 When coming across something new, we tend to think that as knowledge. Learning something that you didn’t know before. However, the issue of knowledge goes way beyond learning something that you didn’t pick up on before. The question, how do you know in the first place is an epistemic question that is begged by the typical thinking of knowledge. One can take a pragmatic approach that argues that it’s useless to talk about knowledge so you should just believe that which is useful. One could argue that I am a thinking thing so it’s impossible to not want to know. The point is, that knowledge is essential to the human experience because we are philosophical creatures that seek to know. This is why it’s important to understand what knowledge is and what it entails. Belief is key to understanding how knowledge is obtained. “There is agreement among most analytic philosophers that belief is (roughly) a dispositional, affirmative attitude towards a proposition or state of affairs.”[1] When we hear a proposition, we must investigate it with proper logical inference and with no prior belief bias. This is the first step for obtaining rational belief that can be held with certainty. Beliefs come with different levels of certainty, but it’s not something you can just calculate with mathematics. Belief aim is the standard for what constitutes as a belief you ought to have. This gets into ethics of belief and the norms of belief. The belief aim for knowledge is to seek the truth. To have knowledge is to know what corresponds to reality. Pragmatic aim of truth would be to believe that which is most useful, which will not get the truth, hence no knowledge. The start of this is to set aside our emotions and have intellectual humility and honesty. Truth should be the norm of belief to obtain knowledge, meaning “that any belief that does not also count as knowledge is impermissible or irrational or vicious or defective”.[2] Without this principle, science, math, social studies, history, and any other epistemological topics are not teaching truth or knowledge. For those who go to universities or colleges, your money would be a waste of time and you might as well sell used cars. With this in mind, it’s important to use our mind since it is the tool that we use to form our beliefs. As we perceive something, then we form beliefs about it. If I see a car in front of me with its brake lights on, then I will form a belief from the accident if I don’t hit my brakes. All humorous examples aside, something to note that a belief is “a propositional attitude, then, is the mental state of having some attitude, stance, take, or opinion about a proposition or about the potential state of affairs in which that proposition is true.”[i] Most beliefs concerning conscious thought will be the gateway to knowledge. We have to seriously reflect on our beliefs and test them out as to see if they are true. This is why it’s important to get your epistemic methodologies set in the right path so that your beliefs will be aimed at truth. When it’s aimed at truth, then you will have true propositions, which are knowledge claims. Knowledge is considered to be a species of belief by many philosophers. You must first believe something to see it as true and to test it as true. It starts with a knowing venture, which is a pathway to wanting to know something particular. If I set out to learn how to ride a bike, then I set out on how to know the process at which how to do it. This is of course an example of procedural knowledge. Semantic or declarative knowledge has to do with epistemology, which is the study of knowledge itself. These are more propositional statements, like Jesus of Nazareth existed. What we see in post-modernity is that anything that is not procedural knowledge is subjective to the mind of the believer. Meaning, that declarative statements of truth are seen as not objective, but subjective. Knowledge at its core is justified true belief. You must first believe in order to know something. The distinction between procedural knowledge and declarative knowledge has been made already. Knowledge is more than just facts and information. It’s not 100% certainty since it stems from beliefs which have presuppositions. Also, different epistemologies have different norms at getting at truth, but in their field topics. For example, science deals with inductive reasoning which cannot have 100% about anything. Unless you want to say that knowledge cannot come from science, then you have to realize that knowledge is not 100%, but certainty. There is scientific knowledge that is justified true belief in the methodology of the scientific method. There are things that we can know for absolute certainty like there are no married bachelors or one ended sticks. Arguments from mathematics and definitions are things that can be demonstrated as proofs and not evidences. The reasoning for this are the axioms of logic and mathematics that are justified starting points since epistemology starts with the axioms of logic. These propositions are indubitable, meaning no counter arguments can show them to be false, hence not doubt worthy. There is another kind of knowledge as well, that is to know someone. To know someone is not a propositional statement or brute face, but a personal experience. Those who are married have this kind of knowledge at the center of their epistemological relationship. Knowledge starts with beliefs since we are philosophical creatures that reflect on what we think and perceive. There are different types of knowledge that are based on different axioms and methodologies. All knowledge claims can be based on absolute certainty, certainty, or confidence. It is belief that corresponds to reality and is objective for all to justifiably believe in. We must submit to the truth and let it guide our beliefs to be true so they will become knowledge. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/JMDapologetics101 Sources: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-belief/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-how/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/belief/
1 Comment
-Dusty Letchworth |
-John Dunfee | |
It’s important to know what happened, where did it happen, and when it happened concerning the events in the Old Testament. This article will focus on where it happened. Knowing where the events of the Old Testament happened is good for getting an important background for the New Testament. Where the Old Testament events happened will show the land in which God’s revelation occurred.
The Old Testament occurred in ancient Israel which is a small part of the Ancient Near East. This is of course in reference to what we call the Middle East today. Israel was geographically smaller than most of its neighbors, but yet it’s location was strategically important throughout ancient history. Israel connects the three continents of Asia, Africa, and Europe. This is one of the reasons why Israel was taken over many times ranging from the Babylonians to the Romans. Two things would result of Israel’s location. First, many nations desired to take control of this land for the very strategic point mentioned before. Second, it resulted in many foreign cultural influences on Israel, which is why we see idol worshiping many times in the Old Testament.
The Middle East contains three geological sub regions all joined together by the Fertile Crescent. Many of these lands contain mountain regions where a lot of the battles from the Old Testament took place. Many of these lands contained deserts, flat lands, and rivers which played into transportation. The three sub regions are Mesopotamia, Syria-Palestine, and Egypt. Israel also had four sub regions that play into many of the events that have occurred there. First, is the coastal plains that are western coastline slants which are narrow in the north and become broader toward the south. Second, the central mountains that are a ridge of hills located between the coastal plains and the Jordan Rift. These hills are divided into four main regions, which are Galilee, Ephraim, Judean Hill Country and Eastern Negeb. Third, the Jordan Rift that is a series of depressions that run from the Jordan River to the foot of Mount Hermon. This area contains the lowest place on earth, which is the Dead Sea located 1,371 feet below sea level. Finally, The Trans-Jordanian Highlands that is located east of the Jordan Rift and sharply rises into a plateau. This area gives way to the Arabian Desert.
Mesopotamia contains the area in between the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, which the Greek implies land between the rivers. The region extends from the mouth of the Persian Gulf to the foot of the Zagros Mountains. Mesopotamia was not a good landscape for defending against enemies mainly due to the lack of natural defenses such as mountain ranges. However, for those who were able to live were able to grow crops and had transportation because of the two rivers. This is where civilization began and writing like cuneiform developed which was wedged shaped writings on wet clay tablets. Many nations sought to take this land because of the weak defense and the benefits of its landscape.
Egypt is a land located by and in the Nile River that is the dominate geographic feature of Egypt. Egyptian culture developed a unique language of hieroglyphs that is “sacred caving.” This was influenced by the cuneiform developed by Mesopotamia cultures, possibly by the Sumerians. Egypt also had great soil due to its locational relationship to the Nile River, which gave Egypt the name of “black land.” Egypt had commercial trading with Asian and European areas due to their seaports. Unlike Mesopotamia, Egypt was very seclusive to outside nations because of the desert borders and its location to the Mediterranean Sea. Due to this, invasion and cultural change did not occur often. At one time, the nation of Israel was located in Egypt.
Syria-Palestine is the area from the northern bend of the Euphrates and southward to the Sinai desert. Israel is located at the southernmost section of Syria-Palestine. This area contains smaller rivers like the Jordan, unlike the Tigris or Euphrates river. Syria-Palestine was not a location to advance societies or national empires in its early history. This was a point of control for many river cultures for both military and political reasons. The most important geographic feature of this area is its formation of a land bridge along the Fertile Crescent. This is also the area that contains the four sub regions of Israel.
The Middle East also contains two important highways that are Via Maris (the way of the Sea) and The King’s Highway. The Via Maris designates all the network of roadways from Egypt through Syria-Palestine into Mesopotamia. The King’s Highway is the second important route, which gets its name from Num. 20:17 & 21:22. It extends from the Gulf of Aqabah at Elath through the Trans-Jordanian Highlands to Damascus. It’s important to know where the events happened to understand what happened. The geology helps show details that are important for many of the events in both Old and New Testament. It also tells us why God choose to reveal himself to the Israelite's in this area and will play into when God did this as well.
Sources:
Arnold, Bill T. and Bryan E. Beyer. Encountering The Old Testament: Third Edition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2015. Text Book.
The Old Testament occurred in ancient Israel which is a small part of the Ancient Near East. This is of course in reference to what we call the Middle East today. Israel was geographically smaller than most of its neighbors, but yet it’s location was strategically important throughout ancient history. Israel connects the three continents of Asia, Africa, and Europe. This is one of the reasons why Israel was taken over many times ranging from the Babylonians to the Romans. Two things would result of Israel’s location. First, many nations desired to take control of this land for the very strategic point mentioned before. Second, it resulted in many foreign cultural influences on Israel, which is why we see idol worshiping many times in the Old Testament.
The Middle East contains three geological sub regions all joined together by the Fertile Crescent. Many of these lands contain mountain regions where a lot of the battles from the Old Testament took place. Many of these lands contained deserts, flat lands, and rivers which played into transportation. The three sub regions are Mesopotamia, Syria-Palestine, and Egypt. Israel also had four sub regions that play into many of the events that have occurred there. First, is the coastal plains that are western coastline slants which are narrow in the north and become broader toward the south. Second, the central mountains that are a ridge of hills located between the coastal plains and the Jordan Rift. These hills are divided into four main regions, which are Galilee, Ephraim, Judean Hill Country and Eastern Negeb. Third, the Jordan Rift that is a series of depressions that run from the Jordan River to the foot of Mount Hermon. This area contains the lowest place on earth, which is the Dead Sea located 1,371 feet below sea level. Finally, The Trans-Jordanian Highlands that is located east of the Jordan Rift and sharply rises into a plateau. This area gives way to the Arabian Desert.
Mesopotamia contains the area in between the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, which the Greek implies land between the rivers. The region extends from the mouth of the Persian Gulf to the foot of the Zagros Mountains. Mesopotamia was not a good landscape for defending against enemies mainly due to the lack of natural defenses such as mountain ranges. However, for those who were able to live were able to grow crops and had transportation because of the two rivers. This is where civilization began and writing like cuneiform developed which was wedged shaped writings on wet clay tablets. Many nations sought to take this land because of the weak defense and the benefits of its landscape.
Egypt is a land located by and in the Nile River that is the dominate geographic feature of Egypt. Egyptian culture developed a unique language of hieroglyphs that is “sacred caving.” This was influenced by the cuneiform developed by Mesopotamia cultures, possibly by the Sumerians. Egypt also had great soil due to its locational relationship to the Nile River, which gave Egypt the name of “black land.” Egypt had commercial trading with Asian and European areas due to their seaports. Unlike Mesopotamia, Egypt was very seclusive to outside nations because of the desert borders and its location to the Mediterranean Sea. Due to this, invasion and cultural change did not occur often. At one time, the nation of Israel was located in Egypt.
Syria-Palestine is the area from the northern bend of the Euphrates and southward to the Sinai desert. Israel is located at the southernmost section of Syria-Palestine. This area contains smaller rivers like the Jordan, unlike the Tigris or Euphrates river. Syria-Palestine was not a location to advance societies or national empires in its early history. This was a point of control for many river cultures for both military and political reasons. The most important geographic feature of this area is its formation of a land bridge along the Fertile Crescent. This is also the area that contains the four sub regions of Israel.
The Middle East also contains two important highways that are Via Maris (the way of the Sea) and The King’s Highway. The Via Maris designates all the network of roadways from Egypt through Syria-Palestine into Mesopotamia. The King’s Highway is the second important route, which gets its name from Num. 20:17 & 21:22. It extends from the Gulf of Aqabah at Elath through the Trans-Jordanian Highlands to Damascus. It’s important to know where the events happened to understand what happened. The geology helps show details that are important for many of the events in both Old and New Testament. It also tells us why God choose to reveal himself to the Israelite's in this area and will play into when God did this as well.
Sources:
Arnold, Bill T. and Bryan E. Beyer. Encountering The Old Testament: Third Edition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2015. Text Book.
-Dusty Letchworth
When it comes to learning about apologetics, there are certain books that I consider “essential”: books that thoroughly explain topics that normally come up in conversations where Christianity is being defended. I normally get several questions or objections about the God of the Old Testament. Richard Dawkins, one of the so-called leaders of the New Atheist Movement, put it very bluntly in his book The God Delusion:
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
So if you were told this by an atheist, how would you respond? Is there a difference between God in the Old Testament versus the New Testament? Are there reasonable responses to such harsh challenges? Not only do I think so, I know so. Why? Because I read a book that I know consider one of my essentials. Paul Copan is an author, speaker and apologist, and a professor of philosophy and ethics at Palm Beach Atlantic University. His book, Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God is a great resource when providing an apologetic response.
Recently, I participated in a friendly debate with someone who felt God allowed men in the Bible to treat women unfairly. If it were not for this book, I don’t think I could have provided a good response to her challenge, but I was able to give a well-researched answer. In biblical times, there was a certain hierarchy which included men at the head of the household, but for practical purposes, were equally influential in their marriages and beyond (pg. 103). The challenge in question was that women were nothing but property, and the young woman provided the verse in Exodus 20:17 which lists the wife as an item not to covet among other items like a servant, ox, donkey, etc. I used Copan’s answers provided in the book and explained five verses prior to that were required to honor our father and our mother. This verse definitely points to the importance of women in relation to God’s commandments. I was glad to have learned this from Copan, and I must say it caused a noticeable reaction in the young woman I was speaking with at the time!
Copan’s book takes several instances in the Old Testament and provides a cultural background for each verse or section that is normally challenged. He covers the sacrifices made to God, the covenants and God’s righteous anger, the treatment of children, women, foreigners, and other races. He also takes a few chapters and goes into detail about the strange laws of the Old Testament (i.e. Why is it wrong to eat shellfish?) as well as the issue of slavery and the killing of the Canaanites (both which are hot topics brought up in debates with atheists). All of these are important topics that will eventually come up in conversation with a non-believer.
This is one of those books that should be included in the foundation of your apologetic knowledge. The book is easy to understand and provides great insight into what it was like in biblical times. By reading this book, you will become more equipped to answer these questions when they arise, and they will definitely be asked. It is best to have read this one and demonstrate that God is a loving God just like he has always been and not the monster Dawkins and other atheists make him out to be.
Faith Fortified: https://faithfortified.com/
Is God a Moral Monster?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004EPYPY4/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
So if you were told this by an atheist, how would you respond? Is there a difference between God in the Old Testament versus the New Testament? Are there reasonable responses to such harsh challenges? Not only do I think so, I know so. Why? Because I read a book that I know consider one of my essentials. Paul Copan is an author, speaker and apologist, and a professor of philosophy and ethics at Palm Beach Atlantic University. His book, Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God is a great resource when providing an apologetic response.
Recently, I participated in a friendly debate with someone who felt God allowed men in the Bible to treat women unfairly. If it were not for this book, I don’t think I could have provided a good response to her challenge, but I was able to give a well-researched answer. In biblical times, there was a certain hierarchy which included men at the head of the household, but for practical purposes, were equally influential in their marriages and beyond (pg. 103). The challenge in question was that women were nothing but property, and the young woman provided the verse in Exodus 20:17 which lists the wife as an item not to covet among other items like a servant, ox, donkey, etc. I used Copan’s answers provided in the book and explained five verses prior to that were required to honor our father and our mother. This verse definitely points to the importance of women in relation to God’s commandments. I was glad to have learned this from Copan, and I must say it caused a noticeable reaction in the young woman I was speaking with at the time!
Copan’s book takes several instances in the Old Testament and provides a cultural background for each verse or section that is normally challenged. He covers the sacrifices made to God, the covenants and God’s righteous anger, the treatment of children, women, foreigners, and other races. He also takes a few chapters and goes into detail about the strange laws of the Old Testament (i.e. Why is it wrong to eat shellfish?) as well as the issue of slavery and the killing of the Canaanites (both which are hot topics brought up in debates with atheists). All of these are important topics that will eventually come up in conversation with a non-believer.
This is one of those books that should be included in the foundation of your apologetic knowledge. The book is easy to understand and provides great insight into what it was like in biblical times. By reading this book, you will become more equipped to answer these questions when they arise, and they will definitely be asked. It is best to have read this one and demonstrate that God is a loving God just like he has always been and not the monster Dawkins and other atheists make him out to be.
Faith Fortified: https://faithfortified.com/
Is God a Moral Monster?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004EPYPY4/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
-Tim Howard
5.Science and religion contradict
4.Who created God
3.You were raised that way
2.Religion is the source of the world’s problems
1.Jesus never existed
The number of those who claim to non-religious or atheist is ever increasing. We live in a time where anti-religious objections (specifically toward Christianity) have been frequently proposed. Naturally, not all objections have been sound ones. In this article, I will be going through some of these objections that I label the top 5 arguments atheists should stop using.
Number 5: "science and religion contradict"
This is a very common misconception I often hear made by skeptics and atheists when it comes scientific evidence. This is the issue that religion cannot be reconciled or be consistent with science. However, the contrary is true. Starting from my position as a Christian, this is not the case. Apologists such as John Lennox give a very well rounded and concise position concerning this falsehood. For example, the existence of a jet engine is explained by what? The parts that make it and the laws of internal combustion, or the engineer? It would be bizarre to suggest that both these explanations conflict with one another. Rather, they complement each other and give a coherent picture as to “why the jet engine.” Those who subscribe to a faith and believe in God, view him as the causal agent behind what makes up our physical world. Just as a programmer is the cause behind the code in a computer program. I also hear people say, "I don't believe in god, I believe in science", so are they suggesting because I'm a Christian I reject the theory of gravity? Or the laws of thermodynamics, and so on? This simply is not the case with religious belief.
Number 4: "Who created God?"
God's existence has always been in debate among theists and atheists, but this tends to be a common objection. This question is usually posed as a type of conversation stopper, rather than with sincerity. This just shows a lack in philosophical understanding of who God is. God, according to his properties, is not a created being, this question would assume that we are proposing created a God. God can be defined by the following: immaterial, timeless, spaceless, changeless, infinitely powerful, eternal, personal, unconditioned, and endowed with freedom of the will, or ontologically speaking, the highest conceivable being. With God outlined correctly, we no longer have any reason to assume God needs to be created, unless we want to be guilty of making a category error. Since God is a metaphysical being, God can also be viewed as an abstract concept just like abstract objects in philosophy. Mathematics, numbers, shapes, etc. exist entirely on their own with no external explanation but become very axiomatic like the laws of logic. Often, this is a response towards cosmological arguments. This fails due do to not properly understanding what the premises convey. Only things that begin to exist require causes, this follows logically that God would not need a cause due to his divine property of being eternal and timeless.
Number 3: "You were raised that way"
When skeptics try to undermine the validity of a person's testimony, this is usually the objection that is raised. While yes, many theists were born into environments where religion is practiced, this does not logically follow that anyone's sole belief in God is only grounded in the fact that they were introduced to it where they were born. This would make the objector guilty of the genetic fallacy. The logical form: The origin of the claim is presented. Therefore, the claim is true/false. Even if the sole reason for a belief in God was due to the brain washing of a specific person, this does not in any way disprove their belief. If God truly exists, then the brainwashed individual has arrived at the correct conclusion. Using myself as an example, I was raised into a religious home, but affirmed my faith through facts and evidence, even though I was born and raised to already believe it. Santa clause, the tooth fairy, and many other myths are usually abandoned at adolescence, but a belief in God holds true for millions at any age, giving us good reason to assume that theistic belief is much more than one’s origin.
Number 2: “Religion is the source of the world’s problems”
This position is usually taken by those who are anti-theists and see religious belief as hazardous. A claim that is typically stated is that all major wars were religiously motivated ones and the gruesome atrocities committed in humanity can be ascribed to religion. While yes, certain inhumane actions were rationalized by religious belief, it does not logically follow that inhumane actions can be traced to just that. I can easily look to the history of the 20th century and demonstrate the data. We have enough non-religious ideologies being pushed at the time leading to the death of millions. We have: Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Adolf Hitler, Chiang Kai-Shek, Vladimir Lenin, Hideki Tojo, Pol Pot, and on I can go. All together coming to a grand total of 122,064,000 lives lost. That’s almost 130 million lives lost by the hands of non-religious peoples. Professor R.J Rummel writes in his book "Death by Government" that, "Almost 170 million men, women and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed or killed in any other of a myriad of ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners." In the light of this evidence, we can correctly conclude that religion cannot be the only responsible source for humanities atrocities and problems.
Number 1: “Jesus never existed”
The reason this is deemed as the worst argument on this list is because of its historically dishonest and scholarly inaccurate position. To claim Jesus of Nazareth never existed would be to deny historical consensus on the subject. It’s a scholarly debate whether Jesus rose from the dead, but to deny his existence is not scholarly. Josephus and Tacitus are often invoked on the matter writing about Jesus of Nazareth in their text. They were two ancient historians and scholars who affirmed the life of Jesus in their written accounts. Here is a link to the full discourse of listing sources: https://beliefmap.org/jesus-existed
Even non-believing New-Testament scholars such as Bart Ehrman attack this radical view that Jesus of Nazareth didn't exist. The bottom line is that only minority groups hold to this view of Jesus not existing and are seen by professional and academic circles as being dishonest in their work.
Tim runs Invoking Theism: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcXdCHoaSy0kNSv-KwjiSqQ
4.Who created God
3.You were raised that way
2.Religion is the source of the world’s problems
1.Jesus never existed
The number of those who claim to non-religious or atheist is ever increasing. We live in a time where anti-religious objections (specifically toward Christianity) have been frequently proposed. Naturally, not all objections have been sound ones. In this article, I will be going through some of these objections that I label the top 5 arguments atheists should stop using.
Number 5: "science and religion contradict"
This is a very common misconception I often hear made by skeptics and atheists when it comes scientific evidence. This is the issue that religion cannot be reconciled or be consistent with science. However, the contrary is true. Starting from my position as a Christian, this is not the case. Apologists such as John Lennox give a very well rounded and concise position concerning this falsehood. For example, the existence of a jet engine is explained by what? The parts that make it and the laws of internal combustion, or the engineer? It would be bizarre to suggest that both these explanations conflict with one another. Rather, they complement each other and give a coherent picture as to “why the jet engine.” Those who subscribe to a faith and believe in God, view him as the causal agent behind what makes up our physical world. Just as a programmer is the cause behind the code in a computer program. I also hear people say, "I don't believe in god, I believe in science", so are they suggesting because I'm a Christian I reject the theory of gravity? Or the laws of thermodynamics, and so on? This simply is not the case with religious belief.
Number 4: "Who created God?"
God's existence has always been in debate among theists and atheists, but this tends to be a common objection. This question is usually posed as a type of conversation stopper, rather than with sincerity. This just shows a lack in philosophical understanding of who God is. God, according to his properties, is not a created being, this question would assume that we are proposing created a God. God can be defined by the following: immaterial, timeless, spaceless, changeless, infinitely powerful, eternal, personal, unconditioned, and endowed with freedom of the will, or ontologically speaking, the highest conceivable being. With God outlined correctly, we no longer have any reason to assume God needs to be created, unless we want to be guilty of making a category error. Since God is a metaphysical being, God can also be viewed as an abstract concept just like abstract objects in philosophy. Mathematics, numbers, shapes, etc. exist entirely on their own with no external explanation but become very axiomatic like the laws of logic. Often, this is a response towards cosmological arguments. This fails due do to not properly understanding what the premises convey. Only things that begin to exist require causes, this follows logically that God would not need a cause due to his divine property of being eternal and timeless.
Number 3: "You were raised that way"
When skeptics try to undermine the validity of a person's testimony, this is usually the objection that is raised. While yes, many theists were born into environments where religion is practiced, this does not logically follow that anyone's sole belief in God is only grounded in the fact that they were introduced to it where they were born. This would make the objector guilty of the genetic fallacy. The logical form: The origin of the claim is presented. Therefore, the claim is true/false. Even if the sole reason for a belief in God was due to the brain washing of a specific person, this does not in any way disprove their belief. If God truly exists, then the brainwashed individual has arrived at the correct conclusion. Using myself as an example, I was raised into a religious home, but affirmed my faith through facts and evidence, even though I was born and raised to already believe it. Santa clause, the tooth fairy, and many other myths are usually abandoned at adolescence, but a belief in God holds true for millions at any age, giving us good reason to assume that theistic belief is much more than one’s origin.
Number 2: “Religion is the source of the world’s problems”
This position is usually taken by those who are anti-theists and see religious belief as hazardous. A claim that is typically stated is that all major wars were religiously motivated ones and the gruesome atrocities committed in humanity can be ascribed to religion. While yes, certain inhumane actions were rationalized by religious belief, it does not logically follow that inhumane actions can be traced to just that. I can easily look to the history of the 20th century and demonstrate the data. We have enough non-religious ideologies being pushed at the time leading to the death of millions. We have: Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Adolf Hitler, Chiang Kai-Shek, Vladimir Lenin, Hideki Tojo, Pol Pot, and on I can go. All together coming to a grand total of 122,064,000 lives lost. That’s almost 130 million lives lost by the hands of non-religious peoples. Professor R.J Rummel writes in his book "Death by Government" that, "Almost 170 million men, women and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed or killed in any other of a myriad of ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners." In the light of this evidence, we can correctly conclude that religion cannot be the only responsible source for humanities atrocities and problems.
Number 1: “Jesus never existed”
The reason this is deemed as the worst argument on this list is because of its historically dishonest and scholarly inaccurate position. To claim Jesus of Nazareth never existed would be to deny historical consensus on the subject. It’s a scholarly debate whether Jesus rose from the dead, but to deny his existence is not scholarly. Josephus and Tacitus are often invoked on the matter writing about Jesus of Nazareth in their text. They were two ancient historians and scholars who affirmed the life of Jesus in their written accounts. Here is a link to the full discourse of listing sources: https://beliefmap.org/jesus-existed
Even non-believing New-Testament scholars such as Bart Ehrman attack this radical view that Jesus of Nazareth didn't exist. The bottom line is that only minority groups hold to this view of Jesus not existing and are seen by professional and academic circles as being dishonest in their work.
Tim runs Invoking Theism: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcXdCHoaSy0kNSv-KwjiSqQ
Popular Articles
Authors
John Dunfee
Mike Jones
Tim Howard
Ted Wright
Clark Bates
Tim Stratton
John Limanto
S.J. Thomason
Dusty Letchworth
Scott Lindsay
Rebecca Brown
Archives
March 2019
February 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
Topics
All
Apologetics
Arguments For God's Existence
Exegesis Analysis
Historical Questions
Logical Fallacies
Philosophical Questions
Theological Questions
RSS Feed