Posted on 01/12/2020 5:44:52 AM PST by Kaslin
Skeptics and atheists insist that belief in God is irrational. All too many believers in God, due to the same theological illiteracy affecting the non-believers and unbelievers, lend credence to this charge by way of their inability and/or unwillingness to defend their belief in God.
Thankfully, there has been no short supply of men of genius over the centuries who have shown that there is nothing at all irrational about theism.
In fact, some, like the 12th century theologian and philosopher Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109), were at pains to establish that it is atheism that’s irrational.
By way of the “ontological argument” for which he is famous, Anselm tried to show that the atheist doesn’t just happen to be wrong, but is necessarily wrong, for atheism is self-contradictory, and a self-contradiction is always false. For example, since the proposition, “Bachelors are not unmarried men” contradicts the very definition of a bachelor, it doesn’t just happen to be false; it must always be false.
The ontological argument is an argument from definition. Anselm’s version of it goes something like this:
God must be, because it is greater to be than to not be and God is, by definition, the greatest conceivable being.
Consider: Everyone, regardless of whether or not they believe in God, knows that, in theory, God is an infinite and perfect being. Insofar as He is infinite, He is a being without either a beginning or an end. And insofar as He is perfect, He is changeless, for any and every change is for either the better or the worse. But God, given His perfection, can neither regress nor progress. Thus, God must be immutable.
What this means is that God, in theory, can’t be dependent upon anything else. Nothing brought Him into existence (for there couldn’t be a time when He didn’t exist), nothing can alter Him in any way (for He is changeless), and nothing could extinguish His existence.
Simply put, God must exist. He doesn’t just happen to exist, like you, me, and everything else in our experience. God, by definition, in theory, necessarily exists.
So, the atheist is guilty of absurdity: “God does not exist” is the same proposition as, “The Being that necessarily exists, the Being that cannot not exist, does not exist!”
There have been many other arguments, or “proofs,” for God’s existence. What is typically known as “the argument from contingency” is another with a long history.
Whatever is contingent is dependent upon other things for its existence. This would include everything and anything that has ever actually existed within the spatial-temporal universe, as well as almost anything and everything that we could imagine. Human beings; animals; plants; insects; buildings; cars; planets; stars; Superman; King Kong; Santa Claus; unicorns—all are alike contingent upon and limited by other beings.
Now, it is logically impossible for there to exist nothing but contingent beings. As the great Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) noted back in the 13th century, whatever depends upon another for its existence at some juncture did not exist. Think about it: At one point, you did not exist, the laptop upon which I’m typing this did not exist, my home did not exist, the planet Earth did not exist, the sun did not exist, etc. However, what this means is that if the only things to have ever existed are contingent, then since a contingent thing is something that at one point does not exist, then at some point, nothing would have existed.
To repeat: Since whatever depends upon another depends upon that being to bring it into existence, prior to that point it did not exist. Thus, if each thing that ever existed is contingent, then at some point there would’ve been nothing.
But if there was nothing then, there would be nothing now, for from nothing, comes nothing.
Or, if you will, something can’t come from nothing.
Because, then, we know that there are things now, the only conclusion that we can draw is that there is at least one being whose existence is most definitely not dependent upon anything or anyone else.
In order to account for this world of mutually dependent beings, we must look beyond it to a being that exists, not contingently, but necessarily.
And the only being that fits this description is what most people call “God.”
Why is there something rather than nothing? This question cannot be answered by referring to things—contingent things—within the universe. What we call “the universe” is the thing, the “something,” that we’re trying to explain, after all, and the universe is simply the sum total of all of its members, i.e. all of its contingent parts. Whether it is one contingent being or an infinity of contingent beings, whatever is contingent points beyond itself to something that is, ultimately, non-contingent.
The universe is not self-explanatory. In the final analysis, only something beyond the universe, something that is not contingent, can account for it.
The third argument for God’s existence that I’d like to consider here is the argument from morality.
Simply put, morality is objective, it is real, only if God exists. Both theists and atheists have conceded this point.
The 20th century French existentialist philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980), who was both an atheist and a communist, is insistent upon this point. His whole philosophy presupposes it.
Historically, Sartre observed, atheists have thought it possible “to eliminate God as painlessly as possible.” They have thought that “nothing will have changed if God does not exist.” Sartre sums up the atheist’s position. It is the most wishful of wishful thinking to suppose, as atheists have, that we “will encounter the same standards of honesty, progress, and humanism” upon turning “God into an obsolete hypothesis that will die quietly on its own.”
Without God, human beings have no objective moral standards “to cling to,” “no values or orders” that can “legitimize our conduct.”
In summary: If God is not real, neither is morality.
There’s no question that we live in a highly improbable universe. There is no explanation for, among many other things, the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the origin of human life.
The current materialistic “explanation” is that we live in one of a very large number of universes, so that - as improbable as is our existence - there were many, many chances for something very improbable to occur. The materialistic explanation is that somebody eventually will win the powerball lottery every day for ten years in a row. For a rational person, if somebody were to win the powwerball lottery every day for ten years in a row, it would prove that that lottery was fixed.
The question isn’t how improbable is the universe, it is whether the Creator of the universe is a personal God, one who loves us and who is just and merciful.
The argument against there being a loving God is the existence of evil in the world. Once you consider that there is a loving God, then you have to deal with such facts as Adolph Hitler. The answer to this is that God has given us free will. But, why such enormous evil? Why wouldn’t a loving God have some kind of test in which innocent people weren’t hurt so badly by evil people?
As Christians, while we have answers to many questions, we too have unanswered questions. Thus, in this life, we need faith and hope in addition to love. Faith in what cannot be seen, and hope in the future. In the next life, when all questions are resolved, we will only need love.
Until the roof leaks. Only too often we ignore Him until faced with adversity.
The best possible argument for the existence of God is that liberals don’t believe in him. They are literally wrong about EVERYTHING. I hope they never start believing in God, because then I will have to question my faith.
The fool has said in his heart that there is no god
Ha!
And again, as I think you realize, I wasn’t arguing against God—just that one particular argument thereof.
20 arguments for the existence of God:
1 argument from change
2 argument from efficient causality
3 argument from time and contingency
4 argument from degrees of perfection
5 argument from design
6 kalam argument
7 argument from contingency
8 argument from the world as an interacting whole
9 argument from miracle
10 argument from consciousness
11 argument from truth
12 argument from the origin of the idea of God
13 ontological argument: Anselm’s version, modal version, possible worlds version
14 moral arguments
15 argument from conscience
16 argument from desire
17 argument from aesthetic experience
18 argument from religious experience
19 common consent argument
20 Pascal’s wager
See that is the ultimate bottom line. I am a fundamental Christian because I accept Jesus Christ as Lord of All; I have an ongoing daily relationship with God who tells me when what I am thinking about doing is wrong and who often tells me things I should do that I have not considered. Invariably when God tells me to do it, I win.
That aside, the atheist who says "well there is nothing beyond this life; the universe is explained by the big-bang theory . . . . " misses the end point. Without God, you can hypothetically explain many of the obvious temporal fact you can see and touch--at the end, it is all still encompassed in the universe.
Where is the universe located? "The stars and the heavens are testimony to the existence and power of God." The bible outright tells you the overall outright power of the Creator and is testimony as to His existence. There is simply no other explanation than God.
If He doesn’t exist, current knowledge would make us the biggest accident in the history of ... history/pre-history/forever...
His creation cries out, no, SCREAMS a creator. Not JUST Jupiter.
Ever look at a map of ocean currents? They control (in part) our weather. So complex, yet all working together for our (all living things) benefit.
I always liked the saying about evolution, that if a tornado blew through a junk yard, you wouldn’t end up with a Mercedes.
Well you got me there, but it was the closest I could think of.
>>There’s no question that we live in a highly improbable universe. <<
Some believe that it will someday be replaced by something even more improbable.
Some believe this has already happened.
/Douglas Adams for the win! :)
>>Because they stop at Darwin and never gave any thought to where everything came from<<
I know of no atheist that does that. Perhaps you can provide a reference?
People who understand science know that TToE and abiogenesis have nothing to do with one another any more than astronomy, geology or any other Natural Science does (although astronomy does brush up against it).
“I don’t ‘conceive’ God in my mind. I ‘perceive’ Him. Big difference. As Romans 1 and David in the Psalms and Job concurred, He has spoken throughout history through the amazing Creation around us all screaming out of His intricate design. Do you honestly think DNA or the atom came into being by willing itself to tell the ‘next-non-failure’ to self-modify? How? by little Post-it’s?
Jesus said that those who seek God (truly honestly seek) will find Him.
The Atheist’ root motive is to deny absolute accountability. Our sinful nature abhors accountability and will craft any vain imagination to prop up that vapor of a structure of deniability.”
Oh, so well stated! Forget “ontological arguments.” How about words in the Bible? Those words have existed for almost 3000 years. The apostle Paul wrote in 1st Corinthians,
“For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known”
In other words, as humans, there are many things we can not comprehend or understand — until we meet God face to face.
Science can’t answer those questions, but many of them are addressed in the Bible. That leaves us with a reliable source — faith in a higher being.
As an example, how did the authors of the Bible know all of this 3000 years ago? It sure makes sense to me that information had to come from some source for those authors.
As an example, take the so-called big bang theory in cosmology and compare that to Genesis 1. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” Sounds to me like the same event described in Genesis. Read what this MIT trained professor had to say in his book, Genesis and the Big Bang Theory... http://bit.ly/2J8wt5O
This is but one example, let science explain:
-How DNA was created which is the menu for all living things?
-Consciousness. Where does it come from and where does it exist?
-Quantum physics with its weird and proven capabilities like human observation affecting the outcome of an event before it happens or how two particles are connected across time and space with instant communication — even if separated by large distances?
No one can explain these. Certainly, not science. They had to be created by something much more intelligent than anything we have on this planet. For me, that is a God in heaven.
IC Clearly
Without Light, there can be no Darkness.
What I really want to know. ....why has the life span of man dropped. ...since Noah’s time. Seinfeld could make a show about this.
Seriously, with all of the “advances in medicine “....pushing 80 is it. ...hell, my house is over 80....
I took a three hour class on Botany 1 last week, for a Master Gardener accreditation. The preciseness of how plants grow, pollinate and fertilize is astounding, perfectly designed.
Here is a fun example, why do fruit trees have big "sugary meat" surrounding the seeds? to feed humans, right? Wrong. When the "momma" tree drops its fruit, it is then eaten by a wild animal because its so tasty and when the seeds finally come out, rarely are they destroyed in the animals gut, they are far from the "momma" tree where a baby would not survive, and a new tree is planted! You just have to give in after a Botany class and say, God is real.
Thanks, Douglas.
Your post reminds me that you have to believe in something. During the 19th Century, it was thought there was a materialistic explanation for everything. Hence, Darwin and his theory of the origin of life. Today, the physics of the universe say no, there isn’t a materialistic explanation. Either there is a Creator or we are deeply alone and life is fragile and ultimately meaningless.
Bible summary on this:
The fool says there is no God.
Everyone knows there is a God.
Some people suppress their knowledge of God , because of sin.
“Until the roof leaks. Only too often we ignore Him until faced with adversity.”
Thus the purpose of struggle and adversity in our lives. When we finally give up we find Him. When we are approaching despair, we are nearest to God. When we are full of ourselves we have no room for god.
“the physics of the universe say no, there isn’t a materialistic explanation.”
Only those who belong to the “Flat Consciousness Society” believe this. The human soul and consciousness itself is a physical object to those who have grown spiritually. It is just not perceived by those who have not grown and are stuck on the “One Channel Theory of Consciousness.”
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.