Blog - Pilgirm's Rock

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 11): “Definitional Disproofs” (Part A)

In the previous article I introduced The Impossibility of God, a collection of essays arguing that God cannot exist because ideas of God are logically contradictory. Section One includes articles contending that elements in the definition of God are mutually incompatible or contradictory (I will assume biblical definitions of God going forward). In the introduction to these “definitional disproofs” we have the key to analyzing the soundness of every argument in the book.

According to the editors, a “definitional disproof” of God looks like this: ^[1]

If God exists, then the definition of God is self-consistent.
The definition of God is not self-consistent.
Therefore, God does not and cannot exist.

In other words, in the same way a square circle cannot exist, so any idea or concept of God that contains contradictory elements cannot exist. As believers we certainly agree with the first premise that in God are no contradictions. He is perfect in every way and cannot be a mixture of any incompatible attributes or elements. But what about the second premise that the definition of God is not self-consistent? Moreover, does the conclusion necessarily follow, even if atheists believe that definitions of God contain contradictions?

Assumptions and Limitations
Specific contradictions alleged by the authors will be addressed in subsequent articles, but for now we ask if the limited perspective of the atheist is sufficient to establish such a claim. Several assumptions lie behind the above argument, including the ever-present belief in the adequacy of the atheist to know transcendent realities. Taking into account our human limitations, perhaps a more accurate rendering of the argument would be as follows:

If God exists, then the definition of God is self-consistent.
The definition of a perfect and infinite God who transcends all things is not self-consistent according to the perspective of people so limited they cannot know the contents of their neighbor’s garage without having a look, who do not know what lies beyond the three or four dimensions of our existence and cannot possibly comprehend transcendent realities.
Therefore, God cannot exist in or beyond the universe unless the finite understanding of people, from their severely limited perspective, can fully grasp and logically reconcile every element of the definition of God.

Given God’s infinite greatness, many things about God are difficult to understand and logically reconcile in our head. But, God’s greatness and our smallness do not justify finite and fallible people making our perspective and understanding the ultimate test of what can exist in and beyond the universe, presuming God can be no higher than what we can logically reconcile in our thoughts. Mystery is both logical and to be expected. If we could fully comprehend God, He would not be God. Or, conversely, if we could fully comprehend God, we would be God. But, “‘My thoughts are not your thoughts, Neither are your ways My ways,’ declares the LORD. ‘For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts’” (Isa. 55:8-9 NAS). Thus, we can only know of Him what He has chosen to reveal to us.

We do better admitting our smallness before an infinite God, rather than adopting the irrational and unjustified assumption that our limited perspective and reasoning constitute the ultimate standard of reality in and beyond the universe. Perhaps we could offer another argument, as follows:

God is Infinite Spirit.
Finite people who forget where they put the car keys and have a brain smaller than a soccer ball cannot possibly know that an Infinite Spirit cannot exist or what such a Spirit could or could not do if He did exist.
Therefore, every argument claiming that God cannot possibly exist constitutes speculation of no authoritative value in describing realities beyond the substantial limits and deficiencies of human understanding.

For instance, how can logic used by limited people explain the nature of infinite spirit, or of God speaking a universe into existence from nothing? Logic is necessary to order our reasoning, but entirely inadequate to prove or disprove transcendent realities, and unable to grant finite people abilities beyond their human limitations. Moreover, to know what is possible and impossible in and beyond reality as we know it requires complete knowledge of everything in the universe and beyond, a simple fact the contributors to The Impossibility of God should consider. Their brilliance notwithstanding, they suffer from the same severe limitations as the rest of us when speaking of things beyond our ability to know apart from God’s explanation in Scripture, the same Scripture that contradicts their assertions.

A Twist
Ironically, no universe, thoughts, or book claiming God is impossible are possible without Him. Indeed, unbelief only exists because God exists.

He Himself gives to all life and breath and all things; and He made from one, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times, and the boundaries of their habitation, that they should seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; for in Him we live and move and exist (Acts 17:25-28 NAS).

In the end, God’s existence remains obvious to everyone, and He will have the last word. “Surely the people are grass. The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever” (Isa. 40:7-8 NAS). Perhaps the authors might consider thanking God for the good gifts they use to deny Him and reassert them for His honor. Eternity is a long time and Christ suffered God’s infinite wrath in our place to pay the penalty for such ingratitude. Thankfully, “He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him” (Heb. 7:25 NAS) “Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen” (1 Tim. 1:17 NAS).

^[1] Michael Martin and Ricki Monnier, eds., The Impossibility of God (Amherst: Prometheus Books, 2003), 17.

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 11): “Definitional Disproofs” (Part A)”

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 10): “God Is Impossible”

I have an interesting book on my bookshelf entitled, The Impossibility of God, a collection of essays that go beyond claims of the mere improbability of God, arguing that “the weight of the evidence is against God’s actual existence,” and that “the concept of God is logically contradictory.” An impressive and weighty book, it contains “most of the important arguments for the impossibility of God that have been published since 1948.” The editors challenge readers to “think deeply and critically about” the idea of God and ask, is the idea of God beset with “an ocean of contradictions,” or “built upon the very idea that disproves it?”

The introduction gives a helpful summary of the types of “disproofs” presented in the book, including 1) “an inconsistency in the definition of God,” 2) the inconsistency of God’s existence with the existence of evil, 3) inconsistency between an attribute of God and biblical doctrines and events, 4) “inconsistency between two or more divine attributes,” and 5) an inconsistency within a single attribute ^[1] The authors present some impressive arguments and have thought “deeply and critically” about their topics. Moreover, the intellectual prowess displayed in the articles is impressive and humbling, a collection of brilliant essays by brilliant minds.

Achilles Heel
Every argument rests on assumptions. If the assumptions are false or unjustified, the most perfect argument built on them will also be false or unjustified. Thus, herein lies the fatal flaw of the many claims made in The Impossibility of God, they stand on significant but faulty assumptions of blind faith. And given the sophistication of the arguments, if these assumptions are accepted or remain unchallenged, the best Christian apologists will have difficulty refuting the assertions of the authors. And worse, those who “defend” the faith by conforming it to the unbelieving culture will not only struggle to answer the attacks, they will affirm unbelief, distort the truth, and be tempted to replace God’s glory with cheap and unbiblical caricatures. Thus, if we are to be adequately prepared to deal with highly sophisticated arguments against faith in Christ and Scripture, we need to easily identify the unjustified and blind faith assumptions on which they stand.

Some Groundwork
As a brief introduction to the next several articles, consider these simple questions: 1) Is God limited to the properties of the universe and our limited understanding of logic? A good many arguments against God’s existence assume that God, if He did exist, must be limited in the same way we are limited. But how can our finite perspective, experience, and reasoning determine this? 2) Can time and chance account for the immeasurable design, beauty, and order of life and every indispensable aspect of reality supporting it, including the intellect and reasoning of the authors? Ignoring the absurdity of the idea and its inconsistency with every known principle observed in the universe (i.e., chaos only produces more chaos), how could anyone know such a thing? And lastly, and the most basic question exposing the grand assumption under every atheistic argument, 3) Do atheists possess sufficient knowledge of transcendent realities to speak with authority about them? Can they reduce infinite spirit to calculations on a page or know what lies beyond the universe and the three or four dimensions of their existence? And dare I say it, do any of them know the contents of their neighbor’s garage without having a look? And if the answer to these simple questions is no, what qualifies them to speak of realities infinitely beyond their understanding, the greatest being God Himself?

Conclusion
In the next several articles we will examine the above categories of arguments and focus like a laser on their underlying assumptions. This is not to dismiss the importance of the details, but to prioritize them and demonstrate that regardless of their brilliance, they cannot support claims built on a false foundation. In the end, believers need not be intimidated by long and complex formulas, or by the erudition and number of opponents.

Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe (1 Cor. 1:20-21 NAS).

Indeed, “The gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it” (Matt. 7:14 NAS). As we continue the series, may God strengthen your faith and encourage you to share Christ in truth and love, unintimidated by the arguments of small people before an infinite God. “Turn to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth; For I am God, and there is no other” (Isa. 45:22 NAS). In the end, nothing else matters.

^[1] Michael Martin and Ricki Monnier, eds., The Impossibility of God (Amherst: Prometheus Books, 2003), 14.

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 10): “God Is Impossible” “

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 9): The Vital Starting Point

In earlier articles we examined the atheists’ assumption that their limited human perspective can speak with authority about ultimate and transcendent realities. We also saw that theological mysteries and difficulties cannot support denials of God’s existence. God is infinite, we are not. Just because we cannot understand something does not make it untrue. Our opinion and experience do not form the ultimate standard of what can be true or possible in and beyond the universe as we know it (and we know very little). We turn now to another important facet of these principles: the assumptions through which we view God and the world form the “starting point” of our thinking. When we view and interpret things we always begin with assumptions about God and the world, the colored lenses through which we view things.

Assumptions and Implications
Atheists assume they can know that God does not exist, and thereby assume that the Bible is not God’s word, Christ is not God, heaven and hell are imaginary, no ultimate authority exists to define or judge sin, life and the universe formed and organized themselves, et al. In short, if your starting point excludes God, then everything will be interpreted accordingly. For the believer, God forms our most basic assumption. Therefore, He created and sustains us, apart from Him we have and can know nothing, and to Him we owe everything. The Bible is His authoritative revelation of His person and works in history and beyond and is the handbook for living and eternal life in Christ (among many other things).

Belief Determines Interpretation
A popular misconception affirms that people start with a neutral belief system, objectively look at the world, and then believe or reject God based on the evidence. Reality, however, tells another story. Belief precedes a view of the evidence and determines its interpretation. The starting point determines the end point, or our starting assumptions determine our conclusions. We view and interpret everything according to our most basic assumptions about God and His world. This explains why an atheist can see the stunning design and beauty of life and the universe and deny a Designer. Rejecting God, they see no evidence for Him. Believers view the same world and see God’s genius everywhere. At issue is whose starting assumptions are true?

Too Limited
We again ask the question, can the atheist know that their starting point for interpreting the world is true, that God does not exist? Can they possibly know the basis by which they have devised the hypothesis of evolution, deny the evidence for a Designer, and determine right and wrong? As we have seen, the atheist would need to know everything about everything in the universe and beyond to know that God does not exist. Thus, the atheist’s entire enterprise of interpreting and explaining the world stands on the blind-faith assumption of their ability to know ultimate realities. Having started in the wrong place, they end up in the wrong place.

When an atheist claims that God cannot exist because… [fill in the blank], we should immediately recognize the unreasonable assumption of their own perspective as sufficient to know what they claim to know. When someone says hell does not exist, that God’s design for men and women in marriage is false, that the Bible is full of fairy tales, how do they know? The assumption or starting point behind these claims holds their limited perspective or opinion as adequate to know such things. But atheists cannot possibly know that the starting point by which they interpret and explain the world is true. Their limitations are too great.

Stand the High Ground
Thus, in responding to unbelief, we should take care to honor God as the infinite source and sustainer of all things, who can do anything, on whom we depend for knowledge and all things. We dare not affirm unbelief by conforming our answer to suit their unjustified assumptions. The idea that finite and fallen people are the ultimate standard of truth and can speak with authority about ultimate reality results in the loss of truth amidst the blind-faith opinions of millions of people, none more capable of speaking about ultimate realities then the others. None can know the contents of their neighbor’s garage without having a look or know what lies beyond the universe and their three or four dimensions of existence. If you start with human opinion apart from God’s revelation, you end up with human opinion.

Believers, then, should not discard the high ground of God and His Word by seeking to conform God’s explanation of Himself, reality, and history to the unbelieving worldview. This not only dishonors God, it forfeits the opportunity to expose the false assumptions behind false interpretations of God and the world and the universal need of Christ and Scripture for truth. We should not affirm the unbeliever’s presumed authority to speak about things they cannot know apart from Scripture by reducing miracles to theological metaphors rather than actual events, by making a global flood local, or by putting God behind the unscientific and absurd hypothesis of evolution, thereby making death, that horrific and painful curse and enemy, God’s means to advance life, an odd notion that overthrows the entirety of the history of redemption and makes God look more like the devil than the holy and good God of Scripture.

The Most Basic Force
Behind the basic assumption or starting point of our view of the world stands a more basic force—love or hatred toward God. Disdain for God’s authority, resentment of His holiness and righteous judgments, and an unwillingness to submit to His will drive the assumptions and interpretations of the atheist. For the believer, “the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us” (Rom 5:5 NAS). “The love of Christ controls us” (2 Cor. 5:14 NAS). Scripture reveals that God displays His existence and attributes clearly and conspicuously in the nature of all of creation (Rom. 1:18ff.), His giving of good things (Acts 14:17), and our conscience (Rom. 2:14-15). God opened our eyes to see that “the heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands” (Ps. 19:1 NAS). In this we rejoice, “For Thou, O LORD, hast made me glad by what Thou hast done, I will sing for joy at the works of Thy hands. How great are Thy works, O LORD!” (Ps. 92:4-5 NAS).

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 9):The Vital Starting Point”

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 8): Pain and Evil

Atheists sometimes describe terrible diseases by which children suffer and die and declare that they would never believe in a God that would allow such things. Most of us have struggled with pain and evil and the profound issues they raise, while countless books wrestle with the pastoral, theological, and philosophical concerns. This short article, then, barely scratches the surface. Nonetheless, it answers a critical question that applies to this objection, and by extension to all objections against God’s existence: Can anyone know that God cannot exist because pain and evil exist? (The question of how moral evil came to be in a world created by a perfectly good, infinitely powerful, and all-knowing God will be addressed in a separate article.)

Paradise Ruined
Life hurts. The pain of losing loved ones can bring the strongest among us to despair, while the history and scope of atrocities committed for ambition and power are staggering. Scripture blames the free choice of created beings for sin, bringing separation from God, spiritual darkness, and the curse of natural evil, including sickness, natural disasters, and death. “All have sinned” (Rom. 3:23), and all enter the world with Adam’s guilt and sinful bent, “original sin” (Rom. 5:12ff.). Rebellion against God has spoiled paradise, the same rebellion that denies God’s existence.

God can do what He pleases with what He created and sustains. He owes us nothing, every good we enjoy comes from His gracious hand, and we owe Him everything. “Who are you, O man, who answers back to God?” (Rom. 9:20 NAS). God is also good, wise, overflowing with lovingkindness, and righteous. He neither rewards wickedness nor punishes innocence. Yet, many have suffered under the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and religious terrorists. Moreover, babies yet to utter a bad word die in their parent’s arms, while others never leave the womb alive by meeting the scalpel of one sworn to do no harm. (Ironically, many that point to evil to deny God’s existence choose to make a virtue of killing the unborn.)

Insufficient Knowledge
We have seen the atheists’ inability to know and explain transcendent realities, that human limitations reduce their basic claims to speculations and blind-faith in a presumed ability to know what they cannot possibly know. Atheists would need infinite knowledge to know that the infinite God does not exist, that the Bible miracles are impossible, that nothing exists beyond what we experience with our senses, and that God did not speak all things into existence in six days. And though people choose to believe that God does not exist from the existence of moral and natural evil, can they know it?

To know that the existence of pain and evil deny the existence of God, one would need to know that we do not exist forever after death; that temporary suffering cannot have an eternal purpose that we do not presently understand; that God will not ultimately execute justice and evil people will never get their just deserts; that no rewards and punishments will be given in the next life that compensate for what people do or suffer in this life; that evil will never be remedied and destroyed; that mankind is not responsible for moral evil and the curse that brought natural calamities; that God cannot righteously judge and curse the world because of sin; that God is unjust and mankind deserves better; and that God’s Word is false and does not explain all we need to know about pain and evil. The finite and fallen atheist cannot possibly know these things, and Scripture says none of them are true. None can possibly know that God does not exist from the presence of moral and natural evil in the world.

Sinful and Unreasonable Presumption
God identifies the heart of this unbelieving argument in His response to Job’s challenge to His righteousness: “Will you really annul My judgment? Will you condemn Me that you may be justified?” (Job 40:8 NAS). So, before we criticize God, maybe we should consider Job’s response, “Behold, I am insignificant; what can I reply to Thee? I lay my hand on my mouth” (Job 40:4 NAS). Created, dependent, and fallen people cannot judge or make claims on a perfect God.

God’s existence does not depend on our limited perspective and understanding, His ways are infinitely higher than ours (Isa. 55:9), in history and personal circumstances. To reject God’s existence because we do not understand something makes our limited understanding the standard of what can exist or be true, an unreasonable notion. Ultimate reality cannot be determined by the limited perspective and knowledge of people who still do not know the contents of their neighbor’s garage without having a look, who have never been beyond the three to four dimensions of their existence or been to the other side of the universe. Dismissing an infinite and holy God because we do not understand the existence of pain and evil is foolish. As it is, Scripture tells us all we need to know about it.

God Is Good
God has displayed His goodness in “satisfying your hearts with food and gladness” (Act 14:17 NAS). He “causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matt. 5:45 NAS) and has made His power and glory known to all by what He has made (Rom. 1:18ff.). And greatest of all, God has displayed His infinite excellence and moral perfection in the person and saving work of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. Evil exists, but God has remedied it and will ultimately dispose of it, while “the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us” (Rom. 8:18 NAS). Rather than encouraging the terrible evil of the world by denying the ultimate judgment of it, and by insulting the One to whom we owe all love, honor, and obedience, and leading others to do the same to face an eternity of suffering for it, perhaps atheists should give their life to Christ for forgiveness of their own evil. God is patient, “not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9 NAS).

Conclusion
Mysteries abound, but our limited perspective determines nothing about God. In the end, all unbelief denies God’s obvious existence and authority from a desire to do what we want. Ironically, no greater evil exists than to deny and insult the One who created us, gives us all good things, and has willingly paid the price of infinite suffering for us that we might be holy and happy forever. We enjoy His blessings of love, family, food, friends, and the stars in the sky, but use our God-given talents to insult Him. Yes, evil exists, but none so terrible as contempt for the One to whom we owe all love, honor, and gratitude.

If you cry with the Psalmist, “when shall I come and appear before God? My tears have been my meat day and night, while they continually say unto me, Where is thy God?” (Ps. 2:1-3), the day will come when

He shall dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be among them, and He shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there shall no longer be any death; there shall no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away” (Rev. 21:1-4 NAS).

May God grant grace that many atheists will join us through faith in Christ, in whom is true and everlasting life. Amen.

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 8): Pain and Evil”

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 7): Creation

The previous article highlighted the myth of “science and reason versus faith” and the irony that atheists call people from trust in God to trust in the atheist’s opinion. They say, in effect, “have faith in me.” But like the rest of us, they are finite and fallible. And apart from God’s revelation, no atheist can know what they assert about God and ultimate realities. One such claim denies that God created the heavens and the earth from nothing. To this we again pose the question: how do atheists know what they claim to know? Or, to the present purpose, how can the atheist know that God did not speak the heavens and earth into existence?

No Neutrality
To begin, no one views the universe with neutral objectivity. Everyone interprets the world according to assumptions (presuppositions) about the nature of God, reality, mankind, knowledge, truth, authority, and ethics. These assumptions form a person’s worldview, the lens through which they see and interpret all things. Those who assume the existence of the God of Scripture see His fingerprints everywhere as the design, order, and beauty of life and the universe reflect His power and genius. Atheists view the same design, order, and beauty as an accident of time and chance. Believers consider all things as impossible without God, while atheists see them as possible without God.

Ultimate Authority and Object of Faith
Whose assumptions (presuppositions), then, are reasonable, justifiable, and consistent with the design, order, and beauty of life and the universe? And in what authority or object of faith does one trust to form these assumptions? The believer trusts God and Scripture, while the unbeliever trusts his or her own perspective and opinion. Science, per se, does not speak with authority, scientists do. Finite and fallible, scientists interpret things according to their worldview. Thus, appeals to science as an authority are actually appeals to scientists that agree with a particular view. No scientist, however, can speak with authority concerning transcendent realities beyond the reach of the scientific method. And no one, scientist or otherwise, views the world with neutral objectivity when it points to God and our debt to love and obey Him.

Limits
As we have seen, to know that God does not exist requires knowledge of everything in the universe and beyond. And, if one cannot know that the biblical God of infinite power does not exist, one cannot possibly know that He did not speak the universe into existence. A person of five senses, limited intellect, and the constraints of three or four dimensions cannot possibly know what a Spirit of infinite power can or cannot do. Apart from God’s revelation, we can only guess. But guesswork is not science.

Blind faith accepts the notion that a big explosion and chance created the design and order of the universe, including the complexity of life and the necessary systems to support it. The scientific method, however, cannot demonstrate it. On the contrary, it remains intuitively obvious that design requires a designer while chaos produces nothing but chaos. And no scientific discovery points to a world older than the Scriptural account of approximately six thousand years unless viewed in a manner consistent with evolutionary principles that require millions and billions of years. And if atheists cannot know that the infinite God of the universe does not exist, they cannot know that He did not create the universe in six days, with light from distant stars already visible, etc., etc. God is not constrained by that which He created and sustains.

Ludicrous
All things reflect the biblical account when viewed according to the obvious existence of the infinite God of Scripture. And no scientific evidence nullifies the biblical account apart from unbiblical assumptions that neither the scientific method nor the nature of reality can support. One might claim, according to evolutionary assumptions, that an exquisite painting came from an explosion in a paint factory, but never has this happened and the nature of reality cannot support such a hypothesis. Even the most zealous atheist would view such an explanation as ludicrous.

How, then, can finite and fallible people know that God did not create everything from nothing in six days? They can’t. We do well to remember God’s rebuke of Job:

Who is this that darkens counsel By words without knowledge? Now gird up your loins like a man, And I will ask you, and you instruct Me! Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding, Who set its measurements, since you know? Or who stretched the line on it? On what were its bases sunk? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:2-7 NAS).

Conclusion
Reams of excellent scholarship concerning the age of the earth can be studied to great benefit. But fundamental to this and any related discussion remains the question: how do atheists know what they claim to know? And are the assumptions behind their interpretations of scientific discoveries (such as chance and the evolutionary process), justified, reasonable, and consistent with the nature of reality, or demonstrable by the scientific method? The limited perspective and understanding of atheists cannot justify their claims.

For the believer, infinitely more obvious than the brilliance behind a beautiful painting stands the genius behind all things. God’s power and infinite excellence are so “clearly seen” and “understood” by His works that all people “know” Him and are “without excuse” (Rom. 1:18ff.). Indeed, “The heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands” (Ps. 19:1 NAS). Behind every unbiblical explanation of our origins lies a dislike of the truth that God created and owns everything, apart from whom we have nothing; that His authority is ultimate, that life and every good gift comes from Him, and that we owe Him all love, honor, and gratitude, forever. Here we find the reason people believe unscientific and impossible explanations of the origin of life and the universe—they dislike the obvious alternative.

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 7): Creation”

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 6): “Have Faith in Me”

Atheists often recite the mantra that their denial of God’s existence stands on reason and science while belief in God stands on faith. The claim, of course is pure fiction. All people use reason and all people have faith in an ultimate authority, though the object of faith may differ. But problems with the claim run deeper, with an irony we would do well to appreciate. Defining faith as blind, the apologists of atheism believe they call people from fairy tales to the enlightened conclusions of science and reason. But underlying the “rational and scientific” façade lurks a well-disguised plea—a call to faith in the perspective and opinion of fallen and finite people. The evangelist of atheism says, in effect, “entrust your meaning, purpose, life, and the ultimate destiny of your soul to my personal opinion.” In short, “have faith in me.” The debate between atheists and Christians has nothing to do with faith versus reason and science (every scientific discovery is consistent with the Christian worldview). Rather, it concerns faith in the God who created everything, knows everything, and has explained everything to us in Scripture, versus faith in the perspective and opinions of people who do not know the contents of their neighbor’s garage without having a look.

A Tall Story and Calling
As we have seen, atheists assume for themselves the ability and authority to know and explain ultimate realities that they cannot possibly know. They presume their own sufficiency to tell others the source, meaning, and purpose of life, including the destiny of the soul. Naturalists, of course, deny the soul’s existence, a belief they cannot know as true. Yet, they invite you to trust their opinions, including no life after death, no judgment of their works, and no heaven or hell.

They ask you to reject Christ, the only possibility of an eternal, holy, and happy life of meaning and purpose, and exchange Him for the speculations of limited and fallen people. They invite you to deny the obvious, to treat with contempt the One who created us in His image, has given us every good thing, including the ability to reason and discuss such things, and has paid an infinite price of infinite suffering to Himself that we might have forgiveness of sins and new life. They ask you to discard the knowledge of your God-given purpose, meaning, and destiny of immeasurable joy in heaven as God’s royal children in exchange for a few years to do what you want without accountability, without hope or purpose as an accident of time and chance destined for nothing, even as they ask you to trust them that you will not end up in hell for it.

Atheists propose a tall story with serious consequences. And who would dare assume responsibility for the eternal destiny of others and direct them entrust their souls to such blind-faith and unwarranted opinions? Who would write books to influence millions without a certainty that their opinions are absolutely true and not leading people to a horrible fate? Their boldness is frightening and only outdone by their inability to know what they so confidently assert and ask others to embrace. By denying God’s existence they have assumed His place.

A Gamble
Whatever you may think of Pascal’s “Wager” as an encouragement to pursue God, one should consider the eternal consequences of the Christian versus the atheist being wrong about heaven and hell. The contrast is stark. Eternity is forever. Yet, atheists cannot possibly know that hell does not exist and they will not bail you out should they be wrong. Beer commercials notwithstanding, there are no parties in this horrible place. Why would anyone risk even a 1% chance of spending eternity there? Yet, the unreasonable deception of sin risks eternal condemnation for a few years of bread that never satisfies (Isa. 55:2), incurring the guilt of inviting others to follow this disastrous course. And as for the here and now, ask any believer if their life is better or worse since they have been born again, even with its hardships and the scorn of the world. True believers know the infinite value of Christ as compared to the temporary and shallow allurements of the world. Why, then, should anyone trust the untrustworthy prophets of nothing and despair?

Be Encouraged and Be Warned
To the believer, God remains infinitely excellent and worthy of your life and worship, while the inability of atheists to know what they claim to know will boost your faith in Christ and Scripture. To the unbeliever, please reflect upon the ability of your object of faith to meet your needs and deliver on its promises, implied or otherwise. Please consider that appeals to reason and science to deny God are neither reasonable nor scientific but attempts to justify unbelief and avoid the One to whom we owe all things. Deep down all people know God exists and that He deserves our love, trust, and gratitude (Rom. 1:18ff.). And consider that those writing thick books denying the truth of Scripture, who ask you to trust their siren song concerning God and all things, cannot possibly know what they ask you to believe.

And know that “the Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9 NAS), that He “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:1-4 NAS). And while people find comfort in numbers, book sales and popularity provide an untrustworthy barometer of truth or virtue, especially today. “The gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it” (Matt. 7:14 NAS). As for the supposed earthly benefits of presuming one’s independence from God, “what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul? For what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Mark 8:36-37 NAS). And disinterest displays contempt for the One who gave us life and every good thing, to whom we owe all things. Christ suffered infinite wrath on His soul to pay the penalty for our rebellion and contempt, and he did so from an overflowing love for the unlovable. Imagine the ingratitude of ignoring such a gift.

Have Faith in Christ
Thus, along with the saints and the Apostles, “We beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:20-21 NAS). May God give you grace to trust Christ, who alone gives eternal life and meets your every need, to whom belongs all glory and honor forever, Amen.

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 6):
“Have Faith in Me” “

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 5): Naturalism (Continued)

Naturalists, as do all atheists, reject the authority of God and Scripture and assume their own ability and authority to explain the nature of the universe and beyond, trusting their limited perspective as sufficient to explain ultimate realities. In the previous article we noted that naturalists claim that nothing exists except matter in space and time. Continuing our look at naturalism, we examine further why finite people, from their finite vantage point, cannot know that souls, angels, and God as Infinite Spirit do not exist.

Scripture clearly reveals the existence of the immaterial soul as the key element of human life, angels as spirits serving those who inherit eternal life, and God as the boundless Spirit that created and sustains everything. Each exist beyond the physical realm, possess none of its limitations, and cannot be measured. And like all things, angels and our souls depend on God as their designer, creator, and sustainer.

We know that angels and souls exist because God exists. Scripture reveals God’s infinite excellence and works, while His creation, His giving of good things, and our conscience display God’s existence and attributes. “That which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse” (Rom. 1:19-20 NAS). “He did not leave Himself without witness, in that He did good and gave you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying your hearts with food and gladness” (Acts 14:17 NAS). He has written His law on every heart (Rom. 2:14-15 NAS).

And in the same way all people know that God exists, so we know the reality of the soul—by its effects. Created and sustained by God, we intuitively and immediately see the evidence, apart from complex logical or philosophical formulas. The soul appears in personality, in how we love, hate, reason, choose, create, and know good from evil, none of which are explicable or possible by mere time, chance, and matter. Like the existence of God, the reality of the soul is obvious.

Yet, naturalists deny this, and no argument will convince them otherwise until God opens their spiritual eyes and removes the prejudice against their debt to love and obey Him. But the question remains, how can someone limited by five senses, three or four dimensions, and limited reason (itself an evidence of the soul), possibly know that people have no spirit that gives life to the body and lives after death? Naturalists reason from the material to the immaterial and infer from the physical world that no spiritual world is possible. But, how does this follow? How does the nature of physical things make impossible things that lack and transcend physical properties? How can anyone know that reality must be limited to what they can taste, touch, see, hear and feel, or be limited to that which they can fully understand?

Like a creature of the sea concluding from its limited experience that nothing exists beyond the realm of salt water, so the naturalist denies the existence of a realm beyond the “natural.” Denying the obvious, they draw conclusions from data that imply no such thing, like pointing to ice cream to deny the existence of quantum physics, or a lump of coal to deny the existence of Maine Coon cats. Children may lack the ability to understand things beyond their experience and capacity to know, but how greater looms human ignorance of the immeasurable universe and beyond. Of course, all things point to the power and genius of God as their creator and sustainer. But the atheist denies this obvious reality and attempts to draw conclusions from data that cannot support their claims. Given our profound human limitations, we cannot deny transcendent realities by pointing to material things. In the end, our meager experience and perspective reduce the best arguments against the existence of the soul to blind-faith guesses.

The same applies to angels. Some deny their reality by appealing to debunked accounts of ghosts and the paranormal. But these need not form the evidence for angels—the obvious existence of God and His testimony in Scripture suffice. Moreover, the question for every atheist applies here, how do you know what you claim to know? Angels have none of the properties of the material universe, how can a finite human being know they do not exist? How can anyone know that nothing exists beyond what they can see, touch, taste, hear, smell, or understand? Can we reasonably limit what is possible in and beyond the universe to what we can perceive or comprehend? Who can legitimately make their own understanding the standard of truth, or the measure of what is possible in and beyond the universe? To do so is neither reasonable nor scientific.

And like denials of miracles, one must first know that God does not exist to know that angels and souls do not exist. And one must know everything in the universe and beyond, including every possibility, to know that God does not exist. Even so, our ability to think and reason about such things gives evidence of the existence of both God and our soul. Created in His image (though marred by sin), we display aspects of His power and genius.

Much more could be said, but the intent of the series is not to prove the existence of spiritual realities—the self-authenticating and divine nature of Scripture suffices for that. The narrow purpose highlights the blind-faith and unjustified assumption underlying every denial of God’s existence and works—the adequacy of limited people to explain transcendent realities. Rejecting God’s clear revelation in Scripture, creation, and their own conscience, they assume for themselves the ability to know what they cannot know.

Thus, the question remains for the naturalist, as for every atheist, how do they know what they claim to know? On a good day, mere mortals can remember where they put the car keys. Nonetheless, we cannot know the contents of our neighbor’s garage without having a look or the neighbor telling us. Denying God’s explanation, what qualifies mere specks in the universe to speak with authority about transcendent things? Regardless of the size of their books, the length and number of their scientific and logical formulas, or the number of people supporting their claims (none of which could exist apart from God), no argument can show that souls, angels, or God Himself do not exist. As it is, they use their God-given abilities to deny their own special status as created in God’s image, reject their would-be servants that God created to “render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation” (Heb. 1:14 NAS), and insult the Infinite Spirit that designed, created, and sustains them that they might know and love Him in happiness forever. Christ paid an infinite price for sin that they might enjoy such a gift. May God grant them grace and mercy to accept it.

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 5): Naturalism (Continued)”

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 4): Naturalism

In the previous article we highlighted the narrow but vital purpose of the series—to show that atheists assume for themselves the ability to know that which lies beyond their ability to know. Behind every argument against God’s existence lurks the unwarranted assumption of the adequacy of limited people to speak of transcendent realities. We turn now to examine yet another example of how atheists do this by a brief look at “naturalism.”

Naturalism comes in many flavors, from the more absolute and dogmatic claims that nothing can possibly exist beyond matter in space and time, to agnostic versions that grant an unlikely possibility of the “supernatural,” an immaterial soul, and miracles, including the possibility of the God of Scripture, if such could be empirically verified. Thus, opinions vary as to what can legitimately be called “naturalism.” But one trait characterizes every version—all assume that limited people, from their tiny vantage point, can speak with authority about the ultimate nature of the universe and beyond.

We need not exhaustively understand every flavor of naturalism to see the inadequacy of the basic assumption behind them all. To keep it simple, we’ll briefly look at one example expressed by the evolutionist Richard Dawkins in his book, The God Delusion. ^[1] Dawkins claims that thought and emotions have a “natural” origin (as opposed to a supernatural or Divine) and defines the “philosophical naturalist” as denying the existence of anything beyond the “physical world,” including souls, God, and miracles. He admits that we have yet to understand many “natural” things, but “hopes” to eventually understand them as part of the “natural.” By the way, why would a “neutral” and “objective” scientist that claims to go where the facts lead him “hope” for such an outcome unless he was predisposed against the alternative? Perhaps his interpretations follow his predisposition? But, I digress.

Dawkins’ assumption of his own adequacy to speak of ultimate realities appears in every flavor of naturalism. Thus, the simple question applies to its every proponent—How do you know what you claim to know? Or, how can people that do not know the contents of their neighbor’s garage without having a look, who have never been beyond the three or four dimensions of their existence, possibly know that nothing can possibly exist beyond the matter that can be seen, heard, tasted, touched, and smelled by their limited senses? How can every possible reality be limited to what finite people can personally experience? What validates such an all-encompassing assumption? Can infinitesimally small human beings really define what is possible in and beyond an immeasurable universe? Just how big are we compared to the cosmos, let alone what lies beyond it? It appears that the same folks exclaiming the marvels, mysteries, and immensity of the universe, and their smallness by comparison, can assume their ultimacy in the same breath.

And, on what possible ground can naturalism be considered reasonable or scientific? Faithful scientists may limit their conclusions to what they can observe, test, and repeat. But, what justifies the leap to assertions about all of possible reality, things that have never been demonstrated by the scientific method? Naturalism stands on assumptions that ultimately rest on the unscientific and blind-faith assumption that limited people, from their tiny vantage point, can speak with authority about the ultimate nature of the universe and beyond. Indeed, to know that “naturalism” is true requires knowledge of everything in the universe and beyond.

The agnostic naturalist may grant that a “god” could exist, that people might have immaterial souls, and that miracles might be possible, but will deny their existence without “tangible” proof. Yet, no one views a beautiful painting and requires tangible proof to accept the existence of its talented painter. Some things are self-evident, intuitively and immediately known, and ridiculous to deny. Yet, that which reflects infinitely more genius, design, complexity, and beauty gives no evidence of its Maker? It does, of course, and all people know that it does, even while they resort to unjustified and unscientific assumptions to deny it.

In the end, “Holy, Holy, Holy, is the LORD of hosts, The whole earth is full of His glory” (Isa. 6:3 NAS). A glory so obvious that all people are “without excuse” for not giving God honor and thanks (Rom. 1:20-21). Yet, a glory suppressed in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18), from a love of darkness and hatred of the light (John 3:19), and a desire for independence from the ultimate authority of God (Ps. 2:3).

^[1] Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, Mariner Books Edition, 2008), 34-5.

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 4):
Naturalism”

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 3): Blind-Faith Assumptions

As we begin the third article in the series, a brief statement of its narrow but vital purpose will prove helpful. In speaking of the human limitations of atheists, the essential truth to grasp concerns the assumption underlying every argument against God’s existence—the adequacy of limited people to speak of transcendent realities. Or, the assumed ability of humans confined to five senses, three or four dimensions, living on a speck of the universe, to speak of things infinitely beyond them. From their insufficient vantage point, atheists presume to know what they cannot possibly know. Limited people are simply unqualified to deny the existence of an unlimited God. So, if you are looking for more details of specific atheistic arguments, consider the greater purpose here to highlight the basic assumption of atheists that, when shown to be unjustified, renders worthless every argument built on it.

Atheists assume the ability to know and articulate that which requires knowledge of everything in the universe and beyond. Our extreme limitations in an immeasurable universe, let alone in the face of an infinite Spirit that transcends it, form an essential and relevant truth in any discussion of God’s existence. Understandably, atheists avoid discussing this at all costs. Nonetheless, we should examine the qualifications of people that deny God’s existence. Do they have sufficient knowledge? Do they have sufficient authority? For instance, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are brilliant in their earthly fields of expertise, but are they more qualified than preschoolers to know what lies beyond the three or four dimensions of their existence?

Advanced expertise in philosophy and science may prove helpful, but most believers don’t have the time or need. And, how many great martyrs of the faith needed a Ph.D. to hold fast to Christ? (Of course, all believers should be students of the Bible and theology.) But, understanding the facade atheism presents as “reasonable” and “scientific” and how atheists call “facts” what they cannot possibly know strengthen our faith and can be learned easily. Intellectual challenges to our trust in Christ and Scripture lose their sting or dissipate like the morning mist when light exposes the blind-faith assumptions on which they rest.

And as we multiply examples of how atheists assume the ability to know what they cannot possibly know, and as we learn to easily identify where and how this assumption operates, we will encounter the more important reality of God’s greatness. His infinite nature will be examined in more detail in a future series, but we will necessarily face the truth of His boundless majesty as we examine our limitations.

May we grow in our love and appreciation of God’s infinite excellence and our dependence on Him for all things, including knowledge of His person and works in Christ. And though we are nothing before Him, He so loved us that He sent His Son to purchase our eternal holiness and happiness, and did so at infinite cost to Himself, suffering infinite wrath on the cross to pay the infinite penalty for our sin. May God grant atheists His infinite gift of mercy and grace through saving faith in Christ, as He has so mercifully done for us. Now, “To the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen” (1 Tim. 1:17 NAS).

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 3):
Blind-Faith Assumptions”

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 2): Theological Mysteries and Difficulties

The first article in the series showed that God’s existence cannot be legitimately denied by arguing against the possibility of biblical miracles. The God of infinite power that created and sustains all things can easily change how He organizes aspects of His universe to perform a “miracle.” Thus, to know that biblical miracles are impossible first requires knowing that God does not exist which, itself, requires knowing everything about everything in the universe and beyond, including every possibility. Thus, the same omniscience to know that God does not exist is required to know that the biblical miracles are impossible. We turn now to see how human limitations make worthless any appeal to theological mysteries to deny the existence of God.

Reasonable Mysteries
Finite and fallen people necessarily face great mysteries in the face of an infinite God. For example, Scripture clearly teaches that God is a Trinity and that the Christian faith stands or falls on this marvelous truth. Yet, mystery must remain. Since no finite human being can fully plumb the depths of God’s infinite being, our limited perspective cannot possibly know that the Trinity is impossible. A God no higher than what finite and fallen people can fully grasp is no God, and certainly not the infinite and incomprehensible God of Scripture. And, to what higher authority can one appeal to say that God cannot be greater or beyond what we can fully comprehend? “‘For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Neither are your ways My ways,’ declares the LORD. ‘For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts’” (Isa. 55:8-9 NAS).

The same applies to moral evil in a universe created by a perfectly good, all-powerful, and all-knowing God. He has clearly told us that sin has its beginning and existence in the will of created beings who, freely and without external compulsion, choose to commit sin. Yet, mystery remains and should be expected. To claim something cannot exist or be true because I cannot fully understand it or reconcile it with my limited use of logic, presumes my own understanding to be the ultimate standard of what can and cannot be true in and beyond the universe. If we could understand everything, we would be God. The same applies to all such mysteries, such as attempts to logically reconcile God’s sovereignty and foreordination with human responsibility for sin. Ironically, even the most vehement atheists will admit to great mystery surrounding the beauty, order, and immensity of the universe, including all life within it, but conveniently reject mystery when arguing against the existence of the God who created and transcends it.

A Proper and Humble Approach
True wisdom, then, humbly accepts that our finite perspective does not constitute the ultimate standard of truth in the universe. Quite the contrary, apart from the truth of God’s Word, our interpretations will go astray. True wisdom understands that if we lack the ability to know what lies on the other side of a wall without having a look, we cannot know what’s on the other side of the universe. And if we struggle with understanding what we can see, hear, taste, touch, and smell, how can we speak with authority about that which lies beyond the three or four dimensions of our existence? No one by pointing to the known universe can say what an infinite God that transcends the universe can be or do. Atheists, then, cannot possibly know what they claim from their observation of the world, while their arguments based on theological difficulties do far more to affirm our profound limitations before God’s immensity than challenge the authority of Scripture or the existence of God. This elephant in the room should be acknowledged before responding to any claim of an atheist.

While we have barely scratched the surface of what could be said concerning difficult truths, the proper approach to all theological mysteries begins by admitting our infinite smallness before God’s infinite greatness. Unsolvable mysteries surround a transcendent God and will always confront fallen and finite people. Indeed, difficult and seemingly “impossible” truths taught in Scripture reveal human limitations, not problems with God and Scripture.

Click here to download a PDF of this article.

Yes, I Want a PDF of “Theological Mysteries and Difficulties”

We respect your privacy. We’ll NEVER sell, rent, or share your email address. That’s more than a policy, it’s our guarantee!

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 11): “Definitional Disproofs” (Part A)”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 10): “God Is Impossible” “

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 9):The Vital Starting Point”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 8): Pain and Evil”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 7): Creation”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 6): “Have Faith in Me” “

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 5): Naturalism (Continued)”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 4): Naturalism”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 3): Blind-Faith Assumptions”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “Theological Mysteries and Difficulties”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 6):
“Have Faith in Me” “

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 4):
Naturalism”

Yes, I Want a PDF of “The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 3):
Blind-Faith Assumptions”