Posts Tagged by naturalism

Barker’s Rebuttal to Kingsley’s Easter Answer: A Dud

Barker’s Challenge explicitly says: “…without omitting a single detail…write a simple, chronological narrative of the events between the resurrection and the ascension… [it] does not have to pretend to present a perfect picture- it only needs to give at least one plausible account of all of the facts. … The important condition to the challenge, however, is that not one single biblical detail be omitted.”

Who among us is surprised to hear that by ‘plausible’ Barker basically means ‘naturalistic explanations’? Even I, I mean, even I, was shocked to hear Barker dismiss the plausibility of Kingsley’s chronology because, well, one must adopt a naturalistic perspective of what counts as ‘plausible’! Unbelievable! Consider this exchange leading into Part 2: [More…]

Dan: Yes. But we’re not there yet. In order for your evidence to be admissible, you have to produce a coherent, noncontradictory, plausible version of it.
Elizabeth: And that is the point of your Easter Challenge. I understand. So the only way for us to proceed is to assume that we are both naturalists, simply looking at the details of the stories themselves, on their own merits.
Dan: Yes. That’s all I was trying to say.

Share

Scientism: The Atheist’s Religion of Faith

In light of what I have said above it may come as a surprise that I have a very high view of science. But it’s true. I believe that you need the right tool for the job and in many cases that tool is empirical scrutiny. But other jobs require other tools and no hemming and hawwing will change that. For some jobs a hammer, for others a screwdriver and others, pliers. You may have found that sometimes one gets lucky- a screwdriver is best for screws but at last resort a hammer did the trick. But try changing your lightbulb with a hammer and tell me how that goes. 😉

Let the hammer pound nails and the screwdriver drive screws and air compressor pump up the tire: the right tool for the job, and be wary of anyone who insists on using just one tool for all jobs, and watch out especially if they don’t want anyone looking over their shoulder while they are ‘at work’ and even berate you for suggesting other approaches.

Share

Literary Apologetics Key to Turning the Tide

Christians are not losing on facts, argument, logic, evidence, and reasoning. We are losing because we are not effectively transmitting the faith to the next generations and probably haven’t been doing so for some time. With more nonChristians in society, logically enough, this is manifested in pop culture. Fixing how we pass on the faith is one of the most important things Christians must do. With more informed and grounded Christians in pop culture, this will have its logical effect.

The second thing is we have to fight fire with fire. The author of the ChristianityToday article doesn’t make this point and I am at a loss as to why not. He does say, correctly:

“…the church needs to broaden its apologetics work to include serious analysis of and response to popular culture, now our most potent form of religious persuasion.

Share

The Regularity of Natural Laws is a Pre-Condition for Reliably Detecting God

So, far from being evidence for atheism and far from supporting a presumption of naturalism, the observed patterns of the universe are the pre-requisite, the minimal requirement, for reliably detecting a supernatural agent, namely God. That doesn’t mean that there is a God. It doesn’t mean we have to believe every report of a violation of the laws of nature that we hear. It does mean that we can’t dismiss them out of hand if the very point of our investigation is to decide if there is a God, for it is precisely such accounts- and only these kinds of accounts- that could allow us to reliably determine that there is a God.

Share

Response to Clark on Naturalism, Faith and Reason, Revelation and Miracle

At the very least, then, Mr. Curtis has faith in reason. As do I. But I understand that reason brings us always to a point of decision where the consequences of that decision might conceivably be other than we suppose. It is always possible that even after a thousand times my chair will break. Technically, it is even possible that all of the atoms will align and I’ll simply pass through it. Yet I sit. Likewise, faith in God is not simply the belief that there is a God, but rather trust in God. Whether or not that is a reasonable trust or an unreasonable one is a separate question but at least let us acknowledge that faith as the Christians present it is not only compatible with reason, but essential when it comes to acting on reason.

Share

One Atheist Admits I’m Right, Another Responds to Big Bang Post

Atheist One. It is not very often that you get an admission as clear as the one that was posted on my forum today.  I asserted in this post on my blog that at the bottom, most atheistic arguments against the existence of God are based on the ‘presumption of naturalism’ with   The atheist on […]

Share

Response to Curtis Clark on Naturalism- A Breath of Fresh Air

Recently an atheist stumbled upon my site and in the course of corresponding with him I have discovered that our different points of view aside, he is a gentleman that I can have a conversation with.  His site is called The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism and he recently put up a post responding to a […]

Share

Equivocation on the word natural by atheists and philosophical naturalists

Has anyone else noticed this? As a case in point- in part because atheists have accused me of ‘inventing’ atheistic positions- consider this entry on my blog and the comments that follow.  But to be clear, I run across this phenomena all the time as I read and debate theism or ‘intelligent design.’ Let me […]

Share

Atheism and Facts and the Escape from Oneself

A recent commenter said: “Well I don’t believe in invisible entities like gods, angels, spirits, or pixies, faeries,etc…”

I immediately thought to myself all the invisible things that he does believe in. I thought of the invisible things that the scientific community believes in- like all the missing dark matter and the millions of years which life is said to have evolved in which is ever and always invisible to direct observation- and realized with a start a fact which of course I have long been aware of… atheists who hide behind science in their mockery of those who believe in invisible realities mask their true objection- not that invisible realities might exist, but that these realities might be an entity.

Share

Global Warming and Evolution: Intimidation the New Step in the Scientific Method

I must at the outset admit that I haven’t delved into the data that I am told substantiates the view that the earth is steadily warming. That is one reason why I have not said anything about Global Warming. I shall say that here in Wisconsin we just came off of a mighty cold spell with snows as late as April, and last year was about the same. As Wisconsin is part of the globe, I feel I can anecdotally chime in that to this point I am skeptical about the Global Warming argument. Moreover, there clearly are several different parts of the question: even if we establish that the earth is warming, it doesn’t follow that humans are causing it, and even if it is warming, it doesn’t follow that a warming earth would be all that bad (did I mention the cold Wisconsin winters?).

Share

Presuppositional versus evidential apologetics and naturalistic bias

I don’t very often get into debates about this but it did come up recently (by a person I make out to be an atheist no less) in the comment section of one of my blog posts.   I’m not sure what his final purpose was… did he mean to convey that we really should assume […]

Share

Searching for the Atheist that Believes the Resurrection Happened

A recurring theme of late is that even if you believed the resurrection happened, that would still not justify the inference that there is a God or that the resurrection was a supernatural event.  There are some 500 posts or more (I kid you not) arguing about the ‘divine inference’ and a recent commenter has […]

Share

Course on the Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus: Against Naturalism

My recent blog posts discussing philosophical naturalism really show that this course is relevant.  Here is the question:  on the historical evidence alone, unfettered by the presupposition that there is a God or that there isn’t one, and unfettered with baggage that reasonable people MUST interpret everything in naturalistic terms, can it be shown (again, […]

Share