Frank Turek answers Eddie Tabash’s question: “My mother was a survivor of the holocaust. She lived a terrible life. And she was offered the gospel and she rejected it. Is she in Hell right now?”

_____________

I touched on this same subject with a signer of Humanist Manifesto 1, 2, and 3 and I posted that earlier. 

Frank Turek vs David Silverman – The Reality Debate

April 25, 2013

Moderator: If God is all-powerful why does he not remove evil, if he is not all-powerful why call him God?

Mr. Turek: He is all-powerful and he hasn’t removed evil yet, but he will. Actually he won’t remove it, he’ll quarantine it. That’s exactly what Hell is. In Hell you’ll have free will. You know I get the question all the time “Will God send me to Hell because I don’t believe in Jesus?” The answer is “No, you don’t go to Hell because you don’t believe in Jesus, you go to Hell because you’ve sinned.” It would be like saying you died because you didn’t go to the doctor. No, you didn’t die because you didn’t go to the doctor. You died because you had a disease. Now if you had gone to the doctor perhaps you could have prevented death, just like if you go to the Great Physician you can prevent eternal death. And so the point here is is that people go to Hell because they’ve chosen to sin and they have not chosen the pardon. But God will not force you into Heaven against your will. If you don’t want God now you will not want him in eternity. So people who go to Hell, which is separation from God, go there justly. If God exists and if there is an afterlife, there are only two possibly places. You’re either going to be with God or without God in the afterlife. In fact, I… just give me two minutes here because this happened in a debate I had with Eddie Tabash–who by the way is a good guy objectively.

Mr. Silverman: I’ll tell him you said that.

Mr. Turek: He said this to me, during our debate. He said “My mother was a survivor of the holocaust. She lived a terrible life. And she was offered the gospel and she rejected it. Is she in Hell right now?” Whoa. I said, “Eddie, I don’t know where your mother is now. I don’t know if she had a death bed conversion, but if she didn’t accept Christ then God is too loving to force her into his presence against her will.” And this is the question I asked the audience that night: Ladies, have you ever had a man pursue you who you didn’t want to date? Ladies, have you ever had that happen? Some of you are going “yeah and he’s sitting right next to me right now. He won’t leave me alone!” Well suppose he continues to pursue, continues to pursue, and you finally get to the point where you say, “I like you, but only as a friend.” Every man has heard this. Ladies why don’t you just stick the knife in and turn it. Well, suppose he continues to pursue, continues to pursue, and he finally says, “Look, I’m going to force you to love me.” Can he do that? No, love by definition must be freely given. If he truly loved you, what would he do? He would leave you alone. And that’s exactly…

Mr. Silverman: Well if God really loves you he’ll send you to Hell because you don’t believe the right way, you don’t think the right way.

Mr. Turek: Let me just finish the thought. That’s what God does. He sends us “cards,” “letters,” and “flowers”–he sends some kind of crazy Christian from New Jersey to talk to you and he says…

Mr. Silverman: Why doesn’t God remove evil from society was the question?

Mr. Turek: Hold on, I’m not quite done yet.

Moderator: He [Mr. Turek] said he [God] will [remove evil from society].

Mr. Silverman: He will?

Mr. Turek: Yes he will.

Moderator: Eventually he will, that’s what he said.

Mr. Silverman: Eventually?

Mr. Turek: Yes.

Mr. Silverman: That’s your answer?

Mr. Turek: Yes, of course.

Mr. Silverman: It will happen sooner or later. Why is he waiting?

Mr. Turek: Because he is redeeming people as we go.

Mr. Silverman: Why does he need to do that?

Mr. Turek: Because there are people out there that need to be redeemed, including you. He’s waiting, he’s patient.

____________

Related posts:

The Glaring Weakness of the Humanist Manifestos (Plus video of Ricky Gervais on the lack of an afterlife)

April 14, 2014 – 2:24 pm

  Ricky Gervais act outs atheist bewilderment and frustration in the face of nice Christian nonsense Carl Sagan – Parents Carl Sagan said that he missed his parents terribly and he wished he could believe in the afterlife but he was not convinced because of the lack of proof. I had the opportunity to correspond […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , | Edit |Comments (0)

Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology

July 26, 2014 – 11:54 am

_______________ Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology Tags: antony flew, bart ehrman, evangelical, evil, karl barth, stanley fish 0 Antony Flew There are two articles in the NY Times this morning that make me sick. They are both about Antony Flew (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04Flew-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin), the famous British philosopher who seems to have […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

Answering my Humanist Friends concerning the Problem of Evil (Plus Atheist Ricky Gervais says he embraces the Golden Rule)

April 14, 2014 – 2:05 pm

Ricky Gervais: Christians Haven’t Got A Monopoly On Good Josh Wilson – Before The Morning (Official Music Video) One of my favorite songs  is called “Before the Morning” and it is by  the Christian singer Josh Wilson. The lyrics start out: “Why do you have to feel the things that hurt you? If there’s a God […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Current Events, Francis Schaeffer, Woody Allen | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Richard Dawkins, Alister McGrath, D. James Kennedy. Francis Schaeffer and Ravi Zacharias discuss the problem of evil!!!

March 20, 2014 – 4:26 pm

______ 115. Filosofia: Richard Dawkins Vs Alister McGrath Published on Dec 21, 2012 Neste vídeo: Richard Dawkins Vs Alister McGrath Curta nossa página no facebook: https://www.facebook.com/multiversosp…; ____________________ At the 40 minute mark Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath discuss Deena Burnett’s assertion that her husband Tom was an instrument carrying out God’s will in stopping the plane […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 38 Woody Allen and Albert Camus “There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide” (Feature on artist Hamish Fulton Photographer )

December 18, 2014 – 4:30 am

____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Francis Schaeffer below pictured on cover of World Magazine:   __________________ Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged | Edit | Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 560) Roger Pilon: Graduates, Your Ambition Is the Problem

April 14, 2014 – 12:41 am

Open letter to President Obama (Part 560) (Emailed to White House on 6-10-13.) President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

Debating Kermit Gosnell Trial, Abortion and infanticide with Ark Times Bloggers Part 9 Owen Strachan: “The Gosnell murders reveal the evil heart that beats in the chest of our society”

February 26, 2014 – 1:24 am

___________ Surgeon General of the United States In office January 21, 1982 – October 1, 1989 President Ronald Reagan George H. W. Bush Francis Schaeffer Founder of the L’Abri community Born Francis August Schaeffer January 30, 1912 Died May 15, 1984 (aged 72) I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Evil, Evangelism and Ecclesiastes by Melvin Tinker

October 31, 2013 – 1:52 am

I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this series on Ecclesiastes I hope to show how secular humanist man can not hope to find a lasting meaning to his life in a closed system without bringing God back […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)
December 23, 2014 – 2:59 pm Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

‘Cosmos’ vs. ‘Master Designer’ BY JOHN STONESTREET, CHRISTIAN POST GUEST COLUMNIST March 18, 2014|1:11 pm

________________

‘Cosmos’ vs. ‘Master Designer’

BY JOHN STONESTREET, CHRISTIAN POST GUEST COLUMNIST
March 18, 2014|1:11 pm

“The cosmos is all that is, all there ever was, and all there ever will be.” Those opening words from Carl Sagan’s 1980s TV series, “The Cosmos” are a succinct statement of what’s become the driving philosophy behind much of modern science and science education: materialism.

The debate over Darwinian evolution, as heated as that gets, is only one part of a larger worldview conflict-one fought between those who look at the natural world and say, “This is designed,” and those who look at it and conclude, “This happened by itself.”

The Bible makes it clear which side we Christians are on. The psalmist tells us “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky proclaims his handiwork” (Ps 19). The Apostle Paul tells us in Romans 1 that the creation reveals even the power and moral nature of God, leaving everyone who’s ever looked up at the sky on a starry night “without excuse.”

The cosmos, Scripture tells us, isn’t all that is. In fact, it shouts to everyone who has ears to listen that Someone greater and eternal exists. But the question is, Do we have ears to hear it?

There’s a scene in C. S. Lewis’ “The Magician’s Nephew,” from “The Chronicles of Narnia” series, when after singing the world into existence, the Lion Aslan tries to speak with Uncle Andrew, the magician who first brings those from our world into Narnia.

“He has made himself unable to hear my voice,” says Aslan. “If I spoke to him, he would hear only growlings and roarings. Oh Adam’s sons, how cleverly you defend yourself against all that may do you good!”

Well, our Creator still speaks through the cosmos, and the sons of Adam keep defending themselves against His voice.

A new remake of Sagan’s series debuted on Fox earlier this month, and its host, Neil deGrasse Tyson, is making no bones where his allegiance lies in this battle of worldviews.

The first episode features the story of Giordano Bruno, a 16th century Dominican friar who was burned at the stake, according to Tyson for speculating the earth revolved around the sun. Now, I’m not for burning heretics at the stake, but the fact is that he was executed for preaching anti-trinitarian universalism and other heresies.

In the latest episode, Tyson goes further, leveling direct shots at Intelligent Design and praising the power of “mindless evolution.” The eye-which Darwin himself called one of the greatest problems for his theory-is no problem at all, according to Tyson. He claims natural selection could build it, step-by-step, despite staggering evidence to the contrary.

But here’s what really strikes me about the new “Cosmos” series: It’s beautiful. And despite the show’s trying to explain that beauty away as a product of “mindless evolution,” the Creator’s voice still breaks through. That’s why DNA co-discoverer Francis Crick felt compelled to write, “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.”

I don’t envy Tyson and other materialists that task, especially after my interview with Steve Greisen. He’s the producer of a new beautifully made documentary that will help you hear not only God’s voice in nature, but the entire symphony.

The film is called “The Master Designer: The Song,” and it explores the biology and lives of six animals-and how they uniquely reveal foresight and intelligent design.

The two insects alone will blow you away. For example, did you know that bees communicate through smells and give each other GPS coordinates by dancing?-or that crickets told the ancient Chinese when to plant, when to harvest and when cold weather was coming? And wait until you hear the cricket’s song slowed down. Wow!

This entire film reminded me not just how overwhelming the evidence for design is, but that the only right response to it is worship. Uncle Andrew can keep “Cosmos.”

From BreakPoint. Reprinted with the permission of Prison Fellowship Ministries. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced or distributed without the express written permission of Prison Fellowship Ministries. “BreakPoint®” and “Prison Fellowship Ministries®” are registered trademarks of Prison Fellowship

Related posts:

(BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew –

July 26, 2014 – 11:55 am

_____________ Famed atheist sees evidence for God, cites recent discoveries Antony Flew NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew — a prolific author who has argued against the existence of God and the claims of Christianity for […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology

July 26, 2014 – 11:54 am

_______________ Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology Tags: antony flew, bart ehrman, evangelical, evil, karl barth, stanley fish 0 Antony Flew There are two articles in the NY Times this morning that make me sick. They are both about Antony Flew (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04Flew-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin), the famous British philosopher who seems to have […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

My correspondence with George Wald and Antony Flew!!!

May 12, 2014 – 1:14 am

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I know […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew in his book THERE IS A GOD talks about his “notoriety” as an atheist! ( also 7 News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God)

May 9, 2014 – 1:24 am

  7News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God Published on Mar 23, 2014 He’s not shy about sharing his opinion with 5 million social media followers so Ricky Gervais was happy to clear a few things up for us too. __________________________________ Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas ___________ The Bible and Science […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Current Events | Tagged , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD is all about (Ricky Gervais talks about atheim on Piers Morgan Tonight)

May 8, 2014 – 1:07 am

Piers Morgan Tonight : CNN Official Interview: Ricky Gervais says atheism shouldn’t offend Uploaded on Jan 20, 2011 Ricky Gervais tells CNN’s Piers Morgan why he’s an atheist, and why his jokes about God shouldn’t offend believers. The Bible and Science (Part 01) __________________________________ Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD: “How the world’s most […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Roy Abraham Varghese: ANTONY FLEW, LOGICAL POSITIVISM, AND THE REBIRTH OF RATIONAL THEISM (Ricky Gervais video from office)

May 5, 2014 – 1:41 am

Discussion (3 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas David Brent on Guitar – Free Love Freeway – The Office – BBC The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Scientific Evidence) (Henry Schaefer, PhD) Published on Jun 11, 2012 Scientist Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer gives a lecture on the cosmological argument and shows how contemporary science backs […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , ,, , , , | Edit |Comments (0)

ANTONY FLEW’S SIGNIFICANCE IN THE HISTORY OF ATHEISM by Roy Abraham Varghese

May 2, 2014 – 1:38 am

________________ The Bible and Science (Part 01) Making Sense of Faith and Science Uploaded on May 16, 2008 Dr. H. Fritz Schaefer confronts the assertion that one cannot believe in God and be a credible scientist. He explains that the theistic world view of Bacon, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Faraday and Maxwell was instrumental in the […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , |Edit | Comments (0)

From 2005 article Charles Colson says of Antony Flew: “When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with twenty-first-century science!” (Plus Ricky Gervais on Losing Religion)

May 1, 2014 – 12:28 am

_____________ Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist Uploaded on Jul 2, 2009 Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist _____________________ Chuck Colson wrote back in 2005 concerning Antony Flew:  When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , ,, | Edit | Comments (0)

Did Antony Flew include George Wald quote after listening to cassette tape I sent him in late 1990s?

April 30, 2014 – 1:53 am

____________ Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known spokesperson […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Former atheist Antony Flew: “Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formulated, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God!”

April 29, 2014 – 1:02 am

Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010 A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008 Debate – William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens – Does God Exist? Uploaded on Jan 27, 2011 April 4, 2009 – Craig vs. […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

_________________

December 23, 2014 – 2:50 pm Categories: Atheists Confronted | Post a comment

THE INVISIBLE VS. THE CONSTANT GARDENER: PARABLES FOR AND AGAINST ATHEISM

__________

THE INVISIBLE VS. THE CONSTANT GARDENER: PARABLES FOR AND AGAINST ATHEISM

British philosopher of religion Antony Flew (1923-2010), writing as an atheist in 1955, expanded upon a parable designed to show that there is no difference between (God as) an “invisible gardener” and there being “no gardener at all.”

Once upon a time two explorers came upon a clearing in the jungle. In the clearing were growing many flowers and many weeds.

One explorer says, “Some gardener must tend this plot.”

The other disagrees, “There is no gardener.”

So they pitch their tents and set a watch.

No gardener is ever seen.

“But perhaps he is an invisible gardener.”

So they set up a barbed-wire fence. They electrify it. They patrol with bloodhounds. (For they remember how H. G. Well’s The

Invisible Man could be both smelt and touched though he could not be seen.)

But no shrieks ever suggest that some intruder has received a shock. No movements of the wire ever betray an invisible climber. The bloodhounds never give cry.

Yet still the Believer is not convinced. “But there is a gardener, invisible, intangible, insensible, to electric shocks, a gardener who has no scent and makes no sound, a gardener who comes secretly to look after the garden which he loves.”

At last the Skeptic despairs, “But what remains of your original assertion? Just how does what you call an invisible, intangible, eternally elusive gardener differ from an imaginary gardener or even from no gardener at all?”

John Frame counters with a parable of his own:

Once upon a time two explorers came upon a clearing in the jungle.

A man was there, pulling weeds, applying fertilizer, trimming branches. The man turned to the explorers and introduced himself as the royal gardener. One explorer shook his hand and exchanged pleasantries.

The other ignored the gardener and turned away: “There can be no gardener in this part of the jungle,” he said; “this must be some trick.”

They pitch camp. Every day the gardener arrives, tends the plot. Soon the plot is bursting with perfectly arranged blooms.

“He’s only doing it because we’re here—to fool us into thinking this is a royal garden.”

The gardener takes them to a royal palace, introduces the explorers to a score of officials who verify the gardener’s status.

Then the skeptic tries a last resort: “Our senses are deceiving us. There is no gardener, no blooms, no palace, no officials. It’s still a hoax!”

Finally the believer despairs: “But what remains of your original assertion? Just how does this mirage, as you call it, differ from a real gardener?”

—John M. Frame, “God and Biblical Language: Transcendence and Immanence,” God’s Inerrant Word, ed. J. W. Montgomery (Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, 1974), p. 171.

Related posts:

(BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew –

July 26, 2014 – 11:55 am

_____________ Famed atheist sees evidence for God, cites recent discoveries Antony Flew NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew — a prolific author who has argued against the existence of God and the claims of Christianity for […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology

July 26, 2014 – 11:54 am

_______________ Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology Tags: antony flew, bart ehrman, evangelical, evil, karl barth, stanley fish 0 Antony Flew There are two articles in the NY Times this morning that make me sick. They are both about Antony Flew (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04Flew-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin), the famous British philosopher who seems to have […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

My correspondence with George Wald and Antony Flew!!!

May 12, 2014 – 1:14 am

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I know […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew in his book THERE IS A GOD talks about his “notoriety” as an atheist! ( also 7 News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God)

May 9, 2014 – 1:24 am

  7News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God Published on Mar 23, 2014 He’s not shy about sharing his opinion with 5 million social media followers so Ricky Gervais was happy to clear a few things up for us too. __________________________________ Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas ___________ The Bible and Science […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Current Events | Tagged , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD is all about (Ricky Gervais talks about atheim on Piers Morgan Tonight)

May 8, 2014 – 1:07 am

Piers Morgan Tonight : CNN Official Interview: Ricky Gervais says atheism shouldn’t offend Uploaded on Jan 20, 2011 Ricky Gervais tells CNN’s Piers Morgan why he’s an atheist, and why his jokes about God shouldn’t offend believers. The Bible and Science (Part 01) __________________________________ Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD: “How the world’s most […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Roy Abraham Varghese: ANTONY FLEW, LOGICAL POSITIVISM, AND THE REBIRTH OF RATIONAL THEISM (Ricky Gervais video from office)

May 5, 2014 – 1:41 am

Discussion (3 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas David Brent on Guitar – Free Love Freeway – The Office – BBC The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Scientific Evidence) (Henry Schaefer, PhD) Published on Jun 11, 2012 Scientist Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer gives a lecture on the cosmological argument and shows how contemporary science backs […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , ,, , , , | Edit |Comments (0)

ANTONY FLEW’S SIGNIFICANCE IN THE HISTORY OF ATHEISM by Roy Abraham Varghese

May 2, 2014 – 1:38 am

________________ The Bible and Science (Part 01) Making Sense of Faith and Science Uploaded on May 16, 2008 Dr. H. Fritz Schaefer confronts the assertion that one cannot believe in God and be a credible scientist. He explains that the theistic world view of Bacon, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Faraday and Maxwell was instrumental in the […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , |Edit | Comments (0)

From 2005 article Charles Colson says of Antony Flew: “When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with twenty-first-century science!” (Plus Ricky Gervais on Losing Religion)

May 1, 2014 – 12:28 am

_____________ Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist Uploaded on Jul 2, 2009 Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist _____________________ Chuck Colson wrote back in 2005 concerning Antony Flew:  When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , ,, | Edit | Comments (0)

Did Antony Flew include George Wald quote after listening to cassette tape I sent him in late 1990s?

April 30, 2014 – 1:53 am

____________ Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known spokesperson […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Former atheist Antony Flew: “Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formulated, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God!”

April 29, 2014 – 1:02 am

Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010 A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008 Debate – William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens – Does God Exist? Uploaded on Jan 27, 2011 April 4, 2009 – Craig vs. […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)
December 23, 2014 – 2:27 pm Categories: Atheists Confronted | Post a comment

“When Science Points To God” by Dinesh D’Souza | Nov 24, 2008

________________________

When Science Points To God

Dinesh D’Souza | Nov 24, 2008

Dinesh D'Souza
Recommend this article

Contemporary atheism marches behind the banner of science. It is perhaps no surprise that several leading atheists—from biologist Richard Dawkins to cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker to physicist Victor Stenger—are also leading scientists. The central argument of these scientific atheists is that modern science has refuted traditional religious conceptions of a divine creator.

But of late atheism seems to be losing its scientific confidence. One sign of this is the public advertisements that are appearing in billboards from London to Washington DC. Dawkins helped pay for a London campaign to put signs on city buses saying, “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” Humanist groups in America have launched a similar campaign in the nation’s capital. “Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness sake.” And in Colorado atheists are sporting billboards apparently inspired by John Lennon: “Imagine…no religion.”

What is striking about these slogans is the philosophy behind them. There is no claim here that God fails to satisfy some criterion of scientific validation. We hear nothing about how evolution has undermined the traditional “argument from design.” There’s not even a whisper about how science is based on reason while Christianity is based on faith.

Instead, we are given the simple assertion that there is probably no God, followed by the counsel to go ahead and enjoy life. In other words, let’s not let God and his commandments spoil all the fun. “Be good for goodness sake” is true as far as it goes, but it doesn’t go very far. The question remains: what is the source of these standards of goodness that seem to be shared by religious and non-religious people alike? Finally John Lennon knew how to compose a tune but he could hardly be considered a reliable authority on fundamental questions. His “imagine there’s no heaven” sounds visionary but is, from an intellectual point of view, a complete nullity.

If you want to know why atheists seem to have given up the scientific card, the current issue of Discover magazine provides part of the answer. The magazine has an interesting story by Tim Folger which is titled “Science’s Alternative to an Intelligent Creator.” The article begins by noting “an extraordinary fact about the universe: its basic properties are uncannily suited for life.” As physicist Andrei Linde puts it, “We have a lot of really, really strange coincidences, and all of these coincidences are such that they make life possible.”

Too many “coincidences,” however, imply a plot. Folger’s article shows that if the numerical values of the universe, from the speed of light to the strength of gravity, were even slightly different, there would be no universe and no life. Recently scientists have discovered that most of the matter and energy in the universe is made up of so-called “dark” matter and “dark” energy. It turns out that the quantity of dark energy seems precisely calibrated to make possible not only our universe but observers like us who can comprehend that universe.

Even Steven Weinberg, the Nobel laureate in physics and an outspoken atheist, remarks that “this is fine-tuning that seems to be extreme, far beyond what you could imagine just having to accept as a mere accident.” And physicist Freeman Dyson draws the appropriate conclusion from the scientific evidence to date: “The universe in some sense knew we were coming.”

Folger then admits that this line of reasoning makes a number of scientists very uncomfortable. “Physicists don’t like coincidences.” “They like even less the notion that life is somehow central to the universe, and yet recent discoveries are forcing them to confront that very idea.”

There are two hurdles here, one historical and the other methodological. The historical hurdle is that science has for three centuries been showing that man does not occupy a privileged position in the cosmos, and now it seems like he does. The methodological hurdle is what physicist Stephen Hawking once called “the problem of Genesis.” Science is the search for natural explanations for natural phenomena, and what could be more embarrassing than the finding that a supernatural intelligence transcending all natural laws is behind it all?

Consequently many physicists are exploring an alternative possibility: multiple universes. This is summed up as follows: “Our universe may be but one of perhaps infinitely many universes in an inconceivably vast multiverse.” Folger says that “short of invoking a benevolent creator” this is the best that modern science can do. For contemporary physicists, he writes, this “may well be the only viable nonreligious explanation” for our fine-tuned universe.

The appeal of multiple universes—perhaps even an infinity of universes—is that when there are billions and billions of possibilities, then even very unlikely outcomes are going to be realized somewhere. Consequently if there was an infinite number of universes, something like our universe is certain to appear at some point. What at first glance seems like incredible coincidence can be explained as the result of a mathematical inevitability.

The only difficulty, as Folger makes clear, is that there is no empirical evidence for the existence of any universes other than our own. Moreover, there may never be such evidence. That’s because if there are other universes, they will operate according to different laws of physics than the ones in our universe, and consequently they are permanently and inescapably inaccessible to us. The article in Discover concludes on a somber note. While some physicists are hoping the multiverse will produce empirical predictions that can be tested, “for many physicists, however, the multiverse remains a desperate measure ruled out by the impossibility of confirmation.”

No wonder atheists are sporting billboards asking us to “imagine…no religion.” When science, far from disproving God, seems to be pointing with ever-greater precision toward transcendence, imagination and wishful thinking seem all that is left for the atheists to count on.

 

____________________

Related posts:

(BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew –

July 26, 2014 – 11:55 am

_____________ Famed atheist sees evidence for God, cites recent discoveries Antony Flew NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew — a prolific author who has argued against the existence of God and the claims of Christianity for […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology

July 26, 2014 – 11:54 am

_______________ Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology Tags: antony flew, bart ehrman, evangelical, evil, karl barth, stanley fish 0 Antony Flew There are two articles in the NY Times this morning that make me sick. They are both about Antony Flew (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04Flew-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin), the famous British philosopher who seems to have […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

My correspondence with George Wald and Antony Flew!!!

May 12, 2014 – 1:14 am

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I know […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew in his book THERE IS A GOD talks about his “notoriety” as an atheist! ( also 7 News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God)

May 9, 2014 – 1:24 am

  7News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God Published on Mar 23, 2014 He’s not shy about sharing his opinion with 5 million social media followers so Ricky Gervais was happy to clear a few things up for us too. __________________________________ Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas ___________ The Bible and Science […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Current Events | Tagged , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD is all about (Ricky Gervais talks about atheim on Piers Morgan Tonight)

May 8, 2014 – 1:07 am

Piers Morgan Tonight : CNN Official Interview: Ricky Gervais says atheism shouldn’t offend Uploaded on Jan 20, 2011 Ricky Gervais tells CNN’s Piers Morgan why he’s an atheist, and why his jokes about God shouldn’t offend believers. The Bible and Science (Part 01) __________________________________ Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD: “How the world’s most […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Roy Abraham Varghese: ANTONY FLEW, LOGICAL POSITIVISM, AND THE REBIRTH OF RATIONAL THEISM (Ricky Gervais video from office)

May 5, 2014 – 1:41 am

Discussion (3 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas David Brent on Guitar – Free Love Freeway – The Office – BBC The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Scientific Evidence) (Henry Schaefer, PhD) Published on Jun 11, 2012 Scientist Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer gives a lecture on the cosmological argument and shows how contemporary science backs […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , ,, , , , | Edit |Comments (0)

ANTONY FLEW’S SIGNIFICANCE IN THE HISTORY OF ATHEISM by Roy Abraham Varghese

May 2, 2014 – 1:38 am

________________ The Bible and Science (Part 01) Making Sense of Faith and Science Uploaded on May 16, 2008 Dr. H. Fritz Schaefer confronts the assertion that one cannot believe in God and be a credible scientist. He explains that the theistic world view of Bacon, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Faraday and Maxwell was instrumental in the […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , |Edit | Comments (0)

From 2005 article Charles Colson says of Antony Flew: “When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with twenty-first-century science!” (Plus Ricky Gervais on Losing Religion)

May 1, 2014 – 12:28 am

_____________ Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist Uploaded on Jul 2, 2009 Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist _____________________ Chuck Colson wrote back in 2005 concerning Antony Flew:  When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , ,, | Edit | Comments (0)

Did Antony Flew include George Wald quote after listening to cassette tape I sent him in late 1990s?

April 30, 2014 – 1:53 am

____________ Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known spokesperson […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Former atheist Antony Flew: “Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formulated, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God!”

April 29, 2014 – 1:02 am

Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010 A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008 Debate – William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens – Does God Exist? Uploaded on Jan 27, 2011 April 4, 2009 – Craig vs. […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)
December 23, 2014 – 2:08 pm Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

The Folly of Denying God by Hank Hanegraaff

_____________

The Folly of Denying God
Hank Hanegraaff

Beyond a doubt, the most significant question to ever penetrate the human mind is that of the existence of God. More consequences for humanity hinge on the denial or affirmation of God’s existence than any other issue.

Countless numbers of Christian families have sent their children off to schools across America only to see them return as strangers robbed of their faith in God and of the basis for morality and ethics.

Many of these children have attempted to fill the vacuum in their lives through aberrant sex, drugs, and alcohol. Others have sought to fill this void with material success, which can never satisfy the spiritual needs of one created in the image of God.

“Is there really a God?” Though there are a variety of possible responses to this question, there are three traditional responses that predominate in Western society: (1) God does not exist — atheism; (2) we cannot know whether God exists — agnosticism; and (3) a personal God does exist — theism. This article will demonstrate how, in witnessing to an atheist, one can move from atheism to agnosticism, from agnosticism to theism, and from the concept of an impersonal God to the personal God of Scripture.

To begin, atheism involves a logical fallacy known as a universal negative. Simply stated, a person would have to be omniscient and omnipresent to be able to say “there is no God” from his own pool of knowledge. Only someone capable of being in all places at the same time — with a perfect knowledge of all that is in the universe — can make such a statement based on the facts. In other words, a person would have to be God to say there is no God. Hence, the assertion is logically indefensible.

By using arguments like this, you will often find that an atheist quickly converts to agnosticism and is thus making progress rapidly in the right direction.

This leads us to the second possible response: agnosticism. In dealing with an open-minded agnostic, an approach I have found effective is to point out that the universe is an effect which requires a sufficient cause, and the only sufficient cause is God. As Scripture says, “the heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands” (Ps. 19:1).

It is helpful to clarify that there are only four possible explanations for how the universe came to be. The first is that the universe is an illusion. This ultimately reduces to solipsism — the theory that “self” is the only reality, that “I alone exist.” This view is unacceptable in an age of scientific enlightenment. (Even a full-blown solipsist looks both ways before crossing the street.)

The second possibility is that the universe is eternal. This possibility flies in the face of the second law of thermodynamics, which says that everything in the universe is running inexorably downhill from order to disorder, from complexity to chaos. If the universe was eternally old, it would have died a heat-loss death an eternity ago.

The third “possibility” is that the universe emerged from nothing. Little needs to be said about the absurdity of this option. Reason tells us that out of nothing comes nothing. This position militates against the first law of thermodynamics, which says that energy can be neither created nor destroyed; it can only change forms. To say an effect can exist without a cause, one must deny the basis for all scientific investigation and rational thought.

The fourth (and only tenable) possibility is that the universe was created by God. Clearly, theism — the belief in a personal God who is the Creator and Ruler of the universe — is the only viable option on the question of God’s existence. Once this is established, it can be pointed out that only a personal God can account for human personality, thought, and morality. Furthermore, this personal God has manifested Himself in the person of Jesus Christ, who demonstrated His deity through the undeniable fact of the Resurrection. Additionally, God has provided His written Word which can be shown to be divine rather than human in origin.

Although we cannot talk atheists and agnostics into the Kingdom of God, God can use our answers to open their hearts to receive the gospel. Scripture therefore exhorts us to “always be prepared to give to every man an answer” (1 Pet. 3:15).

Related posts:

(BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew –

July 26, 2014 – 11:55 am

_____________ Famed atheist sees evidence for God, cites recent discoveries Antony Flew NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew — a prolific author who has argued against the existence of God and the claims of Christianity for […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology

July 26, 2014 – 11:54 am

_______________ Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology Tags: antony flew, bart ehrman, evangelical, evil, karl barth, stanley fish 0 Antony Flew There are two articles in the NY Times this morning that make me sick. They are both about Antony Flew (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04Flew-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin), the famous British philosopher who seems to have […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

My correspondence with George Wald and Antony Flew!!!

May 12, 2014 – 1:14 am

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I know […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew in his book THERE IS A GOD talks about his “notoriety” as an atheist! ( also 7 News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God)

May 9, 2014 – 1:24 am

  7News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God Published on Mar 23, 2014 He’s not shy about sharing his opinion with 5 million social media followers so Ricky Gervais was happy to clear a few things up for us too. __________________________________ Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas ___________ The Bible and Science […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Current Events | Tagged , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD is all about (Ricky Gervais talks about atheim on Piers Morgan Tonight)

May 8, 2014 – 1:07 am

Piers Morgan Tonight : CNN Official Interview: Ricky Gervais says atheism shouldn’t offend Uploaded on Jan 20, 2011 Ricky Gervais tells CNN’s Piers Morgan why he’s an atheist, and why his jokes about God shouldn’t offend believers. The Bible and Science (Part 01) __________________________________ Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD: “How the world’s most […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Roy Abraham Varghese: ANTONY FLEW, LOGICAL POSITIVISM, AND THE REBIRTH OF RATIONAL THEISM (Ricky Gervais video from office)

May 5, 2014 – 1:41 am

Discussion (3 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas David Brent on Guitar – Free Love Freeway – The Office – BBC The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Scientific Evidence) (Henry Schaefer, PhD) Published on Jun 11, 2012 Scientist Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer gives a lecture on the cosmological argument and shows how contemporary science backs […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , ,, , , , | Edit |Comments (0)

ANTONY FLEW’S SIGNIFICANCE IN THE HISTORY OF ATHEISM by Roy Abraham Varghese

May 2, 2014 – 1:38 am

________________ The Bible and Science (Part 01) Making Sense of Faith and Science Uploaded on May 16, 2008 Dr. H. Fritz Schaefer confronts the assertion that one cannot believe in God and be a credible scientist. He explains that the theistic world view of Bacon, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Faraday and Maxwell was instrumental in the […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , |Edit | Comments (0)

From 2005 article Charles Colson says of Antony Flew: “When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with twenty-first-century science!” (Plus Ricky Gervais on Losing Religion)

May 1, 2014 – 12:28 am

_____________ Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist Uploaded on Jul 2, 2009 Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist _____________________ Chuck Colson wrote back in 2005 concerning Antony Flew:  When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , ,, | Edit | Comments (0)

Did Antony Flew include George Wald quote after listening to cassette tape I sent him in late 1990s?

April 30, 2014 – 1:53 am

____________ Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known spokesperson […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Former atheist Antony Flew: “Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formulated, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God!”

April 29, 2014 – 1:02 am

Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010 A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008 Debate – William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens – Does God Exist? Uploaded on Jan 27, 2011 April 4, 2009 – Craig vs. […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)
December 23, 2014 – 1:59 pm Categories: Atheists Confronted | Post a comment

“Religion for Atheists: A Nonbelievers Guide to the Uses of Religion” Alain de Botton reviewed by Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D. Professor of Philosophy Denver Seminary

______________

Religion for Atheists: A Nonbelievers Guide to the Uses of Religion

  • Alain de Botton
  • Jan 24, 2013
  • Series: Volume 16 – 2013

Alain de Botton Religion for Atheists: A Nonbelievers Guide to the Uses of Religion. New York: Pantheon Books, 2012. Hardback. $26.95. 320 pages. ISBN-10: 0307379108; ISBN-13: 978-0307379108.

ReligionforAtheistsCultural critic and popular atheistic philosopher, Alain de Botton, has a new angle on religion. Instead of denouncing religion as having no objective value (the modus operandi of “the new atheists”), de Botton scavenges for atheist blessings among the institutions, practices, and history of the (philosophically benighted) believers. No, there is no God. That, he thinks, is settled—although he gives no arguments to that effect. But why be so hostile to man’s religiosity—his sense of wonder, mystery, fellow-feeling, and the sacred? After all, a lot of religious things are pretty interesting and even inspiring (although there is no Spirit behind any of it). And even though the cognoscenti have outgrown any religious metaphysics (“God is dead,” as Nietzsche pontificated), there may be cultural and psychological gems mixed into the metaphysical manure of empty concepts such as God, angels, providence, prayer, prophets, miracles, saints, salvation, and final judgment.

This ambitious (or quixotic) endeavor has exposed de Botton some savage criticism from fellow God-bashers. Although he didn’t live long enough to excoriate Religion for Atheists, it is certain that Christopher Hitchens, the author of the vitriolic God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, would have denounced it as sentimental, unreasonable, and finally absurd. The entire new atheist movement distinguishes itself precisely by not tolerating religion (and particularly Christianity, which is routinely treated with enormous scorn) and for wanting to exorcise all things religious from culture. Instead of saying that religion is false, but we have to put up with superstition in a free society, the New Atheists claim that religion is the source of all manner of evil. It must be expunged from any rational society. No pats on the head for religion; rather, bring the hammer.

But de Botton who has several popular books under his belt, including Proust Can Change Your Life, attempts to articulate a kinder, gentler atheism. He even proposes a religious atheism. This is not new. The founder of sociology, August Comte (1798–1857), proposed an atheist “religion of humanity” in the nineteenth century, and de Botton draws some secular inspiration from his fatuous and failed endeavor. Moreover, The Secular Humanist Manifesto I, (1933), spoke of secular humanism as a religious endeavor—sans God, however. In The Secular Humanist Manifesto, II(1973), any positive reference to religion was fumigated. In the famous Torcaso vs. Watkins Supreme Court decision of 1963, “Secular Humanism,” was declared to be a “religion.” Sadly, this ruling was never applied to mandatory state education, which is dominated by this secular humanism in every subject and which will not even allow scientific evidence to be brought against aspects of Darwinism. (On this, see Francis Schaeffer, A Christian Manifesto [Crossway, 1981].)

There is no need to describe much of de Bottons project (as witty as some of it may be; he is British, after all), since it rests on an abject absurdity—or more than one, as we will see. On this, I side with the new atheists (“take no prisoners”), and with their grand and eloquent precursor, Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). Consider this soliloquy from “The Madman” parable in The Gay Science (“gay” is taken in the older sense).

The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. “Whither is God?” he cried; “I will tell you. We have killed him—you and I. All of us are his murderers. But how did we do this? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns? Are we not plunging continually? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there still any up or down? Are we not straying, as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is not night continually closing in on us? Do we not need to light lanterns in the morning? Do we hear nothing as yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we smell nothing as yet of the divine decomposition? Gods, too, decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.

“How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whoever is born after us—for the sake of this deed he will belong to a higher history than all history hitherto.”

Atheism, or philosophical materialism, bequeaths to us a “world without windows” (Peter Berger), a closed system of cause and effect (Francis Schaeffer), which is all reducible to brute natural laws, matter and energy, chance, and a heck of a lot of (meaningless) time. Death is the end of the individual and of the entire cosmos eventually. That is the implacable narrative of naturalism, like it or not.

We cannot “comfort ourselves” by appropriating from religion what only religion can provide: divine revelation, a supernatural kingdom and worldview, providential history, real redemption from a source outside ourselves, and the life everlasting, either in the New Creation or in hell.

One may put the argument against de Bottons’s daft idea formally:

  1. X (religious meaning) requires Y (the truth of religion) for its existence.
  2. Y does not exist.
  3. Therefore: X does not exist.

Or it can be put thus:

  1. If and only if Y, then X.
  2. Not X.
  3. Therefore: not Y.

Or:

  1. If there is no religious truth, there is no religious meaning.
  2. There is no religious truth, since atheism is true.
  3. Therefore, there is no religious meaning.

Or, to put it yet another way for hardheaded atheists who wants to steal from religion what atheism itself can never provide:

  1. The truth of religion is a necessary condition for religious meaning.
  2. Religion is factually false (atheism).
  3. Therefore, there is no religious meaning.
  4. Therefore, all is meaningless (nihilism), whatever pseudo-religious games we play.

(This argument restates the first one given, but with a different form.)

I need not go on with this logical theme, lest I suffer the charge of pedantry. But another absurdity needs a tongue-lashing. While de Botton’s illicit existential booty largely comes from Christianity, he samples and mixes in bits from other religions as well. Thus, Buddhism can teach us about tranquility through meditation, and so on. But the problem mentioned above, with respect to Christianity, arises here as well. One cannot find Buddhist meaning without Buddhist truth. If “The Four Noble Truths” are not true, why meditate? But that is not all. Buddhism and Christianity affirm different and antithetical worldviews at their very core. They both cannot be true, since they disagree on minor things like the existence of the soul, the afterlife, and the ultimate reality (God or Nirvana). So, the absurdities multiply for de Botton who obliviously marches from chapter to chapter cherry- picking likeable aspects of false religions—whose meaning depends on their mutually-exclusive truths. Oh, my! How bad can it get? One must invoke the Apostle here:

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools (Romans 1:21-22).

In looting from the biblical ideal of fellowship, de Bottom imagines an “Agape Restaurant, a secular descendent of the Eucharist and of the tradition of Christian communal dining” (45). But later in the chapter, he invokes the debauched tradition of “the feast of fools,” in which normal social relations are skewed to let off the steam built up through good behavior. This means a lot of debauchery.  Of course, there is nothing like a “feast of fools” in the Bible, but no matter. For de Botton the “feast of fools” turns into a sexual orgy, which is pornographically depicted on page 67. Stunned, I ripped it out and disposed of it immediately after briefly seeing it. So, in the irresponsibly eclectic and illogical mind of Alain de Botton one can equally draw from the practice of Holy Communion and from the unholy pagan bacchanalia, the likes of which the Apostle Paul explicitly condemns.

The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God (Galatians 5:19-21).

But mixing communion with “acts of the flesh” for his atheist religion is quite convenient for de Botton and entirely unjustified by any consistent set of godless principles.

Not only is de Botton’s program for religious atheism absurd on several levels, it also testifies to the paucity of atheism qua atheism to deliver any objective or lasting human meaning based on transcendent truths. As astronomer Carl Sagan asserted without argument in Cosmos in 1980: “The universe is all that is, was, or ever will be.” As such atheism fails a necessary test for the truthfulness of a worldview. This is how I articulated it in Christian Apologetics (InterVarsity, 2011) when discussing the rational tests for a worldview.

Criterion 5a: For a worldview to be a likely candidate for truth, its essential propositions must be existentially viable.

Criterion 5b: If a worldview leads habitually to philosophical hypocrisy, it is rationally disqualified, since this indicates that it does not correspond to reality.

Atheism is not existentially viable (or livable), since we are meaning-seeking beings supposedly lost in a meaningless world. As Francis Schaeffer said in The God Who is There, this would be like a fish developing lungs in a world without an oxygen atmosphere. It is beyond pointless. This reality leads atheists such as de Botton to commit philosophical hypocrisy by vainly trying to purloin ideas from antithetical religious worldviews to give some meaning to an ultimately meaningless world. It melts down to these two logically incompatible propositions:

  1. There is no objective meaning in the world, because there is no God to bestow it.
  2. Religion, while false, gives us objective meaning.

But obviously, if (1) is true, then (2) must be false. One must engage in vicious mystification to try to think otherwise. A logically consistent set of two propositions for the atheist is as follows:

  1. There is no objective meaning in the world, because there is no God to bestow it.
  2. Therefore: all religious practices based on the idea of God’s existence lose their meaning and should be shunned, since God does not exist.

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), perhaps the leading philosophical atheist of the twentieth century, put it unforgettably in his often anthologized essay, “A Free Man’s Worship.”

That man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of Man’s achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins—all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul’s habitation henceforth be safely built.

Russell, who drank the cup of atheism to the dregs, realized his godless fate. The “worship” of which he speaks later in the essay is simply the refusal to engage in the worship of power. It has nothing to do with de Bottom’s hopeless program of ontologically empty activities.

However, the Christian can offer a “religion for atheists” — Christianity itself. But that, of course, requires the abandonment of atheism, the embrace of theism and the Incarnation, and the end of pretending otherwise. Only then, will religious meaning become a reality for the thirsty soul. As Jesus put it at the beginning of his world-changing ministry, “Repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand” (Matthew 4:17).

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D.
Professor of Philosophy
Denver Seminary
January 2013

Comments(0)

____________

Related posts:

(BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew –

July 26, 2014 – 11:55 am

_____________ Famed atheist sees evidence for God, cites recent discoveries Antony Flew NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)–Antony Flew, a legendary British philosopher and atheist, has changed his mind about the existence of God in light of recent scientific evidence.Flew — a prolific author who has argued against the existence of God and the claims of Christianity for […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology

July 26, 2014 – 11:54 am

_______________ Guest Blogger Dan Meyer Writes on Antony Flew and Problem of Evil Posted: November 8, 2007 by Rick Hogaboam in Ethics, Philosophy, Theology Tags: antony flew, bart ehrman, evangelical, evil, karl barth, stanley fish 0 Antony Flew There are two articles in the NY Times this morning that make me sick. They are both about Antony Flew (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04Flew-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin), the famous British philosopher who seems to have […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

My correspondence with George Wald and Antony Flew!!!

May 12, 2014 – 1:14 am

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I know […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew in his book THERE IS A GOD talks about his “notoriety” as an atheist! ( also 7 News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God)

May 9, 2014 – 1:24 am

  7News : Web Extra: Ricky Gervais on God Published on Mar 23, 2014 He’s not shy about sharing his opinion with 5 million social media followers so Ricky Gervais was happy to clear a few things up for us too. __________________________________ Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas ___________ The Bible and Science […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Current Events | Tagged , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD is all about (Ricky Gervais talks about atheim on Piers Morgan Tonight)

May 8, 2014 – 1:07 am

Piers Morgan Tonight : CNN Official Interview: Ricky Gervais says atheism shouldn’t offend Uploaded on Jan 20, 2011 Ricky Gervais tells CNN’s Piers Morgan why he’s an atheist, and why his jokes about God shouldn’t offend believers. The Bible and Science (Part 01) __________________________________ Antony Flew tells what the book THERE IS A GOD: “How the world’s most […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Roy Abraham Varghese: ANTONY FLEW, LOGICAL POSITIVISM, AND THE REBIRTH OF RATIONAL THEISM (Ricky Gervais video from office)

May 5, 2014 – 1:41 am

Discussion (3 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas David Brent on Guitar – Free Love Freeway – The Office – BBC The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Scientific Evidence) (Henry Schaefer, PhD) Published on Jun 11, 2012 Scientist Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer gives a lecture on the cosmological argument and shows how contemporary science backs […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , , ,, , , , | Edit |Comments (0)

ANTONY FLEW’S SIGNIFICANCE IN THE HISTORY OF ATHEISM by Roy Abraham Varghese

May 2, 2014 – 1:38 am

________________ The Bible and Science (Part 01) Making Sense of Faith and Science Uploaded on May 16, 2008 Dr. H. Fritz Schaefer confronts the assertion that one cannot believe in God and be a credible scientist. He explains that the theistic world view of Bacon, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Faraday and Maxwell was instrumental in the […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , |Edit | Comments (0)

From 2005 article Charles Colson says of Antony Flew: “When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with twenty-first-century science!” (Plus Ricky Gervais on Losing Religion)

May 1, 2014 – 12:28 am

_____________ Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist Uploaded on Jul 2, 2009 Ricky Gervais – Losing Religion and Becoming An Atheist _____________________ Chuck Colson wrote back in 2005 concerning Antony Flew:  When he reads the first chapter of Genesis, Flew says he’s impressed that a book written thousands of years ago harmonizes with […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , ,, | Edit | Comments (0)

Did Antony Flew include George Wald quote after listening to cassette tape I sent him in late 1990s?

April 30, 2014 – 1:53 am

____________ Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known spokesperson […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged , | Edit | Comments (0)

Former atheist Antony Flew: “Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formulated, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God!”

April 29, 2014 – 1:02 am

Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010 A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008 Debate – William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens – Does God Exist? Uploaded on Jan 27, 2011 April 4, 2009 – Craig vs. […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)
December 23, 2014 – 12:56 pm Categories: Atheists Confronted, Francis Schaeffer | Post a comment

Consciousness and the Existence of God by J.P. Moreland

________

Books that J.P. has authored, edited, or contributed articles.
Consciousness and the Existence of God: A Theistic Argument
Order from Amazon.com

Consciousness and the Existence of God
by J.P. Moreland

  • Title: Consciousness and the Existence of God: A Theistic Argument
  • Publish Date: 11/22/2009
  • Discount: 10%
  • Publisher: Routlege
  • Audience:
  • Kingdom Categories:
Description:

Consciousness and the Existence of God is a useful, single volume that reflects a synthesis of my perspective on the “argument from consciousness.” Some of my earlier publications reflect work on this argument (e.g., in my 1987 intermediate text, Scaling the Secular City), and additional works either summarize it even more tightly (e.g., my chapter in the 2009 Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology) or develops it in further ways (e.g., my 2009 book, The Recalcitrant Imago Dei)

Two trends in philosophy and theology provide the rationale for this book. First, there has been an explosion of literature in philosophy of religion, philosophical theology, classic theology and religious studies. An important part of this explosion is a renewed vigor and excellence in discussions of the arguments for and against the existence of God. In the last three decades, philosophers trained in analytic philosophy have applied their craft to these discussions with the result that there is now a rich dialog taking place.  Second, there is an interesting dialectic occurring in philosophy of mind. A large number, perhaps the majority, of philosophical naturalists (e.g., David Papineau, Frank Jackson, the Churchlands) hold that naturalism does not sit well with irreducible sui generis mental properties/events and advocate a (cottage industry of) strong form(s) of physicalism. However, there is a growing dissatisfaction with the various versions of strong physicalism, and more and more are breaking ranks by venturing into emergent property dualism (e.g., the evolution of Jaegwon Kim’s thought in the last ten years), at least for phenomenal consciousness.

Curiously, these two trends—the explosion in philosophy of religion and the growing importance of clarifying the relationship between naturalism and the resurgence of emergent property dualism—are taking place largely in a sort of bibliographical isolation from each other; scholars are not interacting with these trends as they could. However, Consciousness and the Existence of God seeks to remedy this isolation. At the time of publication, to my knowledge, it was the only book-length attempt written from a theistic perspective to examine the issue of whether or not sui generis consciousness provides a significant defeater for naturalism and substantial evidence for theism. I believe that this book has the potential to open new territory of consideration, especially as more philosophers realize the relationship between finite consciousness and broader worldview considerations, including the interface between the two trends mentioned above. I hope to introduce philosophers of religion to issues in philosophy of mind with which they often do not address and to introduce philosophers of mind, especially naturalists, with the way topics in philosophy of religion inform their area of reflection. In that regard, some of this project might be an endeavor in “metaphilosophy”; trying to make sense of broader philosophical factors and consequences across different fields and areas.

The book’s central claim is that the existence of finite, irreducible consciousness (or its regular, lawlike correlation with physical states) provides evidence (with a strength I characterize) for the existence of God. I call this the Argument from Consciousness (hereafter, AC). I provide some argumentation for irreducible consciousness, but the focus of the book is the conditional “If irreducible consciousness exists (or is regularly correlated with physical states), then this provides evidence (to a degree specified in chapter two) for God’s existence.”

In chapter one, I show how naturalist epistemic considerations along with a naturalist etiological account of how things have come-to-be provide constraints on a naturalist ontology. The constraints, along with other considerations, imply that positive naturalism (a form of naturalism that claims superiority over alternative worldviews due to its explanatory power) should be strong naturalism (all particulars, properties, relations and laws are physical). Weak naturalism accepts various forms of emergent entities that I classify. The upshot of chapter one is that the inner logic of naturalism places a severe burden of proof on those naturalists who would embrace (certain kinds of) emergent properties. In chapter two I present three versions of AC, assess the strength of the evidence it supplies for theism, and clarify and defend its major premises. I conclude that the presence of AC as a rival to naturalism places an additional burden of proof on those who opt for weak naturalism.

In chapters three through seven, I analyze and criticize the top representative of rival approaches to explaining the origin of consciousness. Chapters three through five focus on naturalist approaches:  John Searle and contingent correlation (chapter three), Timothy O’Connor and emergent necessitation (chapter four), Colin McGinn and mysterian “naturalism” (chapter five). In chapters six and seven, I consider views that I claim are not plausibly taken to be versions of (positive) naturalism:  David Skrbina and panpsychism (chapter six) and Philip Clayton and pluralistic emergentist monism (chapter seven). I conclude that these approaches fail for various reasons and, in light of the considerations in chapters one and two, AC stands as the most plausible view currently available.

In light of this fact, a naturalist has an additional reason for opting for strong naturalism. Accordingly, he or she may claim that while possible, scientific evidence has made substance or emergent property dualism untenable. While it is not my main purpose to defend property dualism, I do lay out evidence for it in chapter one. Part of that evidence consists in providing some new insights into the Knowledge Argument and into issues surrounding intentionality that favor (at least) property dualism. In chapter eight, I argue that science provides virtually no evidence at all for strong physicalism and, in fact, the central issues at the core of the mind/body problem are philosophical and not scientific. Given that science does not justify physicalism and given that most physicalists claim that science is the main justification for the view, it is important to ask why physicalism is so popular among contemporary philosophers of mind. In chapter nine, I argue that the fear of God—what McGinn calls “the cosmic authority problem”—is the main reason for physicalism’s popularity. I turn this claim into an argument against physicalism and show that it is the relationship between dualism (substance or property) and theism, especially as formulated in AC, which accounts for physicalism’s hegemony.

As a result of the work by serious philosophical theists and Christian theists writing in consciousness studies, I would like to see non-theists be more explicit about how the problem of consciousness’s origin and existence motivates their physicalism, and I would like to see more interaction with the argument from consciousness.  I would also like to see theists develop the argument more fully and employ it more in their work.

I dedicated Consciousness and the Existence of God to my colleague and dear friend, William Lane Craig, because of his love for God, his fidelity to truth and his dedication to the defense of the knowledge of God for all peoples.

Related posts:

“Schaeffer Sunday” Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on the “Absurdity of Life without God!!” Part 11(Conversation between Evolutionist Michael Ruse and William Lane Craig)

December 7, 2014 – 1:19 am

The Fruits of Atheism (Part 1) Uploaded on Apr 10, 2009 Examining the Creation/Evolution Controversy in Light of Reason and Revelation The Bible and Science (Part 03) There Is A Difference Between Absolute and Objective Moral Values Published on Dec 6, 2012 For more resources visit:http://www.reasonablefaith.org The Bethinking National Apologetics Day Conference: “Countering the New […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Atheists Confronted, Biblical Archaeology,Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Saturday, February 22, 2014 Debate Review: Sean Carroll vs. William Lane Craig: God and Cosmology!

November 13, 2014 – 7:18 am

__________ “God and Cosmology” William Lane Craig and Sean Carroll – 2014 Greer Heard Forum Published on Mar 3, 2014 For more resources visit:http://www.reasonablefaith.org On Friday, February 21st, 2014, philosopher and theologian, Dr William Lane Craig, was invited by the Greer Heard Forum to debate Dr Sean Carroll, an atheist theoretical physicist. The topic […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)

“God and Cosmology: The Existence of God in Light of Contemporary Cosmology” William Lane Craig vs. Sean Carroll (Videos and Transcript)

November 11, 2014 – 7:11 am

__________ “God and Cosmology” William Lane Craig and Sean Carroll – 2014 Greer Heard Forum Published on Mar 3, 2014 For more resources visit:http://www.reasonablefaith.org On Friday, February 21st, 2014, philosopher and theologian, Dr William Lane Craig, was invited by the Greer Heard Forum to debate Dr Sean Carroll, an atheist theoretical physicist. The topic […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)

“God and Cosmology: The Existence of God in Light of Contemporary Cosmology” William Lane Craig vs. Sean Carroll (Opening Speeches with Transcript and Video)

November 10, 2014 – 7:04 am

__________ “God and Cosmology” William Lane Craig and Sean Carroll – 2014 Greer Heard Forum Published on Mar 3, 2014 For more resources visit:http://www.reasonablefaith.org On Friday, February 21st, 2014, philosopher and theologian, Dr William Lane Craig, was invited by the Greer Heard Forum to debate Dr Sean Carroll, an atheist theoretical physicist. The topic […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

The Absurdity of Life without God by William Lane Craig

June 2, 2014 – 12:29 am

____________ The Absurdity of Life without God by William Lane Craig The Scientific Age Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 _______________ Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason ___________________________________________ I love the works of Francis Schaeffer and I have been on the internet reading several blogs that talk about Schaeffer’s work and the work below […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew, Thomas B. Warren,Wallace Matson, Richard Dawkins, William B. Provine, Francis Beckwith, and William Lane Craig on the Moral Argument for the Existence of God!

April 23, 2014 – 1:55 am

Making Sense of Faith and Science Uploaded on May 16, 2008 Dr. H. Fritz Schaefer confronts the assertion that one cannot believe in God and be a credible scientist. He explains that the theistic world view of Bacon, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Faraday and Maxwell was instrumental in the rise of modern science itself. Presented as […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

“Schaeffer Sunday” The Practical Impossibility of Atheism by William Lane Craig (includes film DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE)

March 9, 2014 – 1:57 am

The Practical Impossibility of Atheism By William Lane Craig Guest Contributor 0 Comment(s) CBN.com – Excerpted with permission from On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision About the only solution the atheist can offer is that we face the absurdity of life and live bravely. The British philosopher Bertrand Russell, for example, believed […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Wintery Knight and William Lane Craig: “Can atheists distinguish between right and wrong actions?”

October 24, 2013 – 12:07 am

_______________ Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason ____________________ Episode 8: The Age Of Fragmentation Published on Jul 24, 2012 Dr. Schaeffer’s sweeping epic on the rise and decline of Western thought and Culture _______________________ I love the works of Francis Schaeffer and I have been on the internet reading several blogs that talk […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events, Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on the “Absurdity of Life without God!!” Part 11(Conversation between Evolutionist Michael Ruse and William Lane Craig)

September 11, 2013 – 1:18 am

The Fruits of Atheism (Part 1) Uploaded on Apr 10, 2009 Examining the Creation/Evolution Controversy in Light of Reason and Revelation The Bible and Science (Part 03) There Is A Difference Between Absolute and Objective Moral Values Published on Dec 6, 2012 For more resources visit:http://www.reasonablefaith.org The Bethinking National Apologetics Day Conference: “Countering the New […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Biblical Archaeology, Francis Schaeffer |Edit | Comments (0)

Moral Argument For God – Part 1 – William Lane Craig

June 25, 2013 – 12:27 pm

Moral Argument For God – Part 1 – William Lane Craig Uploaded on Apr 3, 2011http://drcraigvideos.blogspot.com – Dr. William Lane Craig teaches on the topic of morality and God. Is morality objective or subjective? Is it absolute or relative to the individual? MORAL ARGUMENT 1. IF GOD DOES NOT EXIST, OBJECTIVE MORAL VALUES DO […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

The Absurdity of Life without God by William Lane Craig

June 19, 2013 – 12:47 am

The Absurdity of Life without God by William Lane Craig The Scientific Age Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 _______________ Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason ___________________________________________ I love the works of Francis Schaeffer and I have been on the internet reading several blogs that talk about Schaeffer’s work and the work below by […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Christopher Hitchens and William Lane Craig debate (part 4)

December 28, 2011 – 12:40 pm

DEBATE William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens Does God Exist 11 Below are some reactions of evangelical leaders to the news of Christopher Hitchens’ death: DEBATE William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens Does God Exist 12     DEBATE William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens Does God Exist 13 The Christian Post > World|Fri, Dec. […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Christopher Hitchens and William Lane Craig debate (part 3)

December 27, 2011 – 12:37 pm

DEBATE William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens Does God Exist 07 Below are some reactions of evangelical leaders to the news of Christopher Hitchens’ death:   Christian leaders react to Hitchens’ death Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | by Michael Foust   DEBATE William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens Does God Exist 08 Author and […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Christopher Hitchens debate with William Lane Craig (part 2)

December 26, 2011 – 12:31 pm

DEBATE William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens Does God Exist 04 Below are some reactions of evangelical leaders to the news of Christopher Hitchens’ death: Christian leaders react to Hitchens’ death Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | by Michael Foust DEBATE William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens Does God Exist 05 Author and speaker Christopher […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Comments on Christopher Hitchens and William Lane Craig debate

December 26, 2011 – 12:26 pm

Here are some comments on the Hitchens and Craig debate I got from the Stand to Reason Blog: April 06, 2009 Hitchens Made Two Major Admissions – No Three There were two things Christopher Hitchens said in the debate Saturday night at Biola.  First, he admitted at one point that he’d be very disappointed if […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Christopher Hitchens debate with William Lane Craig (part 1)

December 26, 2011 – 12:19 pm

DEBATE William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens Does God Exist 01 Below are some reactions of evangelical leaders to the news of Christopher Hitchens’ death: Christian leaders react to Hitchens’ death Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | by Michael Foust Author and speaker Christopher Hitchens, a leader of an aggressive form of atheism that eventually […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Wintery Knight’s reflections on Carroll v. Craig Debate

November 14, 2014 – 7:26 am

__________ “God and Cosmology” William Lane Craig and Sean Carroll – 2014 Greer Heard Forum Published on Mar 3, 2014 For more resources visit:http://www.reasonablefaith.org On Friday, February 21st, 2014, philosopher and theologian, Dr William Lane Craig, was invited by the Greer Heard Forum to debate Dr Sean Carroll, an atheist theoretical physicist. The topic […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)

Examples of Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer Confronting Modern Culture With The Bible! Part 2 Evolutionist William Provine

October 27, 2014 – 7:44 am

_______________________________ Adrian Rogers pictured below: __________________ I sent William Provine a letter several months ago with a CD of the following message by Adrian Rogers and in the letter were several arguments from Schaeffer. Adrian Rogers – How you can be certain the Bible is the word of God Today I am sending out another […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , ,, , , | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 21 William B. Provine (Feature on artist Andrea Zittel)

June 12, 2014 – 2:52 pm

_______ Dr Provine is a very honest believer in Darwinism. He rightly draws the right conclusions about the implications of Darwinism. I have attacked optimistic humanism many times in the past and it seems that he has confirmed all I have said about it. Notice the film clip below and the quote that Francis Schaeffer […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged , | Edit| Comments (0)

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S BRILLIANT RENOWNED ACADEMICS!! (PART 5 Saul Perlmutter, Nobel Laureate, Astrophysicist at the University of California )

December 23, 2014 – 1:01 am

_________________ On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said: …Please click on this URLhttp://vimeo.com/26991975 and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them. Harry Kroto __________________________ There are 3 videos in this series and they have […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)
December 23, 2014 – 12:36 pm Categories: Atheists Confronted | Post a comment

Norman Geisler on Francis Schaeffer’s view that humans must be willing to live consistently with what they believe!!!!

Few contemporary Christians, however, have given more thoughtful and philosophical backing to a kind of pragmatic test for truth than has Francis Schaeffer. In a chapter called, “How do we know it is true?” Schaeffer outlines his test for truth as follows: “The theory must be non-contradictory and must give an answer to the phenomenon in question,” and, second, “we must be able to live consistently with our theory ” (emphasis added). Schaeffer admits that a non-Christian view such as materialism may  fit the second “for man simply cannot live as though he were a machine.” The Christian view of the universe, however, “can be lived with, both in life and in scholarly pursuits.” And “it should be added in conclusion that the Christian, after he is a Christian, has years of experimental evidence to add to all the above reasons.” Thus crucial to the falsity of the non-Christian view is its unlivability and experiential verification.

Schaeffer illustrates his point by what he thinks of as a kind of broad experiential teleological argument. He notes that no one can really live a chance philosophy of pure materialism. Schaeffer references Jackson but ultimately exhausted his method, and died at an early age. The American musician John Cage, who flipped coins to determine notes, took up hunting mushrooms as a hobby. He confessed, “I became aware that if I approached mushrooms in the spirit of my chance operations, I would die shortly. So I decided that I would not approach them in this way!” Pollock is dead because he tried in vain to live his chance philosophy. Cage lived on because he was inconsistent with his random view of the universe. Both approved that dysteleology (anti-design) is unvilvable. Therefore, to live consistently, one must believe that this universe is a designed and personal one (i.e., atheistic one). Of course, Schaeffer gives much more elaboration and sophistication to his position, but the broad pragmatic emphasis is there nonetheless. Only the Christian view is consistent and livable, and all non-Christian views are in the final analysis unlivable. Experience confirms this to be true (page 110 of CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS by Norman Geisler). 

Related posts:

Examples of Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer Confronting Modern Culture With The Bible! Part 2 Evolutionist William Provine

October 27, 2014 – 7:44 am

_______________________________ Adrian Rogers pictured below: __________________ I sent William Provine a letter several months ago with a CD of the following message by Adrian Rogers and in the letter were several arguments from Schaeffer. Adrian Rogers – How you can be certain the Bible is the word of God Today I am sending out another […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , ,, , , | Edit | Comments (0)

WHO DID FRANCIS SCHAEFFER INFLUENCE?

October 27, 2014 – 4:34 am

WHO DID FRANCIS SCHAEFFER INFLUENCE? Here are some key people listed below: Theologians Harold O. J. Brown, David Wells, Os Guinness, Timothy George, John Warwick Montgomery, John Piper, Norm Geisler, Wayne Grudem and L. Russ Bush, founders of ministries including James Dobson, D. James Kennedy, Jerry Falwell, R. C. Sproul, Chuck Colson and Tim and […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

How Francis Schaeffer Influenced Me by Daniel R. Heimbach

October 21, 2014 – 3:09 pm

How Francis Schaeffer Influenced Me by Daniel R. Heimbach I can honestly say that, besides my parents and Jesus Christ, no individual has influenced me more than Francis A. Schaeffer, a pastor-theologian most consider to have been among the greatest evangelical voices, and perhaps even the most influential, of the twentieth century. But Francis Schaeffer […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

C. S. Lewis, Francis Schaeffer . . . and Larry Norman February 26, 2008

October 16, 2014 – 12:40 am

____________ Christian Rock Pioneer Larry Norman’s Songs Part 1 I posted a lot in the past about my favorite Christian musicians such as Keith Green (I enjoyed reading Green’s monthly publications too), and 2nd Chapter of Acts and others. Today I wanted to talk about one of Larry Norman’s songs. David Rogers introduced me to […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

ESCAPE FROM REASON, FRANCIS A. SCHAEFFER Review by Young Calvinist Blog

October 14, 2014 – 12:32 am

____________ How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason) #02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer 10 Worldview and Truth Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100 Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer on Rob Bell by Carson T. Clark on April 7, 2011

October 10, 2014 – 12:25 am

___________ Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970’s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 28 Woody Allen and “The Mannishness of Man” (Feature on artist Ryan Gander)

October 9, 2014 – 5:10 am

_________________ woody allen on life ____________________   How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason) #02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer The clip above is from episode 9 THE AGE OF PERSONAL PEACE AND AFFLUENCE 10 Worldview and Truth In above clip Schaeffer quotes Paul’s speech in […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Woody Allen | Tagged | Edit |Comments (0)
December 23, 2014 – 11:53 am Categories: Francis Schaeffer | Post a comment

Is Christianity Unique When Compared With Other Religions, And Does It Matter? By John Ankerberg

_____________

Good article:

Fast Facts on Defending Your Faith
<< Return to book overview
By John Ankerberg

The difficulty is that all religions claim to be the truth (even scientific ones), and as a result, a lot of people are confused. Of course, not all religions can be fully true since they all clearly contradict one another. If all religions aren’t true, either all are false or one is true. No other option is available. Any religion claiming that it alone is fully true and producing solid evidence to that effect is worth serious consideration for that reason alone. But only biblical Christianity does this. In fact, it may be said that from an evidential perspective, Christianity is actually superior to other worldviews, secular or religious, because it makes testable and verifiable claims.

Let us begin by examining some of the unique facts about Christianity that set it apart from other religions.

7. Is Christianity Unique When Compared With Other Religions, And Does It Matter?

One way to illustrate the uniqueness of Christianity is to evaluate different concepts of origins. In philosophical apologetics this approach was taken by the late Christian philosopher Dr. Francis Schaeffer in He Is There and He Is Not Silent. How do we attempt to explain our existence? Though there are hundreds of religions and philosophies, when they are reduced to their most common elements, they all share relatively few concepts of origins or explanations of reality:

1. The finite personal—creation by the gods

2. The infinite personal—creation by a God such as the Muslim Allah

3. The infinite impersonal monistic—e.g., creation (self-emanation) by the Brahman of Hinduism

4. The materialistic impersonal—creation by chance (evolution)

5 .The infinite personal triune—creation by the God of the Bible.

Dr. Schaeffer’s argument is essentially this: Only by beginning with the Christian view of origins can one adequately explain the universe as we know it in terms of metaphysics, epistemology, and morality. (Metaphysics deals with the nature of existence, truth, and knowledge; epistemology, with how we know; and morality, with how we should live.)

The problem with options one through four is that they cannot adequately explain and/or logically support these vital philosophical necessities. For example, in option one, the finite personal origin, the existence of mythical and bickering, capricious, and copulating finite gods (whether of the ancient Greeks and Romans or the modern Hindus and Buddhists) can’t explain the nature of existence because they aren’t big enough to create the world, let alone provide us with the infinite reference point we need in order to have absolute truth or to logically justify meaning in life. The preeminent atheist philosopher we discussed earlier, Jean Paul Sartre, was correct in stating that man required an infinite reference point in order for life to have any meaning. Since Sartre argued there was no such reference point, he stated, “Man is absurd, but he must grimly act as if he were not,” and “Man is a useless passion.”40 On the other hand, the infinite personal triune God of the Bible is big enough to create the universe and big enough to provide man with an infinite reference point that gives his personal existence meaning. Amoral gods cannot provide any logical basis for moral living. But the God of the Bible, who is infinitely righteous, holy, and immutable, can provide such a basis.

The problem with option two, the infinite personal origin, is that such a God seems ultimately dependent upon his creation in order to express the attributes of his own nature and personality. In other words, for all eternity prior to creation, this God would have been alone with himself. With whom does He communicate? Whom does He love? (In part, this may explain why the absolute transcendence and “otherness” of the distant Muslim deity, Allah, is stressed so heavily in Islam and why Allah is not truly a God of love.)41 It would appear that such a God is “forced” to create and is subsequently dependent upon his creation for expressing the attributes of his own personality—and is, therefore, not truly an independent or free divine Being. The concept of a God who is dependent on something else offers an inadequate conception of God. The Christian view of origins solves this problem because the triune God (as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) has no need to create in order to express His attributes of personality. The members of the Godhead communicate together and love one another for all eternity and are never dependent upon their creation for anything.

The problem with option three, the infinite, impersonal, monistic (“all is one”) origin, is that it portrays a God who is infinite but impersonal, and therefore it gives no basis for explaining the origin of personality or any logical reason for personhood to have meaning. This explains why, in both Hinduism and Buddhism, the personality is seen as an “enemy” and is finally destroyed by absorption into Brahman or Nirvana. Not only the material creation but human existence, body and personality, are either an illusion as in Hinduism (maya), or so empty and impermanent as in Buddhism (sunyata), that they are ultimately meaningless. In the end, man himself is a hindrance to spiritual enlightenment and must be “destroyed” to find so-called “liberation.” As Dr. Frits Staal comments in “Indian Concepts of the Body,” “Whatever the alleged differences between Hindu and Buddhist doctrines, one conclusion follows from the preceding analysis. No features of the individual personality survive death in either state.”42 But is an impersonal “immortality” truly meaningful when it extinguishes our personal existence forever? Is it even desirable? As Sri Lankan Ajith Fernando, who has spoken to hundreds of Buddhists and Hindus, illustrates, “When I asked a girl who converted from Buddhism to Christianity through our ministry what attracted her to Christianity, the first thing she told me was, ‘I did not want Nirvana.’ The prospect of having all her desires snuffed out after a long and dreary climb [toward “liberation”] was not attractive to her.”43

In addition, monistic philosophies provide no explanation for the diversity within creation. If “God is one,” and the only reality, then diversity—all creation—is by definition part of the illusion of duality. That includes all morality, all human hopes and aspirations, and everything else that matters. In the end, despite having an infinite reference point, we are left with only a destructive nihilistic outlook on life. As Charles Manson noted, “If all is one, what is bad?” Indeed, Eastern Gurus frequently emphasize, often quite offensively, that life is unreal, meaningless, and finally worthless, which is why it must be denied and “transcended.”44

The concept of an infinite personal triune God addresses these issues as well. Because God is personal, human personality has genuine and eternal significance. The only kind of eternity that has any meaning, or gives this life any meaning, is an eternity of personal immortality. And because Christianity involves a philosophy of religious dualism, God is the creator of a real creation. The creation is not simply the illusory emanation of an impersonal divine substance. As a result, there is no need to face the very destructive individual and public consequences of nihilism.

Option number four, the materialistic impersonal origin, has similar problems to option three—it is finally nihilistic, stripping our existence of any meaning. Ultimate reality is again impersonal, although not a divine substance. Ultimate reality is dead matter. There is no God, period. Where does anyone find any dignity or meaning when our own self-portrait is the cold atoms of deep space? In the end, in the words of philosopher Bertrand Russell, there is only “unyielding despair.” After a single, probably difficult, life, we die forever. Although such a fate is infinitely more merciful than the endless reincarnations and final dissolutions of Hinduism and Buddhism, it is still far too nihilistic and despairing for most people to live out practically. As Leslie Paul observed, in this view, “All life is no more than a match struck in the dark and blown out again. The final result is to deprive it completely of meaning.”45

Contrast the darkness of nihilistic theory with the unique doctrines of Christianity. Consider for example the Christian tenet of salvation.

If we break down the doctrine of salvation into its component parts,46 we discover teachings that are found nowhere else in the world. How do we account for one religion that is unique theologically—not to mention evidentially, philosophically, and experientially—when all the other religions of the world teach nothing new? The common themes of other religions include salvation by works, philosophically compromised morality, polytheism, and occultism. Even Islam’s monotheism was not unique. So how do we account for the development of completely unique teachings such as the Trinity, salvation entirely by grace, the doctrine of depravity and others, when they are still a mystery? If there was never a logical impetus for their initial development, how do we explain them apart from divine revelation?

Consider the doctrine of grace. Martin Luther, the great church reformer, once observed there are finally only two religions in the world: the religion of works and the religion of grace. Only biblical Christianity is a religion of grace because only biblical Christianity is a revelation from God.

All other religions we know of teach salvation by meritorious works. Christianity is the only religion that teaches salvation solely by grace through faith alone. (A few others claim it, but either the claim is invalid or the doctrine is not held in a Christian sense.) This simple fact makes Christianity stand entirely apart from other religions. It also necessitates an answer to the question, why, out of the thousands of religions throughout history teaching salvation by works, is there only one religion teaching salvation by grace alone? Apart from divine revelation, how do we logically explain the origin of one religion that teaches something no other religion has ever taught? In other words, how did mankind acquire a religion of pure grace with salvation as a free gift when the human heart unyieldingly tends toward self-justifying works and self-earned salvation?

Again, the only satisfactory answer is divine revelation. This is exactly what the Bible claims. As the Apostle Paul emphasized: “I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ” (Galatians 1:11-12). The gospel of Christianity is not something people made up because people never would have made it up; it goes against the grain of self-justification too sharply. The one true God personally revealed the one true way of salvation in the Bible. Obviously, He didn’t reveal it in the scriptures of other religions because they contradict the Bible’s most basic teachings, and God does not contradict Himself, nor is He a God of confusion (Titus 1:2; 1 Corinthians 14:33 NASB).

In sum, observers of religion and critics of Christianity must clarify why there is one religion of grace amidst universal religions of works. It seems the only explanation is that the one true God who exists is a God of grace (Ephesians 1:7; 2:6-9), and therefore, we find a single religion of grace among all that oppose it. Again, the same is true for the doctrine of the Trinity—no other religion, past or present, has such a doctrine of God, nor is such a doctrine likely to have been invented. The fact it is only found in Christianity makes the point.

In conclusion, the fact that Christianity more logically and adequately explains our existence than does any other religion, and that its theological teachings are unique, argue in part for biblical Christianity being the true religion.

_____________

December 23, 2014 – 11:31 am Categories: Francis Schaeffer | Post a comment

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S BRILLIANT RENOWNED ACADEMICS!! (PART 5 Saul Perlmutter, Nobel Laureate, Astrophysicist at the University of California, “IS THERE A PURPOSE THAT IS WRITTEN IN THE UNIVERSE?” )

_________________

On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said:

…Please click on this URL http://vimeo.com/26991975

and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them.

Harry Kroto

__________________________

There are 3 videos in this series and they have statements by 150 academics and scientists and I hope to respond to all of them. Saul Perlmutter is a Nobel Laureate and a Astrophysicist at the University of California, Berkeley and his comments can be found on the 2nd video and the 91st clip in this series. Below the videos you will find his words.

50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 1)

Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 2)

A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)

_______________

 

I grew up at Bellevue Baptist Church under the leadership of our pastor Adrian Rogers and I read many books by the Evangelical Philosopher Francis Schaeffer and have had the opportunity to contact many of the evolutionists or humanistic academics that they have mentioned in their works. Many of these scholars have taken the time to respond back to me in the last 20 years and some of the names  included are  Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), George Wald (1906-1997), Carl Sagan (1934-1996),  Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-),  Brian Charlesworth (1945-),  Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Matt Cartmill (1943-) , Milton Fingerman (1928-), John J. Shea (1969-), , Michael A. Crawford (1938-), Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010),  Warren Allen Smith (1921-), Bette Chambers (1930-),  Gordon Stein (1941-1996) , Milton Friedman (1912-2006), John Hospers (1918-2011), Michael Martin (1932-).Harry Kroto (1939-), Marty E. Martin (1928-), Richard Rubenstein (1924-), James Terry McCollum (1936-), Edward O. WIlson (1929-), Lewis Wolpert (1929), Gerald Holton (1922-),  and  Ray T. Cragun (1976-).

Saul Perlmutter: “There are so many places we could go with that same information that I am not sure it nails the case of is there a purpose that is written in the universe.” 

Saul Perlmutter
Professor of Physics, UC Berkeley
Senior Scientist, LBNL

 

 

Without God in the picture there is no lasting meaning to our lives and no lasting purpose either. Words like HOPE disappear in a purely materialistic point of view such as Saul Perlmutter and his atheist friends believe.  The comic Doug Stanhope’s life demonstrates in a logical way the conclusions that atheists should have according their own views concerning the issue of purpose and hope in the world and that conclusion is NIHILISM.

Doug Stanhope on John Stossel

Uploaded on Oct 1, 2011

No description available.

______________________

I have so much respect for the hard work that goes into stand up comedy because I have a son named Hunter who has been involved with a local comedy club and even presented several full length shows himself. He is always using  just original material from his own life and that involves the constant study of life itself. The absurdities inside life are always being carefully examined. Today I am writing because I want to take a close look at the comedy of an atheist comic and breakdown his nihilistic views on life.

Since I have lived and worked in Little Rock many years, I used to run into Bill Clinton quite a lot in downtown Little Rock. It was quite remarkable to me when he chose to emphasize that the small town of  Hope was his home town even though he had only lived there 3 or 4 years. Of course, he did so because of the power of the word “HOPE.”  I wanted to talk to you about three men and the subject of nihilism: Comedian DOUG STANHOPE, Bass player DAVE HOPE of the 1970’s rock band Kansas and King Solomon of Israel who wrote Richard Dawkins’ favorite book of the Bible which is Ecclesiastes. There is a thread of nihilism that can be compared in these three men’s stories, and nihilism is the opposite of HOPE.

Ten Sacred Cows Destroyed By Doug Stanhope

dougstanhope

From sex to religion, nothing’s off-topic for the fearless comedian. Posted December 12th, 2012, 1:12 PM by

Last year, on Louis C.K.’s breakout hit series “Louie,” Doug Stanhope played Eddie, an old friend and peer of Louie’s who hadn’t found any success in comedy, nor any happiness in life. Sharing Louie’s low tolerance for bull$#!@, Eddie confided in him that he was just passing through town on his way to Boston, where he would do his final show before killing himself. Every argument Louie tries to muster to convince him otherwise is quickly and brutally shot down, and eventually, he has to just acquiesce to Eddie’s intentions and bid him farewell. With a strong performance from both men, they destroyed the common wisdom that suicide should never be a viable option.

The more viscerally affecting part of that episode is that Eddie doesn’t seem all that far removed from Stanhope himself, aside from the quality of his comedy. Stanhope’s stage persona is a nihilistic man who has to blind himself on alcohol and drugs to enjoy any small part of the bleak, unending hellscape of existence, but as he often says, he’s funnier when he’s drunk, which means he’s not blinding himself at all.

________________________________________________

Obviously the atheist comedian DOUG STANHOPE  has already arrived at the nihilistic conclusion that many other atheists have reached in the past.
The late Christian philosopher Francis Schaeffer sums up where the secular worldview has brought modern man:

So some humanists act as if they have a great advantage over Christians. They act as if the advance of science and technology and a better understanding of history (through such concepts as the evolutionary theory) have all made the idea of God and Creation quite ridiculous.
This superior attitude, however, is strange because one of the most striking developments in the last half-century is the growth of a profound pessimism among both the well-educated and less-educated people. The thinkers in our society have been admitting for a long time that they have no final answers at all.
Take Woody Allen, for example. Most people know his as a comedian, but he has thought through where mankind stands after the “religious answers” have been abandoned. In an article in Esquire (May 1977), he says that man is left with:
… alienation, loneliness [and] emptiness verging on madness…. The fundamental thing behind all motivation and all activity is the constant struggle against annihilation and against death. It’s absolutely stupefying in its terror, and it renders anyone’s accomplishments meaningless. As Camus wrote, it’s not only that he (the individual) dies, or that man (as a whole) dies, but that you struggle to do a work of art that will last and then you realize that the universe itself is not going to exist after a period of time. Until those issues are resolved within each person – religiously or psychologically or existentially – the social and political issues will never be resolved, except in a slapdash way.
Allen sums up his view in his film Annie Hall with these words: “Life is divided into the horrible and the miserable.”
Many would like to dismiss this sort of statement as coming from one who is merely a pessimist by temperament, one who sees life without the benefit of a sense of humor. Woody Allen does not allow us that luxury. He speaks as a human being who has simply looked life in the face and has the courage to say what he sees. If there is no personal God, nothing beyond what our eyes can see and our hands can touch, then Woody Allen is right: life is both meaningless and terrifying. As the famous artist Paul Gauguin wrote on his last painting shortly before he tried to commit suicide: “Whence come we? What are we? Whither do we go?” The answers are nowhere, nothing, and nowhere. The humanist H. J. Blackham has expressed this with a dramatic illustration:

On humanist assumptions, life leads to nothing, and every pretense that it does not is a deceit.79

One does not have to be highly educated to understand this. It follows directly from the starting point of the humanists’ position, namely, that everything is just matter. That is, that which has existed forever and ever is only some form of matter or energy, and everything in our world now is this and only this in a more or less complex form.

__________________
To sum up Schaeffer is saying, “If man has been kicked up out of that which is only impersonal by chance , then those things that make him man-hope of purpose and significance, love, motions of morality and rationality, beauty and verbal communication-are ultimately unfulfillable and thus meaningless.” (Francis Schaeffer in THE GOD WHO IS THERE)
HAS COMEDY PROVIDED DOUG STANHOPE ANY ANSWERS? 3000 years ago Solomon pursued five “L” words in his search for the meaning of life and probing the area of LAUGHTER was one of his first places to start. In Ecclesiastes 2:2 he starts this quest but he concludes it is not productive to be laughing the whole time and not considering the serious issues of life. Then Solomon also asserted the nihilistic statement in Ecclesiastes 2:17: “So I hated life, because the work that is done under the sun was grievous to me. All of it is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.”

In the Book of Ecclesiastes what are all of the 6 “L” words that Solomon looked into? He looked into  learning (1:16-18), laughter, ladies, luxuries,  and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20). IRONICALLY, DOUG STANHOPE HAS MADE ALL FIVE OF THESE BUTTS OF HIS NIHILISTIC JOKES!!!

Schaeffer noted that Solomon took a look at the meaning of life on the basis of human life standing alone between birth and death “under the sun.” This phrase UNDER THE SUN appears over and over in Ecclesiastes. The Christian Scholar Ravi Zacharias noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term UNDER THE SUN — What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system and you are left with only this world of Time plus Chance plus matter.” This puts him in the same place that DOUG STANHOPE finds himself. 

If you are an atheist then you have a naturalistic materialistic worldview, and this short book of Ecclesiastes should interest you because the wisest man who ever lived in the position of King of Israel came to THREE CONCLUSIONS that will affect you.

FIRST, chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13)

These two verses below  take the 3 elements mentioned in a naturalistic materialistic worldview (time, chance and matter) and so that is all the unbeliever can find “under the sun” without God in the picture. You will notice that these are the three elements that evolutionists point to also.

Ecclesiastes 9:11-12 is following: I have seen something else under the sun: The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all. Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times that fall unexpectedly upon them.

SECOND, Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)

THIRD, Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1, 8:15)

Ecclesiastes 4:1-2: “Next I turned my attention to all the outrageous violence that takes place on this planet—the tears of the victims, no one to comfort them; the iron grip of oppressors, no one to rescue the victims from them.” Ecclesiastes 8:14; “ Here’s something that happens all the time and makes no sense at all: Good people get what’s coming to the wicked, and bad people get what’s coming to the good. I tell you, this makes no sense. It’s smoke.”

Solomon had all the resources in the world and he found himself searching for meaning in life and trying to come up with answers concerning the afterlife. However, it seems every door he tries to open is locked. Today men try to find satisfaction in learning, liquor, ladies, luxuries, laughter, and labor and that is exactly what Solomon tried to do too.  None of those were able to “fill the God-sized vacuum in his heart” (quote from famous mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal). You have to wait to the last chapter in Ecclesiastes to find what Solomon’s final conclusion is.

In 1978 I heard the song “Dust in the Wind” by Kansas when it rose to #6 on the charts. That song told me that Kerry Livgren the writer of that song and a member of Kansas had come to the same conclusion that Solomon had. I remember mentioning to my friends at church that we may soon see some members of Kansas become Christians because their search for the meaning of life had obviously come up empty even though they had risen from being an unknown band to the top of the music business and had all the wealth and fame that came with that. Furthermore, Solomon realized death comes to everyone and there must be something more.

Livgren wrote:

“All we do, crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see, Dust in the Wind, All we are is dust in the wind, Don’t hang on, Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky, It slips away, And all your money won’t another minute buy.”

Take a minute and compare Kerry Livgren’s words to that of the late British humanist H.J. Blackham:

“On humanist assumptions, life leads to nothing, and every pretense that it does not is a deceit. If there is a bridge over a gorge which spans only half the distance and ends in mid-air, and if the bridge is crowded with human beings pressing on, one after the other they fall into the abyss. The bridge leads nowhere, and those who are pressing forward to cross it are going nowhere….It does not matter where they think they are going, what preparations for the journey they may have made, how much they may be enjoying it all. The objection merely points out objectively that such a situation is a model of futility“( H. J. Blackham, et al., Objections to Humanism (Riverside, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1967).

_____________________________________

Both Kerry Livgren and the bass player DAVE HOPE of Kansas became Christians eventually. Kerry Livgren first tried Eastern Religions and DAVE HOPE had to come out of a heavy drug addiction. I was shocked and elated to see their personal testimony on The 700 Club in 1981 and that same  interview can be seen on youtube today. Livgren lives in Topeka, Kansas today where he teaches “Diggers,” a Sunday school class at Topeka Bible Church. DAVE HOPE is the head of Worship, Evangelism and Outreach at Immanuel Anglican Church in Destin, Florida. IT IS TRULY IRONIC THAT TWO MEN WITH THE WORD “HOPE” IN THEIR NAMES HAVE SUCH DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO THE 3 PROBLEMS THAT MAN MUST FACE IN ECCLESIASTES.

DOUG STANHOPE believes  three things. FIRST, death is the end and SECOND, chance and time are the only guiding forces in this life.  FINALLY, power reigns in this life and the scales are never balanced. In contrast, DAVE HOPE believes death is not the end and the Christian can  face death and also confront the world knowing that it is not determined by chance and time alone and finally there is a judge who will balance the scales.

Solomon’s experiment was a search for meaning to life “under the sun.” Then in last few words in the Book of Ecclesiastes he looks above the sun and brings God back into the picture: “The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: Fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person. For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil.”

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted.

 

Today I have demonstrated that atheists should agree with the comics Doug Stanhope and Woody Allen that nihilism should be embraced by atheists or they should consider the fact that God does exist and that will change everything!!!!

_______________________________________________________

Is the Bible historically accurate? Here are some of the posts I have done in the past on the subject: 1. The Babylonian Chronicle, of Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem, 2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism), 4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites, 6.Shishak Smiting His Captives, 7. Moabite Stone, 8. Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, 9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets. 10. Cyrus Cylinder, 11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E., 12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription, 13. The Pilate Inscription, 14. Caiaphas Ossuary, 14 B Pontius Pilate Part 2, 14c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology., 

You can hear DAVE HOPE and Kerry Livgren’s stories from this youtube link:

(part 1 ten minutes)

(part 2 ten minutes)

Kansas – Dust In The Wind

Uploaded on Nov 7, 2009

Music video by Kansas performing Dust In The Wind. (c) 2004 Sony Music Entertainment Inc.

 Related posts:

Nihilist Kerry Livgren wrote the song DUST IN THE WIND then came to Christ & here is his story

July 26, 2014 – 1:28 pm

Nihilist Kerry Livgren wrote the song DUST IN THE WIND then came to Christ & here is his story Kerry Livgren’s testimony and Proto-Kaw at Schoal Creek Church KC 11/06 __ I am glad when atheists like the Twitter user going under the name “GodFreeWorld” comes to the point where they embrace nihilism because they […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

A GOOD FIRST STEP:Like Solomon in Ecclesiastes the person on Twitter using the name “God Free World” embraces NIHILISM without God in the picture!

July 26, 2014 – 11:38 am

I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this post on Ecclesiastes I hope to show how secular humanist man can not hope to find a lasting meaning to his life in a closed system without bringing God back […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

How Richard Dawkins’ favorite book of the Bible (Ecclesiastes) and it’s message of Nihilism can be seen in the lives of Comedian Doug Stanhope, Dave Hope of Kansas and King Solomon!

May 29, 2014 – 6:06 am

_____ Doug Stanhope on John Stossel Uploaded on Oct 1, 2011 No description available. ______________________ I have so much respect for the hard work that goes into stand up comedy because I have a son named Hunter who has been involved with a local comedy club and even presented several full length shows himself. He is […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Steve Jobs, Death, Woody Allen, Ecclesiastes and the band Coldplay

November 4, 2013 – 1:00 am

_________________________ (If you want to check out other posts I have done about about Steve Jobs:Some say Steve Jobs was an atheist , Steve Jobs and Adoption , What is the eternal impact of Steve Jobs’ life? ,Steve Jobs versus President Obama: Who created more jobs? ,Steve Jobs’ view of death and what the Bible has to say about it ,8 things you might not know about […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on the “Absurdity of Life without God!!” Part 17 (Kerry Livgren of rock band Kansas wrote the song “Carry On Wayward Son” in his journey to finding peace)

October 23, 2013 – 1:25 am

The Bible and Science (Part 05) Why Can’t Morals Be Grounded In Society? Published on Aug 31, 2012 Dr William Lane Craig was invited by the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) Christian Union, London to give a lecture titled “Can we be good without God?” In this video Dr Craig answers a question about […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Atheists Confronted, Biblical Archaeology,Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on the “Absurdity of Life without God!!” Part 12 (Kerry Livgren’s song “Dust in the Wind” and what it meant)

September 18, 2013 – 2:24 pm

The Fruits of Atheism (Part 2) Uploaded on Apr 10, 2009 Examining the Creation/Evolution Controversy in Light of Reason and Revelation The Bible and Science (Part 04) Eastwooding Richard Dawkins’ Moral Argument Objections Published on Oct 20, 2012 For more information and resources visit:http://www.reasonablefaith.org On September 29th, 2012, William Lane Craig participated in the Contending […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Atheists Confronted, Biblical Archaeology,Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

The Humanist takes on Solomon and the Book of Ecclesiastes (includes poem by humanist Frank S. Robinson)

May 20, 2013 – 1:13 pm

Ecclesiastes 8-10 | Still Searching After All These Years Published on Oct 9, 2012 Calvary Chapel Spring Valley | Sunday Evening | October 7, 2012 | Pastor Derek Neider _______________________ Ecclesiastes 11-12 | Solomon Finds His Way Published on Oct 30, 2012 Calvary Chapel Spring Valley | Sunday Evening | October 28, 2012 | Pastor Derek Neider […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Dave Hope and Kerry Livgren of Kansas: Their story of deliverance from drugs jh16c

September 8, 2011 – 7:52 am

The recent events in Little Rock concerning KARK TV’s top weatherman Brett Cummins and his experience of drinking alcohol and snorting coke has left a lot of people asking questions. Since the evening ended in the tragic death of one of Brett’s friends, Dexter Williams, many questions have centered on the use of illegal drugs. […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged , , ,, , , , , , , , | Edit | Comments (0)

Transcript and video of Francis Schaeffer speech in 1983 on the word “Evangelical”

July 25, 2014 – 1:36 am

    Transcript and Video of Francis Schaeffer speech in 1983 on the word “Evangelical” _____________   SOUNDWORD LABRI CONFERENCE VIDEO – Names and Issues – Francis A. Schaeffer Published on Apr 20, 2014 This video is from the 1983 L’Abri Conference in Atlanta. The full lecture with Q&A time has been included. The lecture […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Review and Pictures and Video Clips of Woody Allen’s movie “MAGIC IN THE MOONLIGHT” Part 4

July 25, 2014 – 12:38 am

Woody Allen Interview – ‘Magic in the Moonlight’ Red Carpet in Chicago Review and Pictures and Video Clips of Woody Allen’s movie “MAGIC IN THE MOONLIGHT” Part 4   Emma Stone and Colin Firth in Woody Allen’s Magic in the Moonlight. [PHOTO: SONY PICTURES CLASSICS] Magic in the Moonlight  BY DAVID LEE DALLAS ON JULY 21, 2014 GO TO COMMENTS (0) There’s […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Woody Allen | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 35 Robert M. Pirsig (Feature on artist Kerry James Marshall)

November 27, 2014 – 4:43 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 34 Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Feature on artist Shahzia Sikander)

November 20, 2014 – 4:28 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 33 Aldous Huxley (Feature on artist Matthew Barney )

November 13, 2014 – 4:39 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 32 Steven Weinberg and Woody Allen and “The Meaningless of All Things” (Feature on photographer Martin Karplus )

November 6, 2014 – 4:42 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 31 David Hume and “How do we know we know?” (Feature on artist William Pope L. )

October 30, 2014 – 5:34 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 30 Rene Descartes and “How do we know we know?” (Feature on artist Olafur Eliasson)

October 23, 2014 – 5:01 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 29 W.H. Thorpe and “The Search for an Adequate World-View: A Question of Method” (Feature on artist Jeff Koons)

October 16, 2014 – 5:06 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 28 Woody Allen and “The Mannishness of Man” (Feature on artist Ryan Gander)

October 9, 2014 – 5:10 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 27 Jurgen Habermas (Featured artist is Hiroshi Sugimoto)

September 25, 2014 – 1:01 pm

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 26 Bettina Aptheker (Featured artist is Krzysztof Wodiczko)

September 25, 2014 – 4:00 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 25 BOB DYLAN (Part C) Francis Schaeffer comments on Bob Dylan’s song “Ballad of a Thin Man” and the disconnect between the young generation of the 60’s and their parents’ generation (Feature on artist Fred Wilson)

September 18, 2014 – 3:57 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 24 BOB DYLAN (Part B) Francis Schaeffer comments on Bob Dylan’s words from HIGHWAY 61 REVISITED!! (Feature on artist Susan Rothenberg)

September 11, 2014 – 4:18 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 23 BOB DYLAN (Part A) (Feature on artist Josiah McElheny)Francis Schaeffer on the proper place of rebellion with comments by Bob Dylan and Samuel Rutherford

September 2, 2014 – 8:42 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 22 “The School of Athens by Raphael” (Feature on the artist Sally Mann)

August 11, 2014 – 2:19 pm

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 21 William B. Provine (Feature on artist Andrea Zittel)

June 12, 2014 – 2:52 pm

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 20 Woody Allen and Materialistic Humanism: The World-View of Our Era (Feature on artist Ida Applebroog)

May 12, 2014 – 4:35 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 19 Movie Director Luis Bunuel (Feature on artist Oliver Herring)

May 1, 2014 – 11:53 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 18 “Michelangelo’s DAVID is the statement of what humanistic man saw himself as being tomorrow” (Feature on artist Paul McCarthy)

April 25, 2014 – 8:26 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 17 Francis Schaeffer discusses quotes of Andy Warhol from “The Observer June 12, 1966″ Part C (Feature on artist David Hockney plus many pictures of Warhol with famous friends)

April 18, 2014 – 7:37 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 16 Francis Schaeffer discusses quotes of Andy Warhol from “The Observer June 12, 1966″ Part B (Feature on artist James Rosenquist plus many pictures of Warhol with famous friends)

April 11, 2014 – 6:14 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 15 Francis Schaeffer discusses quotes of Andy Warhol from “The Observer June 12, 1966″ Part A (Feature on artist Robert Indiana plus many pictures of Warhol with famous friends)

April 4, 2014 – 5:58 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 14 David Friedrich Strauss (Feature on artist Roni Horn )

March 28, 2014 – 2:50 pm

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 13 Jacob Bronowski and Materialistic Humanism: The World-View of Our Era (Feature on artist Ellen Gallagher )

March 21, 2014 – 7:18 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 12 H.J.Blackham and Materialistic Humanism: The World-View of Our Era (Feature on artist Arturo Herrera)

March 14, 2014 – 9:07 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 11 Thomas Aquinas and his Effect on Art and HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? Episode 2: THE MIDDLES AGES (Feature on artist Tony Oursler )

March 4, 2014 – 9:04 pm

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 10 David Douglas Duncan (Feature on artist Georges Rouault )

February 28, 2014 – 5:16 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 9 Jasper Johns (Feature on artist Cai Guo-Qiang )

February 21, 2014 – 6:51 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 8 “The Last Year at Marienbad” by Alain Resnais (Feature on artist Richard Tuttle and his return to the faith of his youth)

February 13, 2014 – 7:59 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 7 Jean Paul Sartre (Feature on artist David Hooker )

February 4, 2014 – 2:00 pm

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 6 The Adoration of the Lamb by Jan Van Eyck which was saved by MONUMENT MEN IN WW2 (Feature on artist Makoto Fujimura)

January 31, 2014 – 5:43 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 5 John Cage (Feature on artist Gerhard Richter)

January 21, 2014 – 8:07 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 4 ( Schaeffer and H.R. Rookmaaker worked together well!!! (Feature on artist Mike Kelley Part B )

January 14, 2014 – 8:52 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 3 PAUL GAUGUIN’S 3 QUESTIONS: “Where do we come from? What art we? Where are we going? and his conclusion was a suicide attempt” (Feature on artist Mike Kelley Part A)

January 7, 2014 – 11:06 pm

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 2 “A look at how modern art was born by discussing Monet, Renoir, Pissaro, Sisley, Degas,Cezanne, Van Gogh, Gauguin, Seurat, and Picasso” (Feature on artist Peter Howson)

January 1, 2014 – 4:27 am

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 1 HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? “The Roman Age” (Feature on artist Tracey Emin)

December 10, 2013 – 2:38 pm

_________________

December 23, 2014 – 1:01 am Categories: Atheists Confronted | Post a comment

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |