by Ronald Scott Smith. Posted with permission.
At the “Reason Rally” in Washington, secular, atheistic people gathered
in support of “reason” over [mere] “faith” of religious people. Not so
hidden in the background was the
widely-held cultural mindset that science uses reason and uniquely gives
us knowledge of truth (the facts). But religion gives us just personal
opinions and preferences, not knowledge. This bifurcation often is
called the “fact-value split.”
This science is naturalistic;
only what is scientifically knowable (i.e., by the five senses) is real.
In principle, such things as God, souls, and mental states (i.e.,
non-physical things like thoughts, beliefs, and experiences) cannot be
known to be real. Or, simplifying, they don’t exist. Yet, we can test
natural, physical stuff scientifically, so that is what is believed to
be real. That view of reality is the philosophy undergirding atheistic
evolution by natural selection (NS) – naturalism. There’s only the
physical universe, without anything non-physical.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
PleaseConvinceMe Blog
Dan and I (Aaron) are honored to have been invited to blog at PleaseConvinceMe.com. You can visit the About Us page to find out a little more about the PleaseConvinceMe team.
Be sure and check out the blog where you will find excellent posts on a variety of topics.
PleaseConvinceMe has some other very helpful resources, including a podcast, radio interviews, and a youtube television channel. Check out their facebook page or follow them on twitter.
Thanks to Jim Wallace for inviting us and the entire PleaseConvinceMe team for having us on board. We are excited to be part of the team and looking forward to blogging together.
Be sure and check out the blog where you will find excellent posts on a variety of topics.
PleaseConvinceMe has some other very helpful resources, including a podcast, radio interviews, and a youtube television channel. Check out their facebook page or follow them on twitter.
Thanks to Jim Wallace for inviting us and the entire PleaseConvinceMe team for having us on board. We are excited to be part of the team and looking forward to blogging together.
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Why the Problem of Evil is a Problem
The so-called problem of evil is one of the most common objections raised against the Christian faith. Perhaps no one has more succinctly stated the apparent contradiction between an all-loving, all-powerful God and the existence of evil as the eighteenth-century Scottish skeptic David Hume:
"Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?"[1]
More modern skeptics have sometimes posed the logical problem this way:
1. If God is all-good (omnibenevolent), He would prevent evil.
2. If God is all-powerful (omnipotent), He could prevent evil.
3. If God is all-knowing (omniscient), He knows how to prevent evil.
4. But evil exists.
5. Therefore, either God is not all-good, all-powerful, or all-knowing (or maybe He doesn’t exist!)
But why is the problem of evil a problem? In answering this question it is important to earnestly think through the following points, points which often are not reflected upon or not contemplated deeply enough. These considerations must be taken into account when addressing the problem of evil, especially from within the Christian worldview. When they are, I believe the problem of evil (POE) largely resolves itself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)