Let’s look at Morality next.
This is philosophical but what is our basis of right and wrong. There has to be a basis. If no basis or standard, then no right and wrong.
There are many forms of the moral argument but they all go something like this;
If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.
Objective moral values and duties do exist.
Therefore, God Exists
That’s it. This is a typical logical argument but is it valid.
Listen to this video from Reasonable Faith (5 min Video)
There are many objections to this argument. Here are just a couple notable ones.
Sam Harris is an Atheist American philosopher. One of the group called the The New Atheists or TNAs. He has a philosophy degree from Stanford and a PhD in neuroscience from UCLA. He wrote the book, “The Science of Values: The Moral Landscape”. In it Harris said, “facts that can be scientifically understood: regarding positive and negative social emotions, retributive impulses, the effects of specific laws and social institutions on human relationships, the neurophysiology of happiness and suffering, etc.”
“human well-being entirely depends on events in the world and on states of the human brain. Consequently, there must be scientific truths known about it”
So Sam Harris thinks that all of our “apparent morals are explained by what is best for human flourishing.” What’s the problem with this idea?
Who decides what human flourishing looks like?
What if Hitler decides. Hitler claimed he was trying to help human flourishing with the rise of the master race by exterminating millions of people he thought were impeding human flourishing. Or
What about Stalin. Stalin killed approximately 6 million of his own people in an effort to help human flourishing.
But what about Mother Theresa. She is just as flawed as all of us.
Only one is good enough to be the standard for human flourishing. Jesus.
Another of famous atheist who objects to the moral argument is Richard Dawkins. He wrote in his book the God Delusion. “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, no evil, no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.”
How do we deal with these kinds of issues
Listen to how William Lane Craig addresses Richard Dawkin’s objections. (Video 3 Min)
William Lane Craig clearly explains why people are so desperate to ignore the obvious, but they try to use logical fallacies to avoid having to accept what they don’t like. God
Richard Dawkins is so adamant God does not exist and we have no basis for right and wrong. Yet he has written lots of books which complain about various things. Especially the dangers of religion. Christian religion. Yet, if he actually believed his worldview there would be no reason or basis to complain about anything let alone try to convince others your opinion is the right one. Dawkins is a moralist despite what he writes. He actually proves there must be a basis for morality, which leads back to the feet of Jesus.
C.S. Lewis wrote, “conscience reveals to us a moral law whose source cannot be found in the natural world, thus pointing to a supernatural Lawgiver”
No matter how people try, they cannot find a basis for morality by science or any other social construct. Any concept of right or wrong leads us to there must be a God.
Blaise Pascal wrote this, “Vanity of science. Knowledge of physical science will not console me for ignorance of morality in time of affliction, but knowledge of morality will always console me for ignorance of physical science.”
Pascal means that despite what scientists try to tell us. Science is not very comforting when you have a bad day. If I don’t know right from wrong, bad things will happen regardless of whether I understand the intricacies of science and technology. It is much better to understand morality than all the knowledge of science. Remember I’m a scientist.
What did we see today as Evidence for God.
The Cosmological argument or the beginning evidence. Since there was a beginning or Big Bang, it requires a “Big Banger”. The uncaused cause. Or the unmoved mover as Aristotle said it. It must be outside of the closed system or outside the box which is our universe.
- The Big Banger must be immaterial, timeless and spaceless.
- It must be extremely powerful. To bring everything into existence from nothing is pretty powerful. And last time I checked nothing wasn’t very powerful, it was nothing.
The moral argument. What is the basis for right and wrong.
- The only source has to be an absolutely morally perfect being.
- And don’t miss this to be the standard of right and wrong, that standard must be personal. This is an incredibly good description of the God of Christianity without using a single Bible verse.
and the oldie but still good, The Being Evidence for those of you that like Philosophy. Ontological Argument
And of course, Truth, which we talked about last time
the figurative fingerprint of God is all over every aspect of Creation. Everything points to not only the existence of God but to the a very a particular God. The God of Christianity.
Next time we will talk about the design argument at every level of creation and it we have some time we may touch on a couple of these others
We have a little time.
Let’s sing a closing song. 10,000 Reasons by Matt Redman.
So many reasons to believe God and I’m no aware of any good reasons not too.
Don’t forget if you do have questions you would like discussed email me at questions@punla.org.
Let’s close and pray
Thank you and God’s Blessing my friends.
This is the end of How to Defend your Faith Session 4: Evidence for God
