Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 64 results found
The claim that knowledge is the enemy of faith is not a scientific claim; it’s a philosophical claim. For those who believe that faith is the enemy of knowledge, philosophy can help us out here. Specifically, we need epistemology in order to figure out what knowledge and and faith are.
Most of the basic arguments for the existence of God, though they can be detailed in sophisticated ways, are easy to understand on a fundamental level. Three arguments are:
Parents do have an obligation to their children, so it seems that God would have an obligation to His creation. The two scenarios do not have the same moral obligations. God is not obliged to anyone. Human beings are under God, and God communicates duties that relate to His perfections and role as King of the Universe.
How do we combat apathy within our youth? Number one, question them. Start forcing them to answer questions about what they believe and why they believe it. Introduce questions and challenges, and help them to see that they don’t know as much as they think they know.
I was reading a book recently that asked the question, “Do we have free will? If you don’t think we do, please turn to page 3.” When you turn to page 3, it says, “Gotcha.” Point being, we all have a basic awareness that we are making decisions that are ours, and we have at least some significant measure of freedom.
When scientists claim that any intelligent design inference is an example of God of the Gaps, they are presuming that there actually is an explanation gap, that is, there simply is no explanation for the phenomena in question. The “God of the Gaps” complaint comes up when theists suggest that design is a better explanation than a naturalistic one in certain areas of science, particularly the beginning of the universe, the origin of life, and the development of life from simple to complex over time.
Arguing a point based on what Jesus, allegedly, did not say betrays a misunderstanding about the Bible that so-called “red letter” Christians seem to fall into. The mistake is thinking that red-letter verses (the words of Jesus) have more authority than the rest of the Bible.
I once saw a sign in a health food restaurant that read, “You are what you eat.” So I pointed out to the waitress that this was true only if you are identical to (the same thing as) your body. Further, if you are what you eat, then you couldn’t be something until you’ve eaten something. But you can’t eat something until you are something. So you must be something before you eat something. Therefore, it’s not true that you are what you eat. The waitress looked a me and said, “You’ll have to talk to the manager.”
In July 1995, Time Magazine made a stunning announcement. In an extensive article on the mind they wrote, “Despite our every instinct to the contrary, there is one thing that consciousness is not: some entity deep inside the brain that corresponds to the ‘self,’ some kernel of awareness that runs the show” (July 17, 1995, p. 52). In other words, there is no soul.
Basic math is another thing that can't be proven. It's known by intuition. Someone once took me to task on this, suggesting he could scientifically prove two plus two equals four. He took two apples and put them together with two more apples to give a total of four. That was his "scientific" proof. The math wasn't proven in this case, though; it was simply exemplified with different tokens. A token is some physical representation--a sound, a mark of ink on a piece of paper, an object--that represents the unseen type, in this case, a number. Let me illustrate.