering how to defend their faith in a world that’s “tolerant” of everything except Christianity.
Ken Boa is a great apologist—one of the most engaging and popular teachers in our Centurion’s training program. You can visit our website, BreakPoint.org, to find out how you can get 20 Compelling Evidences that God Exists. While you’re there, be sure to check out some of our other Christian worldview resources.
Um...no, it isn't profound. It's the intellectual equivalent of "Because I say so." I hope the logic in the rest of the book is better than that.
There are links to further information at the source document.
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Apologetics do not constitute evidence, I'm afraid.
Personally, I think it is a mistake for folks to try to concoct evidence of the existence of deities. The very nature of a supernatural entity means that there is no physical evidence of it.
Faith, alone, is sufficient for most people to believe in whatever deity is the most popular where they are. Most people don't need physical evidence of that deity's existence.
However, some authors just have to take a stab at it. Generally their logic fails miserably and their evidence is nothing more than a chain of circular references.
I'll be buying a copy of this latest attempt to prove the existence of a deity. I've already read so many of them that one more won't be too trying.
And reason #1 being:.... Every time an atheist's car lurches over a cliff, they yell out, "GOD HELP ME!" :)
Without getting into any metaphysical rants, of course God exists. Why has humankind always had some kind of belief in a power greater than themselves---even if it were animistic or shamanistic. I was reading some thing about other animal (dolphins, I believe) having some sense of individuality and being able to recognize other dolphins as individuals. But I don't think any scientist has come up with any kind of proof about the Great Dolphin in the Heavenly Ocean that Flipper and his friends worship. Man is unique in this respect. As must as atheistic Marxism wants to expound on "religion being the opiate of the people"---and unfortunately religion can turn into an opium if your not psychologically sound--the facts is that mankind cannot live in such a spiritual void. Therefore, the state became God (along with its cult worship of folks like Stalin, Mao Castro etc.)
Maybe the system wasn't created by a God; it always existed, and therefore never had a beginning.
That is pretty hard to comprehend. Amazingly having a belief in a God that always existed and never had a beginning is easier to comprehend for most people. - tom
Not a compelling argument for a divine creation given that there are quite probably trillions of planets in the universe.
It's interesting to note that regimes/ideologies that had Atheism as their official religion, were the premier mass murderers of all time. All other ideologies were complete pikers.
Just one more thing. When you're talking about specific beliefs such as a belief in Jesus, Allah, Krishna, Buddha or any other religion then I believe one can definitely debate. I was speaking more about the existence of some kind os Supreme Being in the most general sense.
"And reason #1 being:.... Every time an atheist's car lurches over a cliff, they yell out, "GOD HELP ME!" :)
"
They do? Were you riding along?
This is a variation of the old "There are no atheists in foxholes" cliche. It's not true, either way.
I am an atheist, and have been near death a couple of times. Not once did I call on any deities.
Well when "God" went out the window so did the value of a human life. If a person or group of persons are not useful to the state or challenged the state--they just had to go.
Yet if there were no God or the human species stopped believing there was one then our entire moral underpinnings would be thrown out the window and an anything goes attitude would sweep the world.
Come to think of it,we almost HAVE that philosophy in many quarters today.I know for me if I didn't believe in God's greater plan and that I am here for a wondeful and fulfilling purpose then I would probably say"to hell with any morality"and eat all the junk food,smoke all the dope and screw all the women I could.Just a total hedonism trip.Why not if theres nothing beyond the mortal world?
I think we are hardwired to believe in God BY God.All cultures from time immemorial have believed in a higher power and an afterlife.So I really think that our life down here is a mere boot camp for the evolution of our soul.
I know I'll have all the uber-intellegent rant on me for this...
My husband and I LOVE the science channel. We love anything to do with the planet, science, how things work, etc...
Last night they had a program on a homonid. I can't explain it, but it just didn't 'feel' right to me! A giraffe was still a giraffe (maybe slightly changed, but a giraffe nonetheless) 6 million years ago, but we (humans) have jumped species? I just don't get that? Why?
Why are humans different that we changed completely, while other animals, every other animal on earth for that matter, remained just that. An animal?
Now I don't think God said "poof" and there was the ocean, etc... And I do believe the earth is REAAAAALLLLLLLLYYYYYY old. Older than the Bible predicts, but were we monkeys?
Can someone smarter than me help?
"Yet if there were no God or the human species stopped believing there was one then our entire moral underpinnings would be thrown out the window and an anything goes attitude would sweep the world.
"
That's an interesting argument, but it doesn't really hold up. The concept of a deity is something that every culture seems to have reinvented. All are different in many ways, yet all are the "source" of that culture's morality and ethics.
Since there are, and have been, so many of these deities, which one is the correct one? The answer is that it is whichever one is the dominant deity of your own culture.
Human beings live in societal groups. For such groups to work, there must be rules. It's easiest to assign such rules to a deity and threaten the breakers of the rules with some sort of punishment from the deity or deities. That way, the rules are externalized and nobody in the society needs to take responsibility for them.
Oddly enough, the basic set of moral values are pretty much the same in all societies. One must worship the deity of that society. One may not murder members of that society. One must respect the sexual mores of that society. One must respect the property of other members of that society.
Pretty basic stuff, shared by virtually every society.
Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. --- St.Paul writing for God
"Absolute proof that not only does G-d exist, but he loves you and wants you to be happy:
Chocolate
Coffee
Beer "
You left out the most important one: sexual reproduction.
Romans 1
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
Oh that must explain why in the societies/ideologies where Atheism was/is the official religion, mass murder was a raging epidemic.
It's easiest to assign such rules to a deity and threaten the breakers of the rules with some sort of punishment from the deity or deities. Oddly enough, the basic set of moral values are pretty much the same in all societies.
Um...no, it isn't profound. It's the intellectual equivalent of "Because I say so." I hope the logic in the rest of the book is better than that.
"Because I said so" is meant to stop further inquiry or investigation. "Because it's true" is a summation of information that follows.
Oh really? What's your 'proof'? There are a tremendous number of stories validating that saying.
Thank you and Amen. The Truth is the truth and there is no other Truth.
"The very nature of a supernatural entity means that there is no physical evidence of it."
Nope. God will not hop into a cupola to allow an assay, or pose for a photograph, true. If God, as Christians believe, entered into time and space, there was physical evidence in the form of his person and actions, and a series of unique events in the form of his miracles and his resurrection. Of course, you do need to trust the apostles, who were witnesses and wrote about these unique events and action. Their writings have an historical context. Their writings and the history might be a better place to start your "examination."
"I think it is a mistake for folks to try to concoct evidence of the existence of deities."
I think is is a mistake to prejudge the contents of a book before it has been read.
"I've already read so many of them that one more won't be too trying."
I was going to write something about humility, but at least you are still reading the books. I hope that your continued reading brings something positive to your life.
They were also in the 20th Century, with a much higher population to kill and much more efficient methods of killing and transportation. If the Muslims had this in the 700s, the slaughter of Christians in Europe would have been impressive. But then if the Christians had it, their slaughter of the pagans in that same century would have been equally impressive. Charlemagne would have been much more effective in Northern Europe if he'd had guns, bombs and artillery, and the Muslims would have had a great time.
Creationists must fare the worst in Las Vegas because they don't know anything about odds.
They always bet on life as we know it evolving. They forget that we are just one of many options, and the bet should properly be about any kind of life evolving. I am always amazed at the hubris, to think that we are the one and only, the desired result that the odds must be created for.
Which deity is the correct one?I think they all are just different names for the same higher force.Some cultures like the Yoruba or ancient Greeks and Egyptians had multiple gods and deities but they all represented parts of the human existence that we could not explain.
I really think most civil societies would break down a lot faster if religion(which is an institution I have minimal faith in)was totally discarded and we lived our lives by a moral code based on the premise there was nothing beyond this earthly existence,which,face it,is pretty bleak for most of the world.Religion exerts necessary social control over our basest instincts and appetites and is a pre-requisite for a civilized society.
Personally,I was raised completely absent from any church.My family believed it was a crutch for the weak.I never even went to a church till I was almost 25 and that was to a black Holiness Church in Athens,Georgia-blew my mind BTW-.
I came to believe in a God because I finally saw that my life was a series of events and they had a discerible pattern to them that had to more than random coincidence.People who came into my life to save me from disaster.I attributed these people to divine intervention along with the fact that I get dreams and visions that I feel are messages from God that I need to listen to.So I do.
Hey,maybe you are right.I find I agree with you on a lot of political topics but I hold back on your atheistic leanings.I sure hope there is a God and an afterlife cause this is sheer madness down here!
"The concept of a deity is something that every culture seems to have reinvented." Yet every culture has pne. So the concept of a deity is not reinvented, only the nature of the concept.
Which is the correct deity? That would be for each individual to decide. Even an atheist such as yourself worships a deity. In the case of the atheist, the deity is the individual.
"Human beings live in societal groups. For such groups to work, there must be rules. It's easiest to assign such rules to a deity and threaten the breakers of the rules with some sort of punishment from the deity or deities. That way, the rules are externalized and nobody in the society needs to take responsibility for them."
A rather cynical view, IMO. Yes, each group must have rules. That all groups assign such rules to a deity is not necessarily the easiest path for an individual, or a society, to take. It is all well and good to rely on divine inspiration and fear to impart rules and consequences, but it isn't very practical to leave it to the dieties to provide rules and consequences. There is very little that is easy about the process.
It would be easiest to impose those rules and consequences by one strong-willed individual through force of arms.
"Oddly enough, the basic set of moral values are pretty much the same in all societies. One must worship the deity of that society. One may not murder members of that society. One must respect the sexual mores of that society. One must respect the property of other members of that society.
Pretty basic stuff, shared by virtually every society."
This is pretty compelling evidence that a deity IS at work, regardless of the nature of that deity.
First...No offense, but because you are an atheist, you are starting from a place where you believe there is no deity, so why would you believe there is evidence of a deity? You wouldn't, so your point--though it is honestly advocated, I'm sure--is no more illuminating than when a liberal says there's no such thing as an economic recovery caused by tax cuts. He doesn't believe in trickle-down effects or that anything benefiting the rich could be good for the rest of us, so he's not going to believe there can be solid evidence of those things.
Second, the idea that the supernatural could not leave evidence in the natural world is akin to believing there would never be evidence of ships left on the land. If the supernatural were real, we would only think it was real because we had some sort of contact with it...and contact would be an opportunity for evidence. And if the mission of those supernatural beings was to redeem the natural sphere, there would be even more evidence, just as ships have docks and shipyards to show they exist, because their purpose is wrapped up in contact with the land.
I'll be buying a copy of this latest attempt to prove the existence of a deity. I've already read so many of them that one more won't be too trying.
For you, such a purchase would be a waste of money. I suggest instead that you read More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell. Though Carpenter is McDowell's most important book, I'd also suggest the book he wrote with Don Stewart, Answers to Tough Questions Skeptics Ask About the Christian Faith.
I see your point that many arguments for God's existence are circular or seem circular to a non-believer. That's why I'm suggesting McDowell's book, because it proves the Resurrection as a historical event. That's like proving there are ships by taking someone on a tour of a shipyard. No circular argument, that! And if it doesn't convince you, then the subject is pretty much closed.
Most astronomers believe in God.
As far as I know, none of them believe in a steady state Universe.
Where are the aliens?
I'll elaborate on that question if you'd like.
Yes, but then we're left with the question of why those levels of killing did not go on in lands that did embrace worship of a Creator. If the presence of atheism means nothing but the presence of industrialized weapons does, then why didn't the Christian nations slaughter all their inconvenient citizens? Why didn't we see death camps in those countries, or others where a firm religious mindset was prevalent?
MineralMan has a point, AU. And besides, the lack of atheists in foxholes wouldn't prove God's existence even if it were true. It owuld only prove something about atheists and foxholes.
"For you, such a purchase would be a waste of money. I suggest instead that you read More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell. Though Carpenter is McDowell's most important book, I'd also suggest the book he wrote with Don Stewart, Answers to Tough Questions Skeptics Ask About the Christian Faith."
You assume I have not read those books. I read both of them years ago. They do not impress. I'm more interested in reading apologetics that are a bit more challenging. Josh writes for a naive audience. I stopped being a target for his arguments way back in the 1960s, although I still read such books when they appear.
I'm sure they're useful for some, but they're pretty simplistic.
'First...No offense, but because you are an atheist, you are starting from a place where you believe there is no deity, so why would you believe there is evidence of a deity? '
Why not? Your reasoning is a little fallacious. An atheist chooses not to believe in God on the basis of the evidence to hand. Very rarely because the atheist is anti-theist. Should further evidence come to light in support of a deity, that belief is, for most atheists including myself, quite amenable to change.
That said, my Anglican upbringing always taught me that faith is faith pure and simple. That people need material evidence to support their faith is surely indicative of an essentialy weakness in their faith?
The 'atheists' and 'foxholes' argument is quaint, but actually supports atheism over theism by identifying a key drive behind theism; the human desire for comfort and emotional security. The fact that a human mind, when under the extreme pressures of war, finds solace in the belief of a higher power is completely consistent with psychology.
As it is though, I'm not sure if one did the math that the precentage of atheists that have served their country would significantly differ from the percentage of theists. I'd have to look it up.
The problem with the atheists in foxholes theory is that it can be disproven with a single example. I will give you one. My father was a B-17 pilot in WWII. He was, and is, an atheist. His plane was hit by a burst of flak. It lost an engine, and was on fire. My father took shrapnel in his thigh. His copilot sufferd a head injury and was unconscious.
By sheer dint of will and the amazing fortitude of the B-17, he got that plane back to its base in Italy and landed it. All crew members survived.
I once asked him if he had called on God. He just laughed and said, "What God?" I was the one flying the plane, not some invisible God."
There is the example that disproves the cliche. There are many, many more such examples. It's just one of those things that people like to say, while having no idea whether it is true or not.
Animal Planet produced a special called "The Future Is Wild" which was supposedly written with the help of evolutionary scientists, though i'd sure like to know what barrel-botom they scraped these guys off of. It was supposed to show how species would evolve here on Earth over the next few million years, but some of the conclusions were beyond ludicrous. For example, any evolutionaist will tell you sharks have been virtually unchanged for about 300 million years, but on this show they suddenly developed a sophisticated social culture like dolphins, changed the type of prey they hunted and became pack hunters, and evolved a communications system that flashed messages via bioluminescent panels on their skin. They never felt a need to explain what sort of evolutionary pressure would lead to changes that radical.
Yeah, riiiiight.
Because by then religion didn't have much power over the governments of most of the world. Most Christian countries had converted to democracy, a secular check against the crusades that the churches may have wanted to launch.
While I am not religious, I do like the check-and-balance system between the secular and religious that most Western countries have.
"Yes, but then we're left with the question of why those levels of killing did not go on in lands that did embrace worship of a Creator."
There's a problem with that. Consider the Islamic countries. They certainly worship a creator, yet are quite warlike and destructive.
I fear that the mere belief in deities does not preclude a society from being warlike or even genocidal.
I will give you another: me.
Well, I served in the military, too, but was never in combat, so I can't claim myself as an example. I did have dogtags that said "Atheist", though.
To quote the wise Calvin:
"Sometimes I think the most sure sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is the fact that it hasn't tried to contact us yet."
I still have mine. And I did have to jump into a foxhole once during combat (I hate artillery, at least on the receiving end), so I qualify.
Really? A majority of Stalin's victims were either starved to death or shot, not killed via bombs or artillery.
If you think one example disproves the statement, you're not understanding it. The point of that saying is not that THERE ARE NEVER ATHEISTS IN FOXHOLES EVER EVER. "There are no atheists in foxholes" isn't an absolute statement; it's hyperbole to make a point.
Except when one man's truth is another man's heresy!
If there is only one "truth", why so many schims, sects, denominations, cults?
The old way was better--the rain god, the sun god, fertility gods, etc.--at least you can see whether it rains or not. The sun god is pretty reliable.
Yes and no. They have been a distinct groups for that long, in fact longer, out to some 400 million years. And most all would have been outwardly recognizable as "sharks" to the average observer. Yet "unchanged" seems a totally inappropriate word to apply to sharks. Within the broad paradigm of "sharkiness" they've proven highly adaptable and variable.
In modern sharks you have everything from the "normal" mid water predators (some of which must remain constantly moving to "breathe"), to lugubrious bottom feeders like the nurse shark, to huge behemoths like the "whale shark" that filter feed on plankton at the surface like baleen whales. There's similar diversity, with the occasional "odd ball," among ancient sharks. (IIRC there are well over 2,000 species of fossil sharks. Compare to well under 1,000 species among all dinosaurs.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.