Episodes

  • What is the argument from reason?

    What is the argument from reason?
    Aug 9 2021
    The argument from reason is an attempt to demonstrate that belief in naturalism is unjustified; that is, it is a belief that cannot be trusted. This is done by showing that belief in naturalism is contradictory to confidence in human reason. This is an important point, as atheists often attempt to frame their worldview as “more reasonable” than one that holds to transcendent ideas. A general statement of the argument from reason would be as follows: Either “reason” is merely an illusion of physics—in which case there is no justification for relying on it to produce truthful beliefs—or “reason” is something more than physical—in which case naturalism is false. If human reason is driven by mindless particle interactions, it does not necessarily correspond to truth. If we believe reason corresponds to truth, we cannot also believe reason is determined purely by physical means. An even more concise phrasing would be “the existence of reason itself argues against naturalism.” As with any discussion of philosophical ideas, specific definitions matter. In this case, reason is the ability of a mind to infer and conclude in a logical way. As it applies to the argument from reason, reason refers to the use of the intellect to come to real, true conclusions. Naturalism is the belief that everything is reducible to physical components; it is the view that reality is nothing more than matter and energy. Philosophy also draws a distinction between the questions “how do we know truth?” and “what is reality?” These fields are known, respectively, as epistemology and metaphysics. The argument from reason is an epistemological claim: it narrowly examines how we know and how much we trust an idea. Because reason is an inextricable part of our understanding, the argument from reason heavily implies a metaphysical claim, as well. If “reason” is objectively valid—if reason is “real”—then naturalism would have to be “unreal.” If reason does not exist, why did humanity come to see it as we do: as a non-material, but real thing? If there were no such thing as light, we’d never know we were living in darkness; in fact, such an idea would be pointless to consider. Yet we distinguish between reason and irrationality. The argument from reason is really a series of arguments, in different forms, voiced by both believers and non-believers. Thinkers such as Victor Reppert, C. S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, and Thomas Nagel have been associated with these claims. Each argument has its own strengths and weaknesses, but they all share a common theme. To suggest that literally everything about the universe is effectively random is to suggest that one’s own thoughts and conclusions are equally unreliable. One does not have to start from—or even conclude with—a biblical worldview to appreciate the logical force of this idea. An especially famous version of the argument from reason was popularized by Alvin Plantinga: the evolutionary argument against naturalism (EAAN). Plantinga notes that evolution is driven by survival of the “fittest,” yet beliefs more “fit” for survival are not necessarily the same as those that are “true.” Therefore, if evolution is true, belief in naturalism is unjustified. In other words, at the very least, belief in naturalism logically contradicts itself, thanks to evolution. To visualize the evolutionary argument against naturalism, consider an extreme example: a man develops the overwhelming desire to be eaten by an invisible bear. This drives him to seek out locations where he sees no bears. That belief is contrary to survival—not to mention bizarre—but more importantly, it’s factually wrong. His reasoning did not lead to truth, since there are no invisible bears. And yet, that bizarre, false reasoning makes the man more “fit” for survival since it encourages him to stay away from the bears he can see; that is, ones that exist. This demonstrates how “that which is good for survival” is not identical to “that which is true.” It...
    Show more Show less
    11 mins
  • Could Atheists be more intelligent than believers?

    Could Atheists be more intelligent than believers?
    Jul 7 2021
    What is implicit in this question is that many atheists make public claims that they are the intelligentsia of society—and that they are too intelligent for any sort of belief in religion. It is true that many atheists are highly intelligent, and many are highly educated (intelligence and educational attainment not being synonymous). But are atheists correct in claiming that they are smarter than those who believe in God? Atheist Richard Dawkins is more intelligent than many believers in certain areas, especially biology. He has achieved a higher educational level than many as well. Does this mean he is therefore more qualified to know if God actually exists? Of course not. The problem atheists have is not their level of intelligence; it is their struggle with sin. They have traded away the knowledge of God for the knowledge of this world. The book of Proverbs is an entire book about how to be wise. Solomon begins the opening section of this book by identifying the first step to being a wise person: “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge” (Proverbs 1:7). Solomon clearly says that, for a person to truly gain knowledge, he must first acknowledge his need and possess reverence for the one true God. If a person is to gain wisdom, he must first be in a right relationship with God. The atheist starts in the wrong place and heads in the wrong direction. Solomon finishes Proverbs 1:7 this way: “But fools despise wisdom and instruction.” So a wise person fears God (he has a respect for who God is and willingly submits to His authority). However, a fool despises wisdom. A foolish person does not acknowledge God’s authority over his life; therefore, he shuts himself off to truly gaining wisdom. An atheist can be highly intelligent and very ignorant at the same time. He can have multiple academic degrees and yet be, by the Bible’s definition, a fool. Education is no measure of intelligence, and intelligence is no measure of spiritual condition. A man of the humblest intellect who nevertheless believes God’s promises is wise in what matters most. “Your commands are always with me and make me wiser than my enemies” (Psalm 119:98). There is a big difference between being intelligent enough to succeed in academia and being “wise for salvation” (2 Timothy 3:15). “The foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom” (1 Corinthians 1:25). The intelligence of this world is temporary and can only go so far. But the wisdom that comes from God is eternal and higher than the world’s intelligence (see James 3:13–18). The atheist, who does not have the Spirit of God, cannot discern spiritual truth and might naturally consider those who live by faith to be foolish, irrational, or less intelligent: “The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit” (1 Corinthians 2:14). The problem is not that the atheist does not see enough evidence for God. The problem is that sin has so darkened his heart and mind that he refuses to accept the evidence of God right in front of him. The Bible teaches that sin is not just actions that go against God’s will but is the natural condition of every person due to the curse of Adam (Genesis 3). We come into this world as sinners. One of the effects of sin is spiritual blindness. Atheists can be intelligent by the world’s standards, and they may proclaim their intelligence far and wide, but they are actually fools because they miss the most important fact of life: they are created by a sovereign God who lays claim to their lives. Paul says that the problem with sinful mankind is not that God has not revealed Himself clearly enough but that men suppress the truth: “Although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they...
    Show more Show less
    12 mins
  • Is there real evidence for the existence of God?

    Is there real evidence for the existence of God?
    Jul 6 2021
    There is evidence for the existence of God. Not everyone finds that evidence compelling or convincing; this does not mean such evidence is nonexistent. Most who deny evidence for God demand forms of proof—or levels of certainty—that are either irrelevant or unreasonable. Looking at logic, experience, and empirical observations, there is much evidence for the existence of God. Assessing evidence includes properly categorizing it. Some balk at the idea of “evidence” for a God who is invisible and immaterial. However, even hardened skeptics accept the meaningful existence of many such things, such as the laws of logic. Logic is neither material nor visible, yet it’s legitimately considered “real” and can be both perceived and examined. One cannot see logic or mechanically quantify it, but this does not justify any useful claim that logic does not exist. The same is true, to varying degrees, with other concepts such as morality. This point also establishes that logic and philosophy are relevant when discussing evidence for the existence of God. As demonstrated in the case of the laws of logic, even if empirical proof is unconvincing, that does not mean the subject in question cannot be “real.” The probability that God exists is in no way reduced simply because empirical evidence is subject to interpretation; it is at least possible that something intangible, non-material, and meaningful actually exists. With that in mind, there are several broad categories of evidence for the existence of God. None are self-sufficient to prove that God exists or that the Bible’s description of Him is accurate. Combined, however, they form a compelling argument that the God described in Scripture is real. Human beings have a natural “sense” of God. Historians and anthropologists alike recognize belief in some supernatural reality as common to almost all human beings who have ever lived. The number of people who categorically reject every form of higher power or spirit is vanishingly small. This is true even in profoundly “secular” cultures. Even further, secular fields of study such as cognitive science of religion suggest that such beliefs are ingrained in the natural state of the human mind. At the very least, this suggests there is something real to be perceived, just as senses like sight and hearing are targeted at actual phenomena. Logic points to the existence of God. There are several logic-based arguments indicating that God exists. Some, like the ontological argument, are not considered especially convincing, though they’re hard to refute. Others, such as the kalam cosmological argument, are considered much more robust. Continuing along the same spectrum, concepts such as intelligent design—teleological arguments—make logical inferences from observations to argue for the existence of God. General observations support the existence of God. Teleological arguments arise because so many aspects of reality appear to be deliberately arranged. That evidence, in and of itself, is often extremely indicative of a Creator. The Big Bang is a classic example. This theory was initially resisted by atheists for being too “religious.” And yet the idea of a non-eternal universe, as demonstrated by secular science, is strongly supportive of the claims made in the early chapters of the Bible. History, literature, and archaeology support the existence of God. Whether critics like it or not, the Bible is a valid form of evidence for the existence of God. Not merely “because the Bible says so,” but because the Bible has proved to be so reliable. Dismissing it as biased, simply because it says things skeptics do not accept, is not a rational response. That would be as irrational as dismissing every book describing Julius Caesar and then claiming there are no records describing Julius Caesar. The reliability of the Bible and its coordination with secular history and archaeology are reasonable points to raise when it comes to discussing the existence of...
    Show more Show less
    12 mins
  • Is Jesus Real?

    Is Jesus Real?
    Jul 6 2021
    Jesus is a real person. He is one of the most complicated, discussed, and revered of historical figures. Most scholars, Christian, non-Christian, and secular alike, believe that there was a historical Jesus. The evidence is overwhelming. Jesus was written about by ancient historians, including Josephus and Tacitus. From an historical standpoint, there is hardly any question: there really was a man named Jesus who lived in first-century Israel. The Old Testament predicted the Messiah, a real person who would deliver Israel from their enemies. The Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), of the tribe of David (Genesis 49:10). He was to be a prophet akin to Moses (Deuteronomy 18:18), a herald of good news (Isaiah 61:1), and a healer of maladies (Isaiah 35:5–6). The Messiah would be a godly Servant who suffered before entering His glory (Isaiah 53). Jesus is the real person who really fulfilled these prophecies. The New Testament contains hundreds of references to Jesus Christ as a real person. The earliest gospel may have been written within 10 years of Jesus’ death, and the earliest of Paul’s epistles was written about 25 years after Jesus’ death. This is important because it means that, as the gospels were circulating, there were plenty of eyewitnesses still alive who could verify the truth of the gospel accounts (see 1 Corinthians 15:6). The manuscript evidence for the authenticity of the New Testament is overwhelming: there are about 25,000 early manuscripts of the New Testament. In comparison, the Gallic Wars written by Caesar in the first century BC, only has 10 early manuscripts existing—and the earliest one of those was written 1,000 years after the original. Similarly, Aristotle’s Poetics only has five early manuscripts in existence, dating to 1,400 years after the original. Those who doubt that Jesus is real must also question the existence of Julius Caesar and Aristotle. Outside of the Bible, Jesus is mentioned in the Quran and in the writings of Judaism, Gnosticism, and Hinduism. Early historians considered Jesus to be real. The first-century Roman historian Tacitus mentioned the followers of Christ. Flavius Josephus, an ancient Jewish historian, refers to Christ in his Antiquities of the Jews. Other references to Jesus exist in the writings of Suetonius, chief secretary to Emperor Hadrian; Julius Africanus, quoting the historian Thallus; Lucian of Samosata, a second-century Greek writer; Pliny the Younger; and Mara Bar-Serapion. No other historical figure has had as much impact on the world as Jesus Christ. Whether one uses BC (Before Christ) or BCE (Before Common Era), the whole Western dating system is measured from one event: the birth of Jesus, a real person. In the name of Jesus have been founded countless orphanages, hospitals, clinics, schools, universities, homeless shelters, emergency relief agencies, and other charitable organizations. Millions of people can give personal testimonies of Jesus’ continuing work in their own lives. There is overwhelming evidence that Jesus is real, both in secular and biblical history. Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus existed and that He did what the Bible says He did is the testimony of the early church. Literally thousands of Christians in the first century, including the twelve apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for the gospel of Jesus Christ. People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie. We are called to have faith—not a blind faith in a make-believe story—but genuine faith in a real Person who lived in a real place in a real time in history. This Man, who proved His divine origin through the signs He performed and the prophecies He fulfilled, died on a Roman cross, was buried in a Jewish tomb, and rose again for our justification. Jesus is real. “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:29). . . . . . Keith Muoki is a KJV bible believer who is...
    Show more Show less
    11 mins