The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good. - Psalms 14:1Timothy was highly offended as it seemed to suggest that John was calling him a fool for his disbelief in God. It is hurtful to be called a fool for the rejection of a proposition, any proposition such as "God exists", but the offensive nature of such a claim doesn't negate the possibility that it still may be true.
Is it foolish to believe that God does not exist? Paul clearly states that "...God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." - Romans 1:20 (my emphasis). So the claim is: a belief in God's non-existence is to deny what is clearly seen by the natural world - in sum the data discovered by the natural sciences speaks loud and clear the glory of God (cf. Psalms 19:1-4). Timothy would argue that at a basic level it is foolish to deny data procured from the scientific realm, but considers the aforementioned conclusion of the scientific data as a 'God of the Gaps' argument; in other words: to say 'I can't perceive of any other explanation, so God must have done it' is to stuff God into a gap of knowledge until a better answer comes to fruition.
What is God?
However lets look at this accusation with God's ontology or nature in mind. It is true that the human race is filled with multi-thousands of views of God ranging from: a human invention (atheism) to a unknown, unknowable or a logical possibility (agnosticism) to factual (theism), to monotheistic to polytheistic, from unitarian to trinitarian, to personal to deistic and so forth. And then there is abundance of uniques profiles dictated in the numerous amounts of religious texts throughout the world: The Bible, The Qu-ran, The Book of Mormon, The J.W's New World Translation and so on. It is important to note here though the common denominator - all systems believe that God exists; and this includes atheism; heed Professor Dr. Richard Dawkins words about the Judeo/Christian God, namely Yahweh:
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction:"[i] (my emphasis)
Dawkins, along with every other atheist believes that God is ontologically a work of fiction no different than Walt Disney's, Sleeping Beauty; or at least just an unsubstantiated claim. The theist however believes that the nature of God is factual like the reality of the existence of natural forces are real. In the same way many theists are at odds with each other on the profile of God: Christians believe that God is triune, (three persons in one being of God) while many other theistic systems such as Islam believes God is unitarian (one person in one being of God); in the same way regarding Jesus Christ, many theists believe he is just a prophet or a good man or a good teacher or philosopher (or all of the above) while Christians believe all of the above and that he is the very essence of God (cf. John 1:14); and also that he entered his creation (cf. Phil. 2:6-8). And at a more basic level the monotheist is at odds with the polytheist on the basic number of gods - only one God verses many gods. So the bottom line is everyone believes that God's nature is real, but it is the essence of his nature that everyone is bickering over: Fictional? Factual? Triune? Unitarian? Monotheistic? Polytheistic? Personal? Deistic? A supernatural being? A natural reality? Subjective? Objective? Etc.
God Swap!
It is important to note though that when the atheist says 'God does not exist' they are referring to the invisible being who is spiritual, eternal, omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the creator of the universe; and they may object to the claim that they too believe in God and that the natural catalyst to the Big-Bang would be their 'creator-God'. However by excluding the supernatural being as God, they are limiting themselves to a natural creator of this universe and they are also offering themselves up as God - they are the god of their own lives. In a defense for secular morality atheist and co-host of the Atheist Experience Matt Dillahunty states that secular morality is superior because we get to decide what is right and wrong; we are the God of our own lives on both a macro level (as a race and nations) and on a micro level (as individual people).
God Swap!
It is important to note though that when the atheist says 'God does not exist' they are referring to the invisible being who is spiritual, eternal, omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the creator of the universe; and they may object to the claim that they too believe in God and that the natural catalyst to the Big-Bang would be their 'creator-God'. However by excluding the supernatural being as God, they are limiting themselves to a natural creator of this universe and they are also offering themselves up as God - they are the god of their own lives. In a defense for secular morality atheist and co-host of the Atheist Experience Matt Dillahunty states that secular morality is superior because we get to decide what is right and wrong; we are the God of our own lives on both a macro level (as a race and nations) and on a micro level (as individual people).
When we talk about why secular morality is superior its because we say so ... we have been able to build off of the foundations that other people have left us and learned what works and what doesn't.[ii]
In sum either way the explanation is 'God' and this god will either be a natural reality like the currently unknown materialistic catalyst to the assumed Big-Bang and the human race or a supernatural being!
Arguing for God by who He is!
What we have been discussing in brief is a common apologetic argument called: The ontological argument for God's existence. To put it simply, an argument for God spring boarding off of its nature; it asks the question - what is the nature of God? So far we have concluded that God's nature is a reality - but what is the essence of his nature? Is it fictional as Dawkins proposes or factual as the theist would propose? Is God personal or distant? Is God Triune as the Christian argues or is He unitarian as the Muslim argues? Is there only one God (monotheism) or are there many gods (polytheism)? Is god a supernatural entity that exists separate from our space and time universe or is it a natural reality that existed before our natural reality? Is God made up and whose facets are relative from person to person and culture to culture or is God objective and has an ontology that is factual outside of individual belief? Is God a moral being? And how can one determine which worldview is correct?
The answers to all of these questions and more, will develop a profile of sorts of the nature of God; and this is what I aim to do over the next number of blog posts - develop a character profile of the nature of God. So please follow along with me as we learn who God is how we should therefore respond.
So as for the question asked above: "Is it foolish to believe that God does not exist?" it is obvious that the answer is a resounding 'yes, it is foolish to claim that God does not exist'; as to deny God's existence is to deny the foundation for reality. The question however is: Who or what is this foundation? Who (or what) is God?
__________________________
[i] - Great Britain: Bantam Press, a division of Transworld Publishers,2006), 51.
[ii] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cq2C7fyVTA4 - accessed April 25, 2014
What we have been discussing in brief is a common apologetic argument called: The ontological argument for God's existence. To put it simply, an argument for God spring boarding off of its nature; it asks the question - what is the nature of God? So far we have concluded that God's nature is a reality - but what is the essence of his nature? Is it fictional as Dawkins proposes or factual as the theist would propose? Is God personal or distant? Is God Triune as the Christian argues or is He unitarian as the Muslim argues? Is there only one God (monotheism) or are there many gods (polytheism)? Is god a supernatural entity that exists separate from our space and time universe or is it a natural reality that existed before our natural reality? Is God made up and whose facets are relative from person to person and culture to culture or is God objective and has an ontology that is factual outside of individual belief? Is God a moral being? And how can one determine which worldview is correct?The answers to all of these questions and more, will develop a profile of sorts of the nature of God; and this is what I aim to do over the next number of blog posts - develop a character profile of the nature of God. So please follow along with me as we learn who God is how we should therefore respond.
So as for the question asked above: "Is it foolish to believe that God does not exist?" it is obvious that the answer is a resounding 'yes, it is foolish to claim that God does not exist'; as to deny God's existence is to deny the foundation for reality. The question however is: Who or what is this foundation? Who (or what) is God?
__________________________
[i] - Great Britain: Bantam Press, a division of Transworld Publishers,2006), 51.
[ii] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cq2C7fyVTA4 - accessed April 25, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment