Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,427
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 50:
Line 50: − − ''See also:'' [[Definition of atheism|Atheist attempts to change the definition of atheism]] Line 59:
Line 57: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→Evidential apologetics and demonstrating that anti-Christian views lack evidence
== Evidential apologetics and demonstrating that anti-Christian views lack evidence ==
== Evidential apologetics and demonstrating that anti-Christian views lack evidence ==
Evidential apologists also provide evidence/arguments showing the falsity/improbability of non-Christian [[worldview]]s. For example, Dr. Don Batten wrote an article on the [[origin of life]] which demonstrates the vexing problem first life is for those who insist that life arose through purely natural processes<ref>[http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life] by Dr. Don Batten</ref> See also: [[Philosophical naturalism]]
Evidential apologists also provide evidence/arguments showing the falsity/improbability of non-Christian [[worldview]]s. For example, Dr. Don Batten wrote an article on the [[origin of life]] which demonstrates the vexing problem first life is for those who insist that life arose through purely natural processes<ref>[http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life] by Dr. Don Batten</ref> See also: [[Philosophical naturalism]]
Atheists are now forced to present conclusions for their beliefs that are beyond the scope of evidence. They propose [[Multiverse|multiple universes]], alien creation, secular meanings of life and morals. They suggest [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/30/top-scientist-humans-emerged-after-chimpanzee-had-sex-with-pig/ chimpanzees mated with pigs] to create humans – no joke – and that the Bible is horribly corrupted despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.<ref>[http://bracebarber.com/atheisms-evidential-bankruptcy/ Atheist Beliefs and Absence of Evidence]</ref>}}
Atheists are now forced to present conclusions for their beliefs that are beyond the scope of evidence. They propose [[Multiverse|multiple universes]], alien creation, secular meanings of life and morals. They suggest [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/30/top-scientist-humans-emerged-after-chimpanzee-had-sex-with-pig/ chimpanzees mated with pigs] to create humans – no joke – and that the Bible is horribly corrupted despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.<ref>[http://bracebarber.com/atheisms-evidential-bankruptcy/ Atheist Beliefs and Absence of Evidence]</ref>}}
=== William Lane Craig on attempts to define the word atheism ===
[[Image:Billcraig_czvx.jpg|thumb|150px|[[William Lane Craig]] ]]
''See also:'' [[Definition of atheism|Atheist attempts to change the definition of atheism]]
William Lane Craig declared:
{{cquote|There’s a history behind this. Certain atheists in the mid-twentieth century were promoting the so-called “presumption of atheism.” At face value, this would appear to be the claim that in the absence of evidence for the existence of God, we should presume that God does not exist. Atheism is a sort of default position, and the theist bears a special burden of proof with regard to his belief that God exists....
But when you look more closely at how protagonists of the presumption of atheism used the term “atheist,” you discover that they were defining the word in a non-standard way, synonymous with “non-theist." So understood the term would encompass agnostics and traditional atheists, along with those who think the question meaningless (verificationists)...
Such a re-definition of the word “atheist” trivializes the claim of the presumption of atheism, for on this definition, atheism ceases to [[Atheist worldview|be a view]]. It is merely a psychological state which is shared by people who hold various views or no view at all. On this re-definition, even babies, who hold no opinion at all on the matter, count as atheists! In fact, our cat Muff counts as an atheist on this definition, since she has (to my knowledge) no belief in God.
One would still require justification in order to know either that God exists or that He does not exist, which is the question we’re really interested in.
So why, you might wonder, would atheists be anxious to so trivialize their position? Here I agree with you that a [[Atheism and deception|deceptive game]] is being played by many atheists. If atheism is taken to be a view, namely the view that there is no God, then atheists must shoulder their share of the burden of proof to support this view.<ref name="Definition of atheism">[http://www.reasonablefaith.org/definition-of-atheism Definition of atheism] by William Lane Craig</ref>}}
== See also ==
== See also ==