Christian Apologetics by Norman L. Geisler

Author:Norman L. Geisler [Geisler, Norman L.]
Language: eng
Format: epub, mobi
Tags: Apologetics, Christian Ministry, Christian Theology, Evangelism, Religion
ISBN: 9781441245816
Google: QbRPdxQme1MC
Amazon: 0801048540
Barnesnoble: 0801048540
Publisher: Baker Books
Published: 2013-05-15T00:00:00+00:00

An Evaluation of Atheism

Some Contributions of Atheism

Atheists have made significant contributions in two areas toward building a consistent worldview. First, they have helped to eliminate some contradictory concepts of God. Second, they have provided a corrective for some misconceptions of God and his relation to the world.

The Criticism of the Principle of Sufficient Reason Is Correct. Atheists have been correct in pointing out that the principle of sufficient reason—that everything needs a cause or explanation—leads to an infinite regress and not to God.[535] If everything needs a cause, then so does God, and so on infinitely. If the principle is all-encompassing, then one may not special-plead that God is the one exception to it. Why make God the exception? Why not just start with the world as a whole and say that the universe does not need a cause? Sufficient reason does not lead to an infinite God but to an infinite regress.

Not All Conceptions about God Are Impossible. Atheists are correct in pointing out the fallacy of understanding omnipotence as the ability to do anything. Even God cannot do what is logically contradictory or what is actually impossible. It is logically contradictory for God to make square circles, and it is actually impossible for God to sin. A God who could cease being God or cease being good would not be the theistic God. There are many things impossible for a theistic God. He cannot change his nature; he cannot will contradictory things; he cannot be overpowered by a creature; he cannot achieve certain ends without certain means (e.g., he cannot be worshiped unless he creates beings who are free). Atheists are certainly correct in placing some logical restrictions on the notion of omnipotence. God can do only what is actually possible to do; the contradictory is not possible for even an omnipotent God.

Atheists have pointed out numerous other flaws of theistic conceptions. There cannot be a time before time; God cannot be properly understood in terms of finite, anthropomorphic imagery; a totally static God cannot be dynamically related to the changing world; this is not the best of all possible worlds (there are evils and injustices in it); and so on.

Critique of Atheism as a Worldview

None of the above arguments or contributions of atheism really destroys theism, for most of them turn out to be helpful refinements of theism; the rest are invalid criticisms. It remains for us to do two things here: we must show the invalidity in the arguments for atheism, and we must show the impossibility or at least untenability of the atheistic position.

The Invalidity in the Arguments for Atheism. Each argument for atheism is invalid. It is either based on a misconception or else overlooks some possibility that would avoid atheism. We will treat each of the above arguments for atheism in the order presented.

1. Causality Does Not Lead to an Impossible, Self-Caused Being. The principle of existential causality does not lead to a contradictory, self-caused Being. The principle of sufficient reason, by demanding that everything needs a cause, does lead to such a Being.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.