iCafe Zürich: Reality

Posts mit dem Label Reality werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen

Question: "Who was Cain's wife? Was Cain's wife his sister?"

Eingestellt von Hans | Labels: Creationism, Evolution, Philosophy, Reality

Answer: The Bible does not specifically say who Cain’s wife was. The only possible answer is that Cain's wife was his sister or niece or great-niece, etc. The Bible does not say how old Cain was when he killed Abel (Genesis 4:8). Since they were both farmers, they were likely both full-grown adults, possibly with families of their own. Adam and Eve surely had given birth to more children than just Cain and Abel at the time Abel was killed. They definitely had many more children later (Genesis 5:4). The fact that Cain was scared for his own life after he killed Abel (Genesis 4:14) indicates that there were likely many other children and perhaps even grandchildren of Adam and Eve already living at that time. Cain's wife (Genesis 4:17) was a daughter or granddaughter of Adam and Eve.

Since Adam and Eve were the first (and only) human beings, their children would have no other choice than to intermarry. God did not forbid inter-family marriage until much later when there were enough people to make intermarriage unnecessary (Leviticus 18:6-18). The reason that incest today often results in genetic abnormalities is that when two people of similar genetics (i.e., a brother and sister) have children together, there is a high risk of their recessive characteristics becoming dominant. When people from different families have children, it is highly unlikely that both parents will carry the same recessive traits. The human genetic code has become increasingly “polluted” over the centuries as genetic defects are multiplied, amplified, and passed down from generation to generation. Adam and Eve did not have any genetic defects, and that enabled them and the first few generations of their descendants to have a far greater quality of health than we do now. Adam and Eve’s children had few, if any, genetic defects. As a result, it was safe for them to intermarry.

Source: http://www.gotquestions.org/Cains-wife.html

What does the Bible really say about sex before marriage?

Eingestellt von Hans | Labels: Life, Love, Reality, Sex

There is no Hebrew or Greek word used in the Bible that precisely refers to sex before marriage. The Bible undeniably condemns adultery and sexual immorality, but is sex before marriage considered sexually immoral? According to1 Corinthians 7:2, “yes” is the clear answer: “But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.” In this verse, Paul states that marriage is the “cure” for sexual immorality. First Corinthians 7:2 is essentially saying that, because people cannot control themselves and so many are having immoral sex outside of marriage, people should get married. Then they can fulfill their passions in a moral way.

Since 1 Corinthians 7:2 clearly includes sex before marriage in the definition of sexual immorality, all of the Bible verses that condemn sexual immorality as being sinful also condemn sex before marriage as sinful. Sex before marriage is included in the biblical definition of sexual immorality. There are numerous Scriptures that declare sex before marriage to be a sin (Acts 15:20; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:13, 18;10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 7). The Bible promotes complete abstinence before marriage. Sex between a husband and his wife is the only form of sexual relations of which God approves (Hebrews 13:4).

Far too often we focus on the “recreation” aspect of sex without recognizing that there is another aspect—procreation. Sex within marriage is pleasurable, and God designed it that way. God wants men and women to enjoy sexual activity within the confines of marriage. Song of Solomon and several other Bible passages (such as Proverbs 5:19) clearly describe the pleasure of sex. However, the couple must understand that God’s intent for sex includes producing children. Thus, for a couple to engage in sex before marriage is doubly wrong—they are enjoying pleasures not intended for them, and they are taking a chance of creating a human life outside of the family structure God intended for every child.

While practicality does not determine right from wrong, if the Bible's message on sex before marriage were obeyed, there would be far fewer sexually transmitted diseases, far fewer abortions, far fewer unwed mothers and unwanted pregnancies, and far fewer children growing up without both parents in their lives. Abstinence is God’s only policy when it comes to sex before marriage. Abstinence saves lives, protects babies, gives sexual relations the proper value, and, most importantly, honors God.

For further insights on this topic, please visit:

Source: http://www.gotquestions.org/sex-before-marriage.html

Comments? icafe@evbg.ch

The Bible is a fairy tale... right?

Eingestellt von Hans | Labels: Creationism, Evolution, Life, Philosophy, Reality

The charge that the Bible is nothing more than a fairy tale or a book of nice stories is not new. The Bible is undoubtedly the most impactful book the world has ever known, transforming innumerable lives. Why, then, would the question whether or not the Bible is a fairy tale be a legitimate one in the hearts of many around the world?

From the book of Genesis to the book of Revelation, we read the story of God’s eternal design to redeem a fallen world. With God as its inspiring Author, the Bible is the world’s greatest work of literature, and throughout the ages multitudes have spent their lives proclaiming its truth. Many, in fact, have made the ultimate sacrifice so that others may simply hold in their hands a copy of its pages. Nevertheless, there has never been a book that has been as viciously attacked as the Bible. Banned, burned, mocked, ridiculed and defamed, many have been put to death for simply possessing one. But still the idea that the Bible is a fairy tale persists.

The “prince of this world” has been blinding people to the truth since the beginning of time. He began his “work” on earth by calling God’s words into question (Genesis 3:1-5), and he has been doing so ever since. Everywhere we look, false teaching is rampant—on television and radio, in books and magazines, in our schools and universities, and sadly, even in our churches and Christian colleges, the very places where the truth of God’s Word should most vigorously be defended. When children are taught that our ancestors crawled out of the ocean eons ago, have we not relegated creation and Adam and Eve to fairy tale status? It’s the same thing when scientists and academicians tell us we are wasting our time searching for the “mythological” Noah’s Ark.

In fact, when many in the church, in order to placate the academic world, allow for a reinterpretation of the book of Genesis to accommodate modern evolutionary thought, the message sent to the world is that the Bible, apparently, means something other than what its simple, ordinary words convey. When the supernatural events of the Bible are dubbed as allegory by naturalists, it is understandable how those who have never studied the Bible can be confused as to its truth. For those who have never availed themselves of the truth of God’s Word, how likely are they to believe in a talking donkey or a fish swallowing a man and spitting him out on the shore or a woman turning into a pillar of salt?

However, the Bible is most assuredly not a fairy tale. In fact, the Bible was “God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16) and this essentially means He wrote it. Its human authors wrote from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21). That’s why this divinely woven text of nearly three quarters of a million words is perfect in harmony from start to finish and contains no contradictions, even though its sixty-six books have forty different authors from different walks of life, written in three different languages and taking nearly sixteen centuries to complete. How possibly could we have this amazing biblical congruity if it wasn’t for God guiding their hands? We could not, it’s that simple. A righteous God would never inspire error. A just God would not call error-filled Scripture “holy and true.” A merciful God would not state that His Word is perfect if it is not, and an omniscient God could write it so that it is as relevant today as it was thousands of years ago.

Time and again, the historicity of the Bible has been confirmed by biology, geology, and astronomy. And although the Bible may not always agree with naturalistic hypotheses, it is not in conflict with any true, established scientific facts. In archaeology, the last one hundred years have brought to light a treasure trove of biblical truths that scholars have questioned or doubted for centuries, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the basalt stone containing the “House of David” inscription, a 7th century BC amulet scroll bearing the name of God, and a stone bearing the name and title of Pontius Pilate, the Judean governor who ordered the execution of Jesus Christ. The Bible is without doubt the best documented book from the ancient world, with more than 24,000 whole or partial biblical manuscripts in existence. No other document of antiquity has nearly as much evidence to confirm its reliability.

Another attestation to the Bible’s divine authorship is the vast number of detailed biblical prophecies that have come true exactly as foretold. We see the psalmist, for example, telling of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ nearly a thousand years before it occurred (Psalm 22), and hundreds of years before crucifixion was even invented! Simply put, it would be impossible for human beings to have seen so far into the future with such precision and accuracy hundreds of times. Indeed, it would be completely illogical to believe these proven prophecies are anything other than the work of God. Incidentally, and amazingly, probability experts tell us the mathematical odds of just forty-eight prophecies regarding one person (i.e. Christ) coming true as foretold are one in ten to the 157th power!

But the greatest proof that the Bible is not a fairy tale is the countless number of lives that have been transformed by the truths contained in its pages. Used by the Spirit of God, the holy truths of the Bible have turned millions of sinners into saints. Drug addicts have been cured by it, homosexuals set free by it, derelicts and deadbeats transformed by it, hardened criminals reformed by it, sinners rebuked by it, and hate turned to love by it. No amount of reading “Cinderella” or “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” can effect such change on the soul of man. The Bible does possess a dynamic and transforming power that is only possible because it is truly God’s Word.

In light of the foregoing, the greater question, then, is how could someone notbelieve in these convincing, God-breathed, error-free, life-transforming truths? Unfortunately, the answer is actually an easy one. God has said that if we do not open your hearts to Him, He will not open our eyes to the truth. Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would teach us (John 14:26) and guide us into truth (John 16:13). And the truth of God is found in the Word of God. Thus, to those who believe, these sacred words are life itself, but to those without the Spirit the Bible is nothing but foolishness (1 Corinthians 2:14).

Source: http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-fairy-tale.html

Questions? Comments? icafe@evbg.ch

Why was God so evident in the Bible, and seems so hidden today?

Eingestellt von Hans | Labels: Arguments, Existence of God, God, Reality

The Bible records God appearing to people, performing amazing and undeniable miracles, speaking audibly, and many other things that we do not seem to witness today. Why is this? Why was God so willing to reveal and prove Himself in Bible times, but almost seems "hidden" and silent today? God used miracles and direct communication with people in order to reveal to them His character and nature, as well as His plans and commands. His first miracle – creation – was the primary evidence of God’s existence and exhibited many of His attributes. From what was made, man could conclude that God is powerful, sovereign, and good. The creation was His first declaration to mankind. “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the expanse proclaims His handiwork” (Psalm 19:1). Following creation, God spoke to people to further declare Himself and to inform man of His law and His ways. He first spoke to Adam and Eve, giving them commandments to follow and, when they disobeyed, pronouncing a curse upon them and their descendants. He also assured them, and all mankind, that He would send a Savior to redeem us from sin. Thereafter, God spoke to Moses, giving him the law for His people to follow. He performed miracle after miracle to verify His existence to His people and to build their faith in Him. In addition, He spoke to His prophets so they would write down His words, words which were preserved for us in the Bible.

When Jesus came to earth, He also performed miracles to prove that He was indeed the Son of God and to foster belief in Him (Matthew 9:6; John 10:38). After His miraculous resurrection, He enabled His disciples to continue performing miracles in order to prove they were truly His, again so that people would believe on Him who sent them. So why does God no longer speak audibly to us?

There are several reasons for this. As noted above, God has already spoken, and His words have been miraculously kept for us down through the ages. Now we have the completed canon of scripture, and we need no further miracles to “validate” the Bible. In His perfect Word is everything we need “for doctrine, for reproof, for correction and instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Bible is complete and is perfectly able to make us “wise to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 3:15), a “more sure Word of prophecy to which we would do well to take heed” (2 Peter 1:19). We need nothing more, and we are not to seek extra-biblical revelations. To do so calls into question the efficacy of Scripture which God has declared to be sufficient.

Second, we have within us the Holy Spirit whom God has given to us to “lead us into all truth” (John 16:13). He speaks to us continually, teaching us (1 Corinthians 2:3), reminding us of all things that Jesus taught (John 14:26), guiding, correcting, and convicting us of sin (John 16:8). God is indeed “speaking” to us today through the Holy Spirit, who is certainly not hidden. Another reason for God’s seeming concealment is alluded to by the prophet Habakkuk: “The just shall live by his faith” (Habakkuk 2:4). God does not give His people a continual chain of miraculous signs; He expects them to trust what He has already done, search the Scriptures daily, respond to the Holy Spirit within, and live by faith, not by sight (Matthew 16:4; John 20:29).

Finally, let us remember that even in those times when it seems that God is doing nothing, He is still the sovereign Lord of all creation, and He is constantly at work, bringing about the fruition of His perfect plan. One of the best examples of God’s “hidden” working is the book of Esther, in which God is never mentioned, but which plainly shows His sovereign hand at work from beginning to end.

Source: http://www.gotquestions.org/God-hidden.html

Write us: icafe@evbg.ch

Science and Faith? Impossible... or not?

Eingestellt von Hans | Labels: Creationism, Evolution, Existence of God, Reality

Science is defined as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Science is a method that mankind can use to gain a greater understanding of the natural universe. It is a search for knowledge through observation. Advances in science demonstrate the reach of human logic and imagination. However, a Christian’s belief in science should never be like our belief in God. A Christian can have faith in God and respect for science, as long as we remember which is perfect and which is not.

Our belief in God is a belief of faith. We have faith in His Son for salvation, faith in His Word for instruction, and faith in His Holy Spirit for guidance. Our faith in God should be absolute, since when we put our faith in God, we depend on a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient Creator. Our belief in science should be intellectual and nothing more. We can count on science to do many great things, but we can also count on science to make mistakes. If we put faith in science, we depend on imperfect, sinful, limited, mortal men. Science throughout history has been wrong about many things, such as the shape of the earth, powered flight, vaccines, blood transfusions, and even reproduction. God is never wrong.

Truth is nothing to fear, so there is no reason for a Christian to fear good science. Learning more about the way God constructed our universe helps all of mankind appreciate the wonder of creation. Expanding our knowledge helps us to combat disease, ignorance, and misunderstanding. However, there is danger when scientists hold their faith in human logic above faith in our Creator. These persons are no different from anyone devoted to a religion; they have chosen faith in man and will find facts to defend that faith.

Still, the most rational scientists, even those who refuse to believe in God, admit to a lack of completeness in our understanding of the universe. They will admit that neither God nor the Bible can be proved or disproved by science, just as many of their favorite theories ultimately cannot be proved or disproved. Science is meant to be a truly neutral discipline, seeking only the truth, not furtherance of an agenda.

Much of science supports the existence and work of God. Psalm 19:1 says, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands.” As modern science discovers more about the universe, we find more evidence of creation. The amazing complexity and replication of DNA, the intricate and interlocking laws of physics, and the absolute harmony of conditions and chemistry here on earth all serve to support the message of the Bible. A Christian should embrace science that seeks the truth, but reject the “priests of science” who put human knowledge above God.

Source: http://www.gotquestions.org/science-God.html

Questions? Comments? icafe@evbg.ch

Did God create evil?

Eingestellt von Hans | Labels: Evil, Existence of God, Love, Reality

At first it might seem that if God created all things, then evil must have been created by God. However, evil is not a “thing” like a rock or electricity. You cannot have a jar of evil. Evil has no existence of its own; it is really the absence of good. For example, holes are real but they only exist in something else. We call the absence of dirt a hole, but it cannot be separated from the dirt. So when God created, it is true that all He created was good. One of the good things God made was creatures who had the freedom to choose good. In order to have a real choice, God had to allow there to be something besides good to choose. So, God allowed these free angels and humans to choose good or reject good (evil). When a bad relationship exists between two good things we call that evil, but it does not become a “thing” that required God to create it.

Perhaps a further illustration will help. If a person is asked, “Does cold exist?” the answer would likely be “yes.” However, this is incorrect. Cold does not exist. Cold is the absence of heat. Similarly, darkness does not exist; it is the absence of light. Evil is the absence of good, or better, evil is the absence of God. God did not have to create evil, but rather only allow for the absence of good.

God did not create evil, but He does allow evil. If God had not allowed for the possibility of evil, both mankind and angels would be serving God out of obligation, not choice. He did not want “robots” that simply did what He wanted them to do because of their “programming.” God allowed for the possibility of evil so that we could genuinely have a free will and choose whether or not we wanted to serve Him.

As finite human beings, we can never fully understand an infinite God (Romans 11:33-34). Sometimes we think we understand why God is doing something, only to find out later that it was for a different purpose than we originally thought. God looks at things from a holy, eternal perspective. We look at things from a sinful, earthly, and temporal perspective. Why did God put man on earth knowing that Adam and Eve would sin and therefore bring evil, death, and suffering on all mankind? Why didn’t He just create us all and leave us in heaven where we would be perfect and without suffering? These questions cannot be adequately answered this side of eternity. What we can know is whatever God does is holy and perfect and ultimately will glorify Him. God allowed for the possibility of evil in order to give us a true choice in regards to whether we worship Him. God did not create evil, but He allowed it. If He had not allowed evil, we would be worshipping Him out of obligation, not by a choice of our own will.

Is there an argument for the existence of God?

Eingestellt von Hans | Labels: Arguments, Existence of God, Philosophy, Reality

Karl Marx asserted that anyone believing in God must have a mental disorder that caused invalid thinking. The psychiatrist Sigmund Freud wrote that a person who believed in a Creator God was delusional and only held those beliefs due to a “wish-fulfillment” factor that produced what Freud considered to be an unjustifiable position. The philosopher Frederick Nietzsche bluntly said that faith equates to not wanting to know what is true. The voices of these three figures from history (along with others) are simply now parroted by a new generation of atheists who claim that a belief in God is intellectually unwarranted.

Is this truly the case? Is belief in God a rationally unacceptable position to hold? Is there a logical and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Outside of referencing the Bible, can a case for the existence of God be made that refutes the positions of both the old and new atheists and gives sufficient warrant for believing in a Creator? The answer is, yes, it can. Moreover, in demonstrating the validity of an argument for the existence of God, the case for atheism is shown to be intellectually weak.

To make an argument for the existence of God, we must start by asking the right questions. We begin with the most basic metaphysical question: “Why do we have something rather than nothing at all?” This is the basic question of existence—why are we here; why is the earth here; why is the universe here rather than nothing? Commenting on this point, one theologian has said, “In one sense man does not ask the question about God, his very existence raises the question about God.”

In considering this question, there are four possible answers to why we have something rather than nothing at all:

1. Reality is an illusion.
2. Reality is/was self-created.
3. Reality is self-existent (eternal).
4. Reality was created by something that is self-existent.

So, which is the most plausible solution? Let’s begin with reality being simply an illusion, which is what a number of Eastern religions believe. This option was ruled out centuries ago by the philosopher Rene Descartes who is famous for the statement, “I think, therefore I am.” Descartes, a mathematician, argued that if he is thinking, then he must “be.” In other words, “I think, therefore I am not an illusion.” Illusions require something experiencing the illusion, and moreover, you cannot doubt the existence of yourself without proving your existence; it is a self-defeating argument. So the possibility of reality being an illusion is eliminated.

Next is the option of reality being self-created. When we study philosophy, we learn of “analytically false” statements, which means they are false by definition. The possibility of reality being self-created is one of those types of statements for the simple reason that something cannot be prior to itself. If you created yourself, then you must have existed prior to you creating yourself, but that simply cannot be. In evolution this is sometimes referred to as “spontaneous generation” —something coming from nothing—a position that few, if any, reasonable people hold to anymore simply because you cannot get something from nothing. Even the atheist David Hume said, “I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that anything might arise without a cause.” Since something cannot come from nothing, the alternative of reality being self-created is ruled out.

Now we are left with only two choices—an eternal reality or reality being created by something that is eternal: an eternal universe or an eternal Creator. The 18th-century theologian Jonathan Edwards summed up this crossroads:

• Something exists.
• Nothing cannot create something.
• Therefore, a necessary and eternal “something” exists.

Notice that we must go back to an eternal “something.” The atheist who derides the believer in God for believing in an eternal Creator must turn around and embrace an eternal universe; it is the only other door he can choose. But the question now is, where does the evidence lead? Does the evidence point to matter before mind or mind before matter?

To date, all key scientific and philosophical evidence points away from an eternal universe and toward an eternal Creator. From a scientific standpoint, honest scientists admit the universe had a beginning, and whatever has a beginning is not eternal. In other words, whatever has a beginning has a cause, and if the universe had a beginning, it had a cause. The fact that the universe had a beginning is underscored by evidence such as the second law of thermodynamics, the radiation echo of the big bang discovered in the early 1900s, the fact that the universe is expanding and can be traced back to a singular beginning, and Einstein’s theory of relativity. All prove the universe is not eternal.

Further, the laws that surround causation speak against the universe being the ultimate cause of all we know for this simple fact: an effect must resemble its cause. This being true, no atheist can explain how an impersonal, purposeless, meaningless, and amoral universe accidentally created beings (us) who are full of personality and obsessed with purpose, meaning, and morals. Such a thing, from a causation standpoint, completely refutes the idea of a natural universe birthing everything that exists. So in the end, the concept of an eternal universe is eliminated.

Philosopher J. S. Mill (not a Christian) summed up where we have now come to: “It is self-evident that only Mind can create mind.” The only rational and reasonable conclusion is that an eternal Creator is the one who is responsible for reality as we know it. Or to put it in a logical set of statements:

• Something exists.
• You do not get something from nothing.
• Therefore a necessary and eternal “something” exists.
• The only two options are an eternal universe and an eternal Creator.
• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.
• Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.

Former atheist Lee Strobel, who arrived at this end result many years ago, has commented, “Essentially, I realized that to stay an atheist, I would have to believe that nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; and non-reason produces reason. Those leaps of faith were simply too big for me to take, especially in light of the affirmative case for God's existence … In other words, in my assessment the Christian worldview accounted for the totality of the evidence much better than the atheistic worldview.”

But the next question we must tackle is this: if an eternal Creator exists (and we have shown that He does), what kind of Creator is He? Can we infer things about Him from what He created? In other words, can we understand the cause by its effects? The answer to this is yes, we can, with the following characteristics being surmised:

• He must be supernatural in nature (as He created time and space).
• He must be powerful (exceedingly).
• He must be eternal (self-existent).
• He must be omnipresent (He created space and is not limited by it).
• He must be timeless and changeless (He created time).
• He must be immaterial because He transcends space/physical.
• He must be personal (the impersonal cannot create personality).
• He must be infinite and singular as you cannot have two infinites.
• He must be diverse yet have unity as unity and diversity exist in nature.
• He must be intelligent (supremely). Only cognitive being can produce cognitive being.
• He must be purposeful as He deliberately created everything.
• He must be moral (no moral law can be had without a giver).
• He must be caring (or no moral laws would have been given).

These things being true, we now ask if any religion in the world describes such a Creator. The answer to this is yes: the God of the Bible fits this profile perfectly. He is supernatural (Genesis 1:1), powerful (Jeremiah 32:17), eternal (Psalm 90:2), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7), timeless/changeless (Malachi 3:6), immaterial (John 5:24), personal (Genesis 3:9), necessary (Colossians 1:17), infinite/singular (Jeremiah 23:24,Deuteronomy 6:4), diverse yet with unity (Matthew 28:19), intelligent (Psalm 147:4-5), purposeful (Jeremiah 29:11), moral (Daniel 9:14), and caring (1 Peter 5:6-7).

One last subject to address on the matter of God’s existence is the matter of how justifiable the atheist’s position actually is. Since the atheist asserts the believer’s position is unsound, it is only reasonable to turn the question around and aim it squarely back at him. The first thing to understand is that the claim the atheist makes—“no god,” which is what “atheist” means—is an untenable position to hold from a philosophical standpoint. As legal scholar and philosopher Mortimer Adler says, “An affirmative existential proposition can be proved, but a negative existential proposition—one that denies the existence of something—cannot be proved.” For example, someone may claim that a red eagle exists and someone else may assert that red eagles do not exist. The former only needs to find a single red eagle to prove his assertion. But the latter must comb the entire universe and literally be in every place at once to ensure he has not missed a red eagle somewhere and at some time, which is impossible to do. This is why intellectually honest atheists will admit they cannot prove God does not exist.

Next, it is important to understand the issue that surrounds the seriousness of truth claims that are made and the amount of evidence required to warrant certain conclusions. For example, if someone puts two containers of lemonade in front of you and says that one may be more tart than the other, since the consequences of getting the more tart drink would not be serious, you would not require a large amount of evidence in order to make your choice. However, if to one cup the host added sweetener but to the other he introduced rat poison, then you would want to have quite a bit of evidence before you made your choice.

This is where a person sits when deciding between atheism and belief in God. Since belief in atheism could possibly result in irreparable and eternal consequences, it would seem that the atheist should be mandated to produce weighty and overriding evidence to support his position, but he cannot. Atheism simply cannot meet the test for evidence for the seriousness of the charge it makes. Instead, the atheist and those whom he convinces of his position slide into eternity with their fingers crossed and hope they do not find the unpleasant truth that eternity does indeed exist. As Mortimer Adler says, “More consequences for life and action follow from the affirmation or denial of God than from any other basic question.”

So does belief in God have intellectual warrant? Is there a rational, logical, and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Absolutely. While atheists such as Freud claim that those believing in God have a wish-fulfillment desire, perhaps it is Freud and his followers who actually suffer from wish-fulfillment: the hope and wish that there is no God, no accountability, and therefore no judgment. But refuting Freud is the God of the Bible who affirms His existence and the fact that a judgment is indeed coming for those who know within themselves the truth that He exists but suppress that truth (Romans 1:20). But for those who respond to the evidence that a Creator does indeed exist, He offers the way of salvation that has been accomplished through His Son, Jesus Christ: "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13).

Source: http://www.gotquestions.org/argument-existence-God.html

For Questions/Comments please write to icafe@evbg.ch

Links

Categories

Archives