Dedicated to the devotional, exegetical and philosophical study of theological paradox in Conservative, Thoroughly Biblical, Historically Orthodox, Essentially Reformed theology . . . to the glory of God alone!
Showing posts with label Atheism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Atheism. Show all posts

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Cornelius Van Til - "Why I Believe In God"

If you would like to know more about Dr. Cornelius Van Tilthe father of presuppositional apologetics, you may find the following video useful. It contains the narration of a long letter written by Van Til to defend his belief in God, and more specifically the Christian faith. This is extremely thought provoking and insightful material, and even includes some interesting autobiographical information regarding Van Til's upbringing in Holland (you'll love his jokes about wooden shoes).

Here is a great example of Van Til's presuppositional method:
  

"... I propose to argue that unless God is back of everything you cannot find meaning in anything. I cannot even argue for belief in Him without already having taken Him for granted. And, similarly, I contend that you cannot argue against belief in Him unless you also first take Him for granted. Arguing about God's existence, I hold, is like arguing about air. You may affirm that air exists, and I that it does not, but as we debate the point we are both breathing air all the time." 
- 2:43 on the video


I especially liked his critique of the presupposition behind rationalistic atheism:

"You have made the reach of your intellect the standard of what is possible or not possible. You have thereby virtually determined that you intend never to meet a fact that points to God. Facts, to be facts at all - facts, that is, with decent scientific and philosophic standing - must have your stamp instead of that of God upon them as their virtual creator."
- 44:30 on the video

Cornelius Van Til - "Why I Believe in God"



There is much more on Van Til here: www.VanTil.info

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Where in the World is Paul Manata?

Paul Manata's "Aporetic Christianity" blog mysteriously disappeared awhile back, and I wasn't able to find him for a few months. But now, at last, I've tracked him down! He has been posting HERE since April.

I'm thankful for the work of Reformed philosophers like James Anderson and Paul Manata. Any Christian who is interested in logic and philosophy will find the work of these men to be an invaluable resource.


The video below is an old debate between Manata and atheist Dan Barker. It's both informative and fun to listen to.

Sunday, January 17, 2010

The Ultimate Proof that the Bible Isn't True







[This Page Intentionally Left Blank]








Friday, November 27, 2009

The Improbability of God - A Response to Dawkins' Argument

I received this note from my friend, Chris DeVidal . . .

Found this on WhoMadeGod.org, website for Edgar Andrews' new book. Edgar is a Christian apologist and brilliant scientist with more letters behind his name than in his name.

He says, "The argument for the improbability of God, as advanced by Dawkins, seems to boil down to the following reasoning: (1) By common consent, the world is a highly improbable and complex system; (2) if God created the world He must be more complex than the world He created; therefore (3) God is less probable than the world; indeed, He is fantastically improbable; so (4) God probably doesn’t exist."

Since this world is so very complex, atheists rejoice in its rare existence (and in a way, I think they are right in rejoicing).

Since I personally know this God and know that He exists, and I know of His immense complexity (with all of its corresponding apparent paradoxes), and since this apparently means the probability of such a God existing is so very, very, very slight, all the more so I REJOICE in the rarity and preciousness and holiness (other-ness) of this God!!

Truly, there is NONE like Him!

Thank you Dawkins. Romans 8:28 :-)




Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Was God Invented?

"We invented god out of our inability to understand the complexity of the universe."
~James Lynne, in a written debate over the question, "Is God an invention of man's mind or a true being?"
This is a contemporary restatement of the classic "God of the gaps" argument. I have two responses:
1. Doesn't a universe so complex as to warrant "invented" explanations point to an intelligent Creator? This argument against God would seem to lead us right back to God.
2. This argument may work well if God is containable, fully definable, and ultimately controllable. But that's not the Biblical vision of God - a God Who is beyond our understanding, shrouded in mystery and yet self-revealing. Far from solving the mysteries of the universe, belief in this God introduces us to an entirely new set of mysteries. Finite man in search of answers would never arrive at a belief in a transcendent, all-knowing, perfectly righteous, totally sovereign, absolutely just, terrifyingly good, relentlessly kind, inexplicably merciful, unfathomably wise and unknowably pure deity if he wasn't made to.
I use the term, "made to" in three senses:
"made to" - meaning God surrounds us with so much evidence that His existence is self-attesting.
"made to" - meaning God is the active cause of our belief in Him.
"made to" - meaning God created us for this very purpose.
Later in his article, Mr. Lynne makes this statement:
"Since the beginning of history most cultures have conceived gods for themselves. We are a creative lot, we humans. Our ability to scheme, devise, and create is apparently boundless."
Several questions come to mind. Where did we get such amazing creativity? Doesn't the existence of vastly creative beings living in a complex universe lead us back again to the conclusion that we have been created by an intelligent Being? If one posits that we use this creativity for the purpose of self-deception (and I would strongly affirm that we do), doesn't that imply a core moral problem within us (i.e. total depravity)? Does the possibility of self-deception exist because there is no divine source of truth, as the atheist would argue - or because there is a Source, and we are disconnected from Him?
We can agree with Mr. Lynne that man is in the habit of self-deception. However, our belief in the Biblical God is not a result of this habit. Rather, it is the effect of God's merciful decision to lead us back into truth and rescue us from the lies we have told ourselves about the world, about others, about ourselves, and about Him.

We didn't invent God - He invented us!

Monday, September 01, 2008

PARADOX FILES, VOL. 2 - A.S.A. Jones

The following is an excerpted portion of the testimony of A.S.A. Jones, a former hard-core skeptic who became convinced of the truth of the Gospel through an understanding of Biblical paradox (and, obviously, a sovereign work of grace). I have highlighted some portions in bold text for emphasis. I probably don't need to add this disclaimer, but lest anyone should think otherwise: this is NOT an endorsement of the philosophies represented by Friedrich Nietzche or Zen Buddhism. I believe Jones is using these as illustrations, not recommended reading. You can read his entire article here.

"A paradox is that which appears to contradict, but upon closer examination, really does not . . .

I prided myself on pure intellect and logical thinking and 'spiritual' things didn't make any sense to me. I discounted spiritual matters as emotional matters and I had made myself as unemotional as I could in order to avoid having emotions interfere with my rationality of thought. When I began reading the bible differently, I no longer saw contradictions of logic, but paradox after paradox. Being confronted with paradox forces one's mind to think ABOVE logic but not against it. For example, examine the statement, "Never less alone than when alone". If you break this sentence down into its components, logically it cannot make sense. Yet this phrase describes a very real type of individual; it is describing a person who considers himself to be his own best company. It tells of an individual who is content to spend hours lost in his own thoughts. You have to examine the paradox in the context of what you know to be true about human nature in order to understand it. It is assumed by the author that the reader will not be ignorant of this information.

All the way from beginning to end, the bible contains paradoxes that push one's mind to look beyond what is written to that which is being implied. Skeptics view these paradoxes as errors but if they are indeed errors, they are consistent in the writings of the more than 40 men who authored the books of the bible. I find it strange that men who were intelligent and literate enough to write in that early time could be so ignorant of their own culture and religion to have made mistake after mistake after mistake in issues regarding it. Instead, I think it is more probable that the skeptics are ignorant of the matters about which these men wrote and unable to grasp their culture and way of thinking. Many of these alleged errors are due to poor reading comprehension and the inability to grasp what is being said within the context of the whole.

Some of these paradoxes are presented as a unit, making them unlikely errors. For example, Proverbs 26:4-5 states, "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit." A contradiction in logic would render these two statements as meaningless but there is a truth to be found in them (See "The Games Skeptics Play"). Other paradoxes are not so obvious and do not occur in close proximity to each other.

A second type of paradox deals with morality. Paradoxes of this nature deal with the law and push the reader into the spirit of the law (See 'Why I Believe God is Real') in order to understand them. Examples of moral paradox include issues of divorce, adultery (Deut 24:1-4 vs Mark 10:2-12), and God setting Himself above His own commandments. What appears to be ambiguity or contradiction or nonsense in the 'absolute declaration of law' can be reconciled or deemed as irrelevant when the reader understands the spirit of the law.

Not all of the paradoxes contain meaning, but serve as arrows to direct the reader toward higher meaning. The accounts of the death of Judas and many other alleged discrepancies are irrelevant to the truth of God, yet they serve as stumbling blocks to those who are shallow or legalistic in their thought. In this way, the Word of God becomes a sieve, separating its readers through a series of screens. Paul describes this sieve in 1 Cor: 1. Those who have made themselves too big, get trapped in the holes, while those who have allowed themselves to be made small, pass through to see the hidden truth. Jesus Christ makes reference to his own device of conveying God's truth in parables (Luke 8:10) so that "...though hearing, they may not understand."

If you are a skeptic, you are probably scoffing at the above. I would like to take this opportunity to point out to you that Friedrich Nietzsche, poster boy for existentialism, was very fond of intentionally using words that would be misinterpreted by careless, superficial readers. Walter Kaufmann, who edited Nietzsche's 'Ecce Homo', included this in his introduction:

"Nietzsche had an almost pathological weakness for one particular kind of ambiguity, which, to be sure, is not irremediable: he loved words and phrases that mean one thing out of context and almost the opposite in the context he gives them... The former is bound to lead astray hasty readers, browsers and...nonreaders."

When a man does this type of thing, it is considered a matter of genius. When similar devices are employed in the bible, there is no reason to discount them as foolishness. Of course, it is not the 'hasty' reader that is being sifted out in the Bible, but the spiritual Pharisee who is being left in the dark.

The reason for doing this can be found in the Zen philosophy. The Masters of Zen don't seek to enlighten their students with the truth; they seek to confound them in order that they discover the truth for themselves. Herein lies the difference between knowing how to do multiplication and merely memorizing and regurgitating multiplication tables. If the truth about God could be told, we could know ABOUT Him, but in seeking and finding Him for ourselves, we can KNOW Him. For me to have been so profoundly changed through a minute faith in Jesus Christ is a miracle. Psychology tells us that the hardest thing to change in a person is their personality; we can modify our behavior, but our nature remains. The words of Christ didn't TELL me how to change. Like a Zen Master, He gently led my mind to experience truth. That's why the changes were so powerful."