Tuesday, October 23, 2018

Common Objection #35- "All religions teach basically the same thing."

On a surface level, this certainly seems to be true.  However, upon closer examination, we learn that while most religions have a similar moral code1, they actually disagree on almost every major issue including the nature of God, the nature of man, sin, salvation, heaven, hell and creation!

Author and apologist Frank Turek explains the significance of these facts:

"Think about it: the nature of God, the nature of man, sin, salvation, heaven, hell and creation.  Those are the biggies!  Here are a few of those big differences:
  • Jews, Christians, and Muslims believe in different versions of a theistic God, while most Hindus and New Agers believe that everything that exists is part of an impersonal, pantheistic force they call God.
  • Many Hindus believe that evil is a complete illusion, while Christians, Muslims, and Jews believe that evil is real.
  • Christians believe that people are saved by grace while all other religions, if they believe in salvation at all, teach some kind of salvation by good works (the definition of 'good' and what one is saved from varies greatly)."2
Pastor Justin Clemente offers another way to think about this common claim.  He writes:

"You could also summarize by saying that although religions appear to say similar things horizontally (love your neighbor, etc), they are saying radically different things vertically (in relation to God, etc)."3

So, while this claim may be popular, it is clearly untenable.

For answers to common objections, go here.

Courage and Godspeed,

1. For the Christian, this is just what we would expect to find when one considers the Christian conviction that God has implanted right and wrong on our consciences.  Consider the words of Paul in Romans 2:12-16.
2. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, p. 46.
3. This quote originated on FB and was used with Pastor Clemente's permission.

Related Posts

Video: Do All Religions Offer a Piece of the Truth?

Michael C. Sherrard on Religious Pluralism

With All the Different Religions, How Can I Know which One is Correct? from gotquestions.org

Tuesday, October 16, 2018

Video: Should We Fear Artificial Intelligence? by John Lennox

John Lennox is Professor of Mathematics (emeritus) at the University of Oxford and Fellow in Mathematics and the Philosophy of Science at Green Templeton College, Oxford.  He is also an Associate Fellow of the Said Business School, Oxford University, and teaches for the Oxford Strategic Leadership Programme.  In addition, he is an Adjunct Lecturer at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University, and at the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics, as well as being a Senior Fellow of the Trinity Forum.

In this featured talk, Lennox discusses the critical questions surrounding artificial intelligence and how the future of artificial intelligence bears on a Christian vision of reality.

Fascinating stuff!  Enjoy!

Courage and Godspeed,

Friday, October 12, 2018

Hugh Ross - The Book of Job and Earth's Early Fossils on the Moon

In this video, Dr. Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe discusses his book, Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job, and his thoughts on the importance of going back to the moon to discover more about Earth's fossil history.

God Bless,

Wednesday, October 10, 2018

J.P. Moreland on the Assumptions of Science

"The nature of the assumptions of science do not prove the existence of a God very much like the God of the Bible, but in my view, they provide reasons for preferring theism over scientistic naturalism.  The assumptions are at home in a theistic worldview; they fit quite naturally.  If God is himself a rational being, then it stands to reason that he would create a rational, orderly universe.  If he created us, then it naturally follows that he would give us the proper faculties to know and appreciate the inner workings of his world by 'thinking his thoughts after him.'  The existence of objective values makes far more sense if there is an objective Lawgiver than if there is not.

If we begin with 'In the beginning, there was the Logos," then we have reasonable explanations for these assumptions.  But if we begin with 'In the beginning were the particles (or plasma, strings, etc.)," it is hard to see how these assumptions could have obtained...certain naturalistic commitments-e.g, naturalistic evolutionary theory-actually undermine crucial assumptions of science such as the trustworthiness of our faculties for obtaining truth about the world's deep structure."1

Courage and Godspeed,

1. J.P. Moreland, Scientism and Secularism: Learning to Respond to a Dangerous Ideology, p. 75-76.

Related Posts

What Are the Laws of Logic? by J.P. Moreland

J.P. Moreland on Culture

Book Preview: Scientism and Secularism by J.P. Moreland

Tuesday, October 09, 2018

What is the Difference Between the A-Theory of Time and the B-Theory Time?

When discussing God and time it is useful to understand the difference between the A-Theory of time and the B-Theory of time.

The A-Theory of time is the most widely accepted of the two and for good reason.  As philosopher William Lane Craig explains:

"According to A-Theory, things/events in time are not all equally real: the future does not yet exist and the past no longer exists; only things which are present are real.  Temporal becoming is an objective feature of reality: things come into being and go out of being." [1]   This is the commonsense view of time.  Past events are no longer, the present is real, and the future does not yet exist.

In contrast, as Craig explains, on the B-theory of time, "...all events in time are equally real, and temporal becoming is an illusion of human consciousness.  Pastness, presentness, and futurity are at most relative notions: for example, relative to the persons living in the year 2050 the people and events of 2000 are past, but relative to the persons living in 1950 the people and events of 2000 are future.  Things and events in time are objectively ordered by the relations earlier than, simultaneous with, and later than, which are tenseless relations that are unchanging and hold regardless of whether the related events are past, present, or future relative to some observer." [2]   On the B-Theory of time you can think of all events, past, present and future, as represented on a yard stick.  We are right now somewhere on the yard stick, but all the events represented by the yard stick are equally real.

For those interested in learning more, I recommend this short video in which Dr. Craig explains the A-Theory of time and B-Theory of time and how it relates to the Kalam cosmological argument for God's existence.

Which theory of time do you hold to?  Please share in the comments!

Courage and Godspeed,

1. William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith 3rd. Ed., p. 121.
2. Ibid., p. 121.

Related Posts

Is Our Universe Simply the Winner of a Universe Lottery?

Video: Why Does Anything Exist at All? by William Lane Craig

William Lane Craig on the "Many Worlds" Hypothesis as a Backhanded Compliment to Design

Tuesday, October 02, 2018

Debate Video: Is Homosexuality Consistent with New Testament Obedience?

In this featured video, Dr. James White and Dr. Michael Brown confront the issues of homosexuality, transgenderism and other such labels with gentleness and reverence as they debate Pastor Deweyne Robinson and Rev. Ruth Jensen-Forbell.

This debate took place at the Switzerland Community Church in St. Johns, Florida on September 8, 2018.

Who do you think had the better arguments?  Share in the comments below!

Courage and Godspeed,