Do you ever wonder what sets Christianity apart from other belief systems? Is Christianity truly more worthy of consideration than other religions we simply call myths today? What got me thinking about this was a conversation I recently heard on Dennis Prager’s radio show on May 13th, 2008. During the third hour Mr. Prager was dialoging with callers about the lack of doubt among atheists on the question of God’s existence when an atheist called up and said (I'm paraphrasing), “Of course we don’t have any doubt. Do you ever doubt the non-existence of unicorns? No you don’t. We see the existence of God the same way you see unicorns.”
This got me thinking. Is what the atheist caller said valid? What would you say to such a person? For the one who doesn’t already follow Christ, is there any reason why Christianity should be given more consideration than other religious systems, such as ancient paganism? After thinking about it for the last several weeks I have come to a conclusion:
Whether you believe in Christianity or not, there are good, objective reasons why this system stands alone on the world stage as being worthy of consideration.
There are a number of reasons that I make such a claim, although I will not be able to touch on them adequately in this post. I guess that means that I will be starting another series to flesh out my thoughts on why Christianity should be considered before other systems, and even if rejected, cannot be put in the same class as unicorns, ancient pagan religions, or even other modern alternatives.
Regarding religious systems, you’ve probably heard people say things to the effect of, “Religions are matters of faith, and matters of faith cannot be proved or disproved.” If what such a claimant means is that it may not be possible to prove the existence of God conclusively enough to sway the hardened skeptic, then I have to agree. However, all religious systems make claims about history and the way the world is that can be checked against what we know about these subjects. If we begin checking such claims and find that, over and over again, the claims don’t comport with reality, then we probably have good reason to reject the system making the claims.
For instance, Hinduism makes the basic claim that the world is an illusion and that we are all figments in the imagination of the divine unconsciousness. Because of this basic Hindu claim, I feel safe in rejecting Hinduism as a whole because the system simply doesn’t agree with reality. If you and I are only figments of some cosmic unconsciousness then why are we aware of ourselves? When you dream, the characters in your dreams don’t have individual consciousness or awareness, they don’t think they exist nor do they know they don’t exist.
To make this as simple as possible, ask yourself this question: Does Mickey Mouse know that he’s a cartoon character? No. In fact, there isn’t even a “he” there, the cartoon character is a figment of the imagination, transferred to film, of Walt Disney. As you and I are aware ourselves we can safely say that we are not figments of anyone’s imagination; or as René Descartes would say, “Cogito ergo sum” (best known as, “I think therefore I am,” but better translated as, “I am thinking therefore I exist”).
Over the next several weeks, I will be attempting to build a case for the reasonableness of Christianity, starting with it’s most basic claims and building upon each post with more and more specific and detailed claims that Christianity makes about world around us. My current schedule (as I’m making it up in head as I write this) will look something like this:
- Is it reasonable to believe that God exists?
- If such a God did exist, could He communicate with us?
- Is belief in miracles reasonable?
- Is the Bible trustworthy?
- Is the resurrection reasonable?
- Does the Biblical worldview comport with reality?
- How does Christianity fare against the other leading worldviews of today?
Anyone who has done much reading in the area of theistic Philosophy will recognize these questions and will probably be familiar with most of the answers. However, I hope that my presentation might be somewhat unique in that I am attempting to put these questions together in such a way as to build a progressive case for the validity and the truthfulness of Christianity as opposed to it’s competitors today and other myths.
I have my work cut out for me.
6 comments:
As always, I love to hear your disagreements, your questions, or even if something I wrote particularly resonated with you.
Yes you do, but I am looking forward to reading it. Sounds like it will be good and informative.
mom
I can't wait!
I was giving this some thought the other day....We are called to give a defense for what we believe. We call sharing our faith "witnessing." What is a "witness," other than someone who can testify to certain facts and give evidence (usually in a court setting). And what is it that we give witness to? One can clearly go to the historical record and make a compelling case that Jesus existed, and indeed was crucified, and indeed rose from the dead. As many apologists have written, the case for Christ's life, death, and resurrection can be convincingly made.
But we also "witness" or testify to the reality of God in our everyday life, or should be able to. I would consider answered prayer to be irrefutable evidence of God -- one answer to prayer could be passed off as a coincidence by a skeptic, but a pattern of answered prayer would be hard to refute. Would that we lived in such constant dependence upon God that an irrefutable pattern of prayer developed out of our lives.
I posted an item on my blog on what the nature of the gospel is (http://rendertogod.blogspot.com/2008/06/have-we-lost-our-first-love.html). In it, I listed the various titles or attributes of Jesus Christ. Most (arguably all) of these attributes or titles apply to us in our daily lives -- that is, they should be our experience of God. Another way of looking at it is to say that the very character of who Christ is can be considered a series of promises (Christ is our comfort, our freedom, our encouragement, our motivation and ability for living, our enablement to walk in the Spirit, and so forth). To live our lives according to Christ isn't an abstract concept, but a concrete reliance upon the character of Christ to fulfill his promises (his character) in us. The greatest evidence or proof of God's existence is the existence of the character of Christ, his promises being fulfilled, in and through a person who puts their faith in Christ. For anyone who knows and experiences the reality of God's promises in their life, and the reality of answered prayer, the analogy between God and a unicorn is sadly off-base.
BTW, you might consider getting a copy of "The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and It's Scientific Pretensions" by David Berlinski. He's a self-identified secular Jew, but he filets the quasi-scientific speculations of athetists to arrive at the conclusion that "there is no God".
Another point (sorry)....What is the biblical means of proof? Ps. 34:8 says, "Taste and see that the Lord is good." If the proof is in the pudding, so to speak, then the proof of God is found in the exercise of faith in God, and noting the results of that faith. Perhaps God cannot be proven using the scientific method (as the "truth" of macro-evolution cannot be proven by the scientific method either) -- one cannot drag God into a lab, run experiments, note the results, and then replicate those results over a series of similar experiments. How can one apply the laws of nature to an entity who, by definition, stands outside nature? My sense on this is that there are limits to science -- science can answer some questions, but not all, and certainly cannot answer questions of ultimate importance such as "Is there a God?" or "Why are we here?" Atheists insist upon a certain type of proof, and when God doesn't submit to their demand, they deny his existence. God has provided a means of proof, but it requires a step of faith...something the atheists refuse to do. So, they are locked in their ignorance by their insistence that God bend to their concept of "proof."
Finally, there are numerous examples of people who have started out to disprove the Bible, or to disprove that Jesus rose from the dead, who have poured over scripture to make their case, who in the end converted, dropped their atheism, acknowledged the truth of the Bible, and acknowledged that God is found in Jesus Christ. It's intellectually disingenuous of some atheists to based their "beliefs" on a series of straw men, and they refuse to go that route of more serious skeptics who ended up, in their process, becoming believers.
Post a Comment