Many people mistakenly think that if evil exists, then therefore God cannot exist. But the question must be asked, "How are the two incompatible with each other?" Dr. William Lane Craig in this short two-minute video shows that the atheist is actually the one who has the burden of proof to shoulder, showing that the two cannot co-exist.
That is because there are only two ways to disprove something.
ReplyDeleteThe first way is to put forth the notion that there is no proof for said concept.
The other way to disprove something is by contradiction, for example the idea that there is no god in the world because there is evil.
Of course the logic behind that statement is flawed, as the coexistence of god and evil merely contradicts the fact that god is not all powerful or all good. This then begs the question of whether or not god is worthy of its title if it is not both all good or all powerful, which is another entire philosophical discussion altogether.
Heh, actually it doesn't contradict the fact that God is all powerful or all good, rather it raises the question of why if God is all good and all powerful does he allow suffering in the world, which brings us to the answer contained in the bible. (from genesis to revelations)
ReplyDeleteThe point of Christianity.
Extraordiary claims require extraordinary evidence. What does this mean? Xtians claim that God exists. God is an extraordinary phenomenon he is not something of every day life like rain or sea shells an all powerful and unseen God appears to atheists as entirely imaginary. Therefore the burden lies on the claimant, the Xtians for proof. If I claimed that there were invisible pink unicorns living in my garden would not the proof lie on me? Of course. Even if I could produce the bible and show the references to them, I would still have to prove my claim. You claim - you prove.
ReplyDelete@ Paul
ReplyDeleteI see you are as atheistically evangelistic with adults as you would like to be with children :).
Your point is a good one, we have a burden of proof to shoulder. This is the point of this blog and many others like it. I could just say "happy reading" and that would be sufficient for this corespondence but there is more.
As an atheist you make an extraordinary claim also that you must shoulder the proof for. As all thinking atheists agree there is plenty of evidence for the appearance of design (see R. Dawkins book The Blind Watchmaker) in the biological world. There is also this evidence in the world of physics and chemistry when fine tuning of constants is taken into account. You make extraordinary leap of faith when you say this appearance of design is merely illusion. The Christian (that is how you spell it by the way) accounts for this easily with a personal God who has claimed to make all things including the moral, intelligent, personal, spiritual beings called humans. The atheist on the other hand...? Dawkins does a woeful job on it, how do you account for the appearance of design? Your claim - you prove.
God Bless you, I will pray for you in this discussion.
A further point that I hope would have been obvious from the post itself in conjunction with my comments Paul.
ReplyDeleteYou also contradict the obvious implications of the laws written loud across all humanity's consciences. Absolute moral law indicates an absolute moral law giver. This issue is glossed over by most atheists using 'just so' stories. So as an absolute minority in the world (much less than 3%) I would ask you to again prove your case. You contradict the apparent facts; you must pull something pretty amazing out of your hat to prove it.
God Bless again.