Thursday, August 21, 2008

Does God Exist?

A good question to consider indeed. One argument for the existence of God that I find especially powerful is the so called "Moral Argument." Here it is.

  1. If God does not exist, objective moral values & duties do not exist.

  2. Objective moral values & duties do exist.

  3. Therefore, God exists.

Now this is a good argument because 3 follows necessarily if premises 1 & 2 are true; thus producing a sound argument.

Premise 2 seems intuitively obvious to most people. Hitler was objectively wrong. Torturing babies for fun is objectively wrong. Human trafficking is objectively wrong. 'Objective' simply means that it is true regardless of whether anyone else thinks so or agrees etc. It is a fact of our world. Honestly if someone denies premise 2, they don't need an argument, they need to get help.

It seems to me the issue is premise 1. Is God necessary to objectively ground morality? We will explore that in another post.

Until then, listen to a debate on this issue - Is God Necessary for Morality?

To see the argument in book form, check out Reasonable Faith by William Lane Craig.

Monday, August 11, 2008

At least 5 things science can't explain

In a debate between Peter Atkins (a Darwinist) and William Lane Craig (a Christian), there was an interesting exchange on the limit or limitlessness of science. Atkins says there weren't any. Craig pointed out the following 5 areas that science cannot give a scientific explanation of:

1. mathematics and logic (science can't prove them because science presupposes them),
2. metaphysical truths (such as, there are minds that exist other than my own),
3. ethical judgments (you can't prove by science that the Nazi's were evil, because morality is not subject to the scientific method),
4. aesthetic judgments (the beautiful, like the good, cannot be scientifically proven), and , ironically
5. science itself (the belief that the scientific method discovers truth can't be proven by the scientific method itself)

Science is helpful; but we should not expect it to answer everything and it certainly hasn't proven that God doesn't exist contrary to many claims being made. If you found this kind of insight helpful, you would benefit from I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Does Science Have Blindspots?

I came across an interesting podcast today by Dr. Cornelius G. Hunter on this question. Listen Here.

*Dr. Hunter is an engineer and biophysicist. He received his doctorate in biophysics and computational biology from the University of Illinois. Hunter has authored three books related to science, theology, and philosophy: his most recent book, Science’s Blind Spot: The Unseen Religion of Scientific Naturalism; Darwin’s God: Evolution and the Problem of Evil; and Darwin’s Proof: The Triumph of Religion over Science. All three of his books can be purchased through

Monday, August 4, 2008

Does Science Have the Answer for Every Question?

Alex Rosenberg is a Philosopher of Science at Duke. He offers a helpful observation:

“If the direction in which science carries philosophy is a one-way street towards physicalism, determinism, atheism, and perhaps even nihilism, then the intellectual obligation of those who wrestle with philosophical questions would be unavoidable. We must understand the substantive claims of physical science…and we must understand the strengths and limitations of science as a source of answers to these questions.”

Science is far as it goes. But it is not omni-sufficient to answer all of life's ultimate questions (not least of which the nagging issue of what science itself is and what counts as science and what does not).