And you thought there were only five philosophical arguments for God:
Alvin Plantinga offers two dozen or so.
Thursday, March 12, 2020
Wednesday, March 11, 2020
What is "Street Epistemology"?
Street epistemology attempts to apply good philosophical debating approaches to ordinary conversations with people. Not a bad idea on the surface.
Where it comes unstuck is its definition of 'faith' when applied to Christians.
Their definition:
In Hebrews, faith is defined as: Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. (11:1)
Note, this is things not seen, not things for which there is no evidence. Christian faith is a response to evidence or the reasonableness of our belief. It is firstly confidence or trust in God through his word and the internal witness of his Spirit. Compare Hebrews 11:3.
This arises from our understanding of the Bible through textual criticism, biblical analysis, archeology, external historical records and the like. Our scholars bring us this information.
It next arises from the person and work of Jesus who rose from the dead (based on more good evidence in the texts, the church's foundational history, and biblical reasonableness based on Old Testament prophesy).
This then is founded in the action of God in history, and the explanation of our experience of reality that he comprehensively provides.
The classic arguments are those from Cosmology, Ontology, Teleology, Experience, Ethics.
If you want to get complicated, Alvin Plantinga has 24 or so grounds for faith.
Ask an atheist why his belief is reasonable (and, BTW, atheism is the belief that there is no god. It is not a personal "I don't believe in god, persuade me otherwise". It requires a positive ground for belief).
As the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has it:
Where it comes unstuck is its definition of 'faith' when applied to Christians.
Their definition:
-
Faith: When given as a reason for belief, it can be understood as firm confidence in
the claim in excess of what is warranted by evidence.
Note, this is things not seen, not things for which there is no evidence. Christian faith is a response to evidence or the reasonableness of our belief. It is firstly confidence or trust in God through his word and the internal witness of his Spirit. Compare Hebrews 11:3.
This arises from our understanding of the Bible through textual criticism, biblical analysis, archeology, external historical records and the like. Our scholars bring us this information.
It next arises from the person and work of Jesus who rose from the dead (based on more good evidence in the texts, the church's foundational history, and biblical reasonableness based on Old Testament prophesy).
This then is founded in the action of God in history, and the explanation of our experience of reality that he comprehensively provides.
The classic arguments are those from Cosmology, Ontology, Teleology, Experience, Ethics.
If you want to get complicated, Alvin Plantinga has 24 or so grounds for faith.
Ask an atheist why his belief is reasonable (and, BTW, atheism is the belief that there is no god. It is not a personal "I don't believe in god, persuade me otherwise". It requires a positive ground for belief).
As the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has it:
This definition has the added virtue of making atheism a direct answer to one of the most important metaphysical questions in philosophy of religion, namely, “Is there a God?” There are only two possible direct answers to this question: “yes”, which is theism, and “no”, which is atheism. Answers like “I don’t know”, “no one knows”, “I don’t care”, “an affirmative answer has never been established”, or “the question is meaningless” are not direct answers to this question.
Tuesday, March 10, 2020
What do non-Christians think of Christianity?
A couple of interesting blogs from Stand to Reason:
1. What do non-Christians think of Christianity?
and
2. A collection on Talking to Jehovah's Witnesses (or any Arian, I'd think).
1. What do non-Christians think of Christianity?
and
2. A collection on Talking to Jehovah's Witnesses (or any Arian, I'd think).
Sunday, March 8, 2020
It'll all be OK
I guess you've heard of one of the consolations of faith being quoted as Romans 8:28 (God causes all things to work together for good).
But, maybe you're not aware of the full information on this. Paul writes (Roms 8:28-30):
It is not about things working out on this Earth.
Nor is it about God manipulating events for us.
It is God weaving into his objective the contingent uncertainties of a fallen and distorted world (out of which he is saving us) that operates according to the 'prince of the power of the air'. No matter how bad others want to make things, God will weave them into his cloth, not theirs. During which time, we persevere in prayer for courage, boldness, strength and wisdom as we await the 'eternal weight of glory (2 Corinthians 4:17)
But, maybe you're not aware of the full information on this. Paul writes (Roms 8:28-30):
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.The end God has in mind is our eternal state with God in the new creation of free fellowship with him, living in his presence.
It is not about things working out on this Earth.
Nor is it about God manipulating events for us.
It is God weaving into his objective the contingent uncertainties of a fallen and distorted world (out of which he is saving us) that operates according to the 'prince of the power of the air'. No matter how bad others want to make things, God will weave them into his cloth, not theirs. During which time, we persevere in prayer for courage, boldness, strength and wisdom as we await the 'eternal weight of glory (2 Corinthians 4:17)
That old style religion
Today I visited a church we attended many years ago.
I was surprised by a couple of changes in the morning service: it was more formal than before. A good thing, in my view.
I don't care if others want a less formal service, but I don't. The formality is for me reminds me of the continuity of the worshipping community over time: big time! I find it peaceful, almost other-worldly. The hymns, set prayers, formality of communion (not to mention the real wine!), all takes me into 'worship-land'.
Love it. Here's the first page of the service sheet.
I was surprised by a couple of changes in the morning service: it was more formal than before. A good thing, in my view.
I don't care if others want a less formal service, but I don't. The formality is for me reminds me of the continuity of the worshipping community over time: big time! I find it peaceful, almost other-worldly. The hymns, set prayers, formality of communion (not to mention the real wine!), all takes me into 'worship-land'.
Love it. Here's the first page of the service sheet.
Thursday, March 5, 2020
5 part story and reprise
Earlier I posted on the five-point story of reality.
Now to reprise it, with detail
1. God (creator)
Now to reprise it, with detail
1. God (creator)
creates heaven and earth2. Man (creature)
rejects God-relationshp and becomes anti-god3. Christ
Christ, the creator, enters creation as a man, a creature4. Crucifixion
Christ dies in our place and defeats anti-god-ness (death)5. Resurrection (consummation)
God makes all things new and brings us into life with him, forever.
Tuesday, March 3, 2020
Can we be good without God?
Bill Craig has a video of a lecture on this subject, but not quite. His lecture is on the notion of being good without God providing a standard of 'good'. Fair enough, but it's not about the question.
It get's the mealy-mouthed answer of 'yes' of course an atheist can be a good person. But this is 'good' without belief in God. Good without God is a different kettle of fish.
The answer?
No!
And why?
Firstly, people broadly have a moral sense because God is. His nature defines what is 'good' (or God-like) and in the default, what is not good, or evil (or not-God-like). Without this, there is no definition outside personal convenience, accidental convention, and power. It comes down to taste or power. This is the 'earthworm reality'. Earthworms live on the basis of convenience and power and that's it.
So for a person to hold that they can be good, or that the concept of 'good' has any real meaning, without God they have to prove that there is no God and material, or impersonal force is all there is.
Craig does go into this, but for the ordinary conversation, the implication is that a person who doesn't believe in God can be good.
Of course they can, and that is only because God is (i.e. he exists). Otherwise good has no meaning. See above. We can do good and often aspire to be good (or delude ourselves that we are: that 'good' has some intrinsic value and non-material significant meaning) because we are made in the image of God. That is, we are morally meaningful and in the context of the reality that is God.
Naturally, the question that flows from this is how then is 'evil'. Or the antithesis of good? Evil is the absence of good. It is of 'not-God'. It is from the exercise of will in contradiction of God-like-ness. That is, of not-love. We can only do this because we are in God's image and are morally meaningful.
Why did God make us so...that we could act ungodly? Because having this capacity is the only way we could truly enjoy fellowship with God.
It get's the mealy-mouthed answer of 'yes' of course an atheist can be a good person. But this is 'good' without belief in God. Good without God is a different kettle of fish.
The answer?
No!
And why?
Firstly, people broadly have a moral sense because God is. His nature defines what is 'good' (or God-like) and in the default, what is not good, or evil (or not-God-like). Without this, there is no definition outside personal convenience, accidental convention, and power. It comes down to taste or power. This is the 'earthworm reality'. Earthworms live on the basis of convenience and power and that's it.
So for a person to hold that they can be good, or that the concept of 'good' has any real meaning, without God they have to prove that there is no God and material, or impersonal force is all there is.
Craig does go into this, but for the ordinary conversation, the implication is that a person who doesn't believe in God can be good.
Of course they can, and that is only because God is (i.e. he exists). Otherwise good has no meaning. See above. We can do good and often aspire to be good (or delude ourselves that we are: that 'good' has some intrinsic value and non-material significant meaning) because we are made in the image of God. That is, we are morally meaningful and in the context of the reality that is God.
Naturally, the question that flows from this is how then is 'evil'. Or the antithesis of good? Evil is the absence of good. It is of 'not-God'. It is from the exercise of will in contradiction of God-like-ness. That is, of not-love. We can only do this because we are in God's image and are morally meaningful.
Why did God make us so...that we could act ungodly? Because having this capacity is the only way we could truly enjoy fellowship with God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)