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.
Leave Buddha out of future comparative analogies please.
He's not a God nor a prophet. To "believe" in Buddha is the same as "believing" in Thomas Jefferson.
They were both men, and only men, and they are now both dead.
Buddha was a moral philosopher who presented a brilliant way of life to avoid suffering. That's all.
"It is not based on any religion or divine commandments, but upon "we the people"."
I guess you have never read any of the writings of the people who actually drafted the Constitution, or voted on it. Those writings are chock full of invocations of the Almighty, etc. Almost all were Christians. None were atheists; a tiny minority were deists. The only times atheists have been left alone to come up with a government system (as in the French and Russian Revolutions), they came up with dictatorship and mass murder. Why? Probably because they think most ordinary human beings are so so inferior to them that they couldn't be allowed to have choice, or even to live.
I hate it when people reduce God to a scientific theory.
I'd say that was pretty clear....
To those who can count past 1.
Except that those phenomena can be reliably demonstrated and reproduced. Which shows that heathen secular materialists *will* believe wacky things, *if* there's actual evidence for them.
Geez man, how many times can you insult a guy's father in a single post? Whether you're right or wrong is besides the point. You're intentionally baiting Mineralman by flaming his father and you know it.
The Enlightenment did not succeed the Dark Ages. In between there were some 10 centuries comprising the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Science was born long before the Enlightenment, and it was born in the Christian world (Europe). Somehow that "Christian Taliban" which atheists always think is lurking right under the bed, waiting to annihilate science, just couldn't do the job. Most early scientists were Christians, and many modern scientists are, also. Very few are dogmatic atheists.
Er, Christians aren't theists?
A conclusion can never be used to support an hypothesis, or contention. That's a gross error in logic.
" they talk, for example, about how finely our solar system and our planet had to be calibrated to support life.”
Whatever the value of any physical parameters are, it does not follow that a god exists.
" evidence of humanity’s sinful nature"
Man does not have a sinful nature. Man simply has a free will, there is no inherent bias, or propensity to do either good, or evil.
Christianity=the teachings of Jesus Christ, not what some humans do.
The only times someone was brought to Jesus and described as deserving death, he forgave them and sent them on their way.
When Peter wanted to fight the Temple guards who came to arrest Jesus, Jesus stopped him, and went willingly to His death.
And you expect us to believe that Christianity is about hatred and condemnation?
[Take that, you "blashpher.}
You actually believe that pure energy, like maybe photons, can have intelligence, math, recorded knowledge. etc.? And you accuse US of believing in things for which there is no evidence?
How does one photon talk to another? What journals do they publish in?
If there is a Sun God, and he gets mad at us because we don't worship him, we're pretty much screwed.
An alternative view: The "Dark Age"occurred owing to suppression of new ideas by the Church and Popes, and ended only when Martin Luther challenged the authority of the Vatican. Elements of the Dark Ages are perpetuated by their fellow fundamentalists who refused to accept the Germ Theory of Disease, refused to accept women as equal citizens, refuse to accept women as spirtual in leadership.
The US Constitution derives from the Enlightenment. It is not even a tiny bit Christian. It rejects all the previous church hierarchies and claims to 'truth' in matters of government.
Phobonics?
For me, it's logic.
To my mind, there must be at the bottom of it all, not an utterly simple equation, but an utterly simple IDEA. And to me that idea, when we finally discover it, will be so compelling, and so inevitable, so beautiful, we will all say to each other, "How could it have ever been otherwise?"
With increased understanding of nature comes increased control of nature. Technology advances exponentially. See The Law of Accelerating Returns
How much technology advancement is required to create a galaxy or universe? When will we have that technology? Will we seed the new galaxy or universe so it evolves conscious beings or will that be set with the initial conditions for creating the galaxy or universe? How much sooner before that will we have cured human death and saved a replica of each persons conscious mind in case of accidental death so that a new body can house it? Current estimates from research and development in several fields concerning human longevity put it at 2040 to 2100. Will Earthlings be the first to create universes? Can't have too big a customer base to do business with. ;-)
Come to think of it, if there are other immortal conscious beings scattered throughout the Universe they probably have already assured that the implosion half-cycle of the Universe will never occur. Perhaps maintaining the Universe in a state of oscillation.
Matter and energy are but two of three macro components of existence. The third and controlling component is consciousness.
Around about that time we'll say: "How could it have ever been otherwise?"
Achieving much more than any imagined God, immortal Earthlings become God-men and God-woman.
I'm feeling something pointy in my back....
The Founders certainly had personal beliefs, but they were thoughtful about not imposing them on others.
Go, thou, and do likewise.
There is not a single mention in the Constitution about any god or about Christ. Art VI says atheists, pagans, etc. are equal because there "shall be no religious test."
I don't have anything against electrons. Far from it. If they weren't exactly the way they are, none of us would be here posting this stuff. The charge on the electron is one of the most fundamental things in nature. All other charges are just integral multiples of it.
There are other quantities in physics which could not have significantly different values either--or else the universe would be completely inhospitable. Just ask a physicist.
OK. I won't blame you for the sayings of other atheists. It would be nice, though, if those other atheists wouldn't try to tar Christianity with all the bad acts of self-styled Christians.
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.