Logic & Light has touched on the issue of evolution in several posts. But since this topic is of such importance, a more in-depth, multi-part analysis is warranted.
Evolution is a pivotal issue for several reasons. First, it is the very foundation of the naturalistic worldview. According to Richard Dawkins, Darwin’s philosophy made “it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist1.” If evolution is not true, naturalism is unquestionably false. Continue reading
In part one, we briefly reviewed the biblical and extra-biblical testimony concerning the identity of Jesus. Now we turn our attention to several other key historical facts that further validate that evidence.
Historically speaking, the empty tomb is a fact. Continue reading
The Historical Argument represents the sixth step in Logic & Light’s systematic case for the Christian God. It seeks to demonstrate, using sound historical facts from both biblical and extra-biblical testimony, that Jesus was divine and actually resurrected after His crucifixion. If the fact of Jesus’ resurrection is established, then Christianity is, without a doubt, true. We have addressed one form of the Historical Argument previously (Six Facts About Jesus: Part I, Part II, Part III), but we will cover a bit more ground here. Continue reading
Recently a Logic & Light reader asked if there was one place from which they could access the entire “Busted” article series. In response to that request, we pulled together this page. It provides links to all 14 articles in the series.
For those who aren’t familiar with this series, here’s a quick overview. Critics are fond of saying that the Gospels are full of obvious errors that render them unreliable as historical documents. They ask, “If Luke (or John or Matthew or Mark) can’t get their basic facts straight, then how can we rely on them for huge claims like Jesus’ resurrection?” Continue reading
In this fifth installment, we continue building the case for belief in the Christian God. The Cosmological and Teleological Arguments demonstrate a logical, scientific foundation for a general belief in God. The Anthropological and Covenantal Arguments begin steering us directly to the Christian God. We now continue down that path with the Biblical Argument. Continue reading
With the previous Cosmological and Teleological Arguments, we began building the foundation for a rational belief in God. Then the Anthropological Argument began to narrow our focus from “a god” to the specific Judeo-Christian God. We now continue building that case with the Covenantal Argument. Continue reading
Logic & Light has previously explored the powerful evidence for God offered by the Cosmological and Teleological Arguments. And while these arguments offer a strong, logical, and scientific basis for belief in God, they do not tell us much about who God is or which religion has the correct view of Him. So, we now turn our attention to those arguments that begin to build the case for a belief in the specific God of the Bible. Continue reading
Read Part I here
As with the Cosmological Argument, we will now examine the primary claims against the Teleological Argument… Continue reading
Read Part II Here
After examining the strength of the Cosmological Argument, we now turn our attention to the Teleological Argument or the Argument from Design. The Teleological Argument is just as compelling as the Cosmological and when combined with it, provide a very strong basis for belief in God.
And just like with the Cosmological Argument, it is firmly rooted in what we know to be scientifically true. It is not born of ignorance or some God of the Gaps reasoning. Rather it is entirely fact-based and uses the naturalists’ supposed ally, scientific discovery, to argue against Naturalism. It was, in fact, largely the strength of the Teleological Argument that converted well-known atheist philosopher, author, and debater Anthony Flew to a belief in God, as he details in his 2007 book “There is a God.”
The Teleological Argument can be summarized as follows:
In part one, we examined the scientific and philosophical rationale that supports God as the cause of the universe. However, since there are many intelligent, rational, scientific atheists, one may suppose that the case is hardly undeniable. And as you would assume, there are many responses provided by naturalists to refute the Cosmological Argument. So we will look at the primary arguments and assess their validity. In the end, it will be clear that God remains not only the most reasonable explanation for the universe, but the only intellectually honest option. Continue reading
