I recently had an interesting exchange online and I thought I would share.
I was talking to a very active and intelligent Twitter atheist, and he went on a long rant about all the neuroscience that he says proves God is a delusion. I listened to his complex arguments for a few minutes and when he was done I asked a very simple question:
“What kind of evidence or criteria would you accept to show that God was not a delusion?”
He said, “Easy….I want Jesus to show up at the UN and tell mankind something they couldn’t possibly know. See I say the UN, because I know enough science to know that I can't trust my own brain, if I saw Jesus and talked to him it wouldn’t convince me.”
First, notice that he is asking for a straight up miracle. He is not asking for historical evidence or anything like that. He is asking for a personalized miracle. There is literally nothing that I can say or show him evidentially that will convince this guy. Only a blind miracle preformed by Jesus himself, specifically for him, will do. All his prior requests for evidence or rational arguments have been disingenuous. At this point, my work as a Christian is to simply pray for this man. As irrational as I think he is being, I cannot personally do anything for him. All I can do is pray that Jesus do a miracle in his life. God may have mercy on him. Or he might not. That is not my call.
But notice something else about what he has just said. Without knowing it, he has just conceded the entire case to me. In one short statement he has reminded us why atheism/naturalism is ultimately futile. “I know enough science to know that I cant trust my own brain, if I saw Jesus and talked to him it wouldn’t convince me.” If he cannot trust his own brain on something as straight forward and simple as being able to know what he plainly observes, why in the world does he trust it to evaluate complex neuroscience claims properly? Why should I trust his conclusion if he cannot even trust it?
Atheism is self-defeating. This man’s argument destroys itself. Ultimately, if you don’t have any way to ground the legitimacy of reason, or logic, or science – and atheists don’t – you have no way to know anything at all. For all the atheist chatter about how much we know from science, we actually have no way of even knowing whether or not the scientific method is even legitimate. Think about it. How do we know that science and reason works? Now, I believe they do work and that we can ground rationality/science in God’s existence. But as an atheist you can’t possibly know whether or not these things are real. You’ll end up like my friend here, admitting that as an atheist he can’t really “know” even that which he plainly sees.
But we can “know” things for sure. I know this, you know this, and the atheist knows this. The only way we can legitimately “know” things, is if we can somehow ground what we know in a standard that exists outside of ourselves. The theist has a solution to this problem. The atheist does not. The fact that we can “know” things and that rationality is legitimate, is actually a strong piece of evidence that points to the existence of God.
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.” -Proverbs 1:7
Atheism is not self-defeating. The person you debated with was. I should add that atheism is not a form of debate or belief - so really, it's not a weapon being used to defeat religious arguments. Atheism is simply the lack of belief, the term shouldn't exist. Do we have a special term used for those who don't believe in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy? No.
ReplyDeleteWhat atheists do use in their debates is something very common, logic. It's that simple really. Although again, the logic for this particular person wasn't entirely there.
It is wrong for this person to say that if Jesus presented himself to him, he would still not believe in him. Atheists hold evidence as the most valuable source of proof. However, Jesus should present himself and prove without a doubt that all claims are real. In this case, even I would become a believer.
The scientific method indeed works, any hint of doubt towards it is just plain absurd. We can see it works with all the advancements we've made over the years. Whether those advancements are used for good or bad, the advancement is there. So far, science has not found any remote evidence suggesting there is a god.
I'll end briefly saying that the proof of burden is on not on those who refute the claims, it's on those who make them. After all, does everyone go around believing in all the claims made without evidence? Absolutely not, this only flies when it's held in a religious context. We're at a point in history where this should not be acceptable anymore. There have been hundreds of gods throughout human history. The only difference between atheists and Christians is that Christians choose to believe in one of those many hundreds of gods. A quote I like says:
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
-Stephen Roberts
I suggest you look into the Russell's Teapot analogy.
Nicely said.
DeleteAtheists don't use logic. Atheists are against logic and they are irrational. Atheism teaches that the universe was created from nothing which has no evidence and is quite literally impossible. Atheism also teaches that life evolved from inanimate material which is another concept that is impossible. The theory of spontaneous generation (life from non-life) was debunked by Louis Pasteur and for that reason we are led to the logical conclusion that the universe came from something and that life came from life. Scientific method shows us all of this. Scientific method debunks atheism.
ReplyDelete“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do." - Some idiot
Considering atheism is complete denial of every god, no, we theists are not atheists.
"An atheist is a man who believes himself an accident." ~~ Francis Thompson
Atheism is a fairy tale. There's no chance that the theory of atheism could be correct. Scientific method argues against it.
Good day.