Transcending Proof: In Defense of Christian Theism
My new book,
available at Amazon.
Contents:
Foreword by Stephen J. Bedard
Preface 1. A Theodicy of Incompleteness
2. Why I Am Not a Metaphysical Naturalist (and Why I Am a Christian Theist)
3. Extraordinary Claims, Ordinary Fallacies, and Evolution
4. Transcending Proof: A Reply to Richard Carrier
5. A Brief Critique of Theological Fatalism
6. The Presumption of Naturalism and the Probability of Miracles: A Reply to Keith Parsons
7. History, Archaeology, and the Veracity of Scripture
8. The Dusty Web of Gnosticism
9. On Belief as Inductive Inference
10. Classical Apologetics: Traditional Arguments for the Existence of God
11. Is God Incoherent? A Reply to Dan Barker
12. Out of the Whirlwind
From the back cover:
This
selection of writings by a seasoned apologist offers some creative answers and
insights concerning issues that challenge the intellectual integrity of the
Christian faith:
·
Theodicy
and the problem of evil
·
Creation
and the logic of evolutionary theory
·
Evidence
and rational justification of belief
·
History,
probability and miracles
·
The
coherence of Christian theism
" Don’s work is a valuable addition
to the growing apologetic library that is so needed by the Church."
-- from the Foreword by Stephen J.
Bedard
From
the Preface:
.… I can think of no subject more interesting, or important, than the
"defense and confirmation of the gospel," as Paul put it in
Philippians (1:7). The title is taken from the fourth essay, a reply to
historian-philosopher Richard Carrier, who has argued that the presumed lack of
evidence or “provability” of Christian theism essentially proves it false. The
basic idea behind my rebuttal, initially inspired by the incompleteness
theorems of mathematician Kurt Gödel, is that some truths (indeed the most
obvious, basic truths) cannot be proven. If it holds that within a given
mathematical system certain statements can be true yet unprovable, it seems
reasonable to suggest that within the system of this present world certain
theological truths – articles of faith – may likewise "transcend"
proof.
“The madman’s explanation of a
thing," Chesterton once observed, "is always complete.” Apart from an
acknowledgment of transcendent truths and our own incompleteness, the human
sense of imagination, perspective and hope becomes dangerously stunted. This is
not to suggest that reason and evidence have no place in the acquisition of
truth. Indeed for believers struggling with skepticism and skeptics struggling
with belief, the pages to follow contain many reasons and much evidence to
justify the claim that God exists and has revealed Himself in Jesus Christ.
What I do suggest rather is that when reasons and evidence for a proposition
have been examined in full, we are still free to believe or doubt as we will….
Comments
I certainly hope that this book does not make the same mistake.
Besides, it's not as if the existence of a Creator is irrelevant to the truth of Christianity. To the contrary, if God does not exist Christianity is false.
As for historians and prophecy: What interests me there is why various historians do or do not accept that prophets may accurately prophecy future events. If they believe that such activity is "impossible," for example, then their belief will very likely muddy their reading of the evidence.
In regards to OT prophecy, I think we should use the same standards that we use for any other alleged prediction. Can we be reasonably sure that the author of the alleged prophecy was who Jews/Christians say he was? Can we be reasonably sure that the author wrote in the time period that Jews/Christians say he did? And, are we interpreting/translating the passage in question correctly?
For instance, if we were to find a book which states in the inside cover that it was written by a man who lived and died in the early 1800's, with a copyright date of 1825, how should we treat the "prophecy" within that book that a man named Donald Trump will win the American presidential election on November 8, 2016?
I think that most of us would be very skeptical of such a "prophecy". We would want to investigate the origins of this book, extensively, prior to believing that a man living almost 200 years ago predicted the election, almost one week ago, of the next American president.
That is the issue that most skeptics I know have with OT prophecy. Can we be reasonably certain that a man named "Daniel", living during the Babylonian defeat of Judah, wrote a book which prophesied so many future events? Or, is there good evidence that the "prophecies" in question in the Book of Daniel had already occurred, and the true author (not named Daniel) had written about these prophecies as if they were events in the future (an act of fraud)?
As in the case of the early 1800's book predicting Donald Trump's election, probability based on cumulative human experience says that "Daniel" did not write the Book of Daniel, someone else did living in a much later period than the writer wants us to believe.
I can find a consensus statement by Muslim theologians who believe that Islamic prophecies have been fulfilled. I can find a consensus statement by Mormon theologians who believe that Mormon prophecies have been fulfilled. And I can find a consensus statement by Christian theologians who believe that Judeo-Christian prophecies have been fulfilled. And many of the prophecies of each one of these religions directly contradict the teachings and prophecies of the other two religions.
But no consensus statements from non-theologian historians on the existence of accurate fortune telling (prophecies).
I would say that that is a BIG problem for the credibility of your Christian prophecy claims.
Now again consider the nation of Israel. As prophesied repeatedly throughout the OT, Israel was dispersed throughout the world (following the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70), subjected to horrific persecutions, and then restored to her homeland – immediately following the Holocaust no less. Consider the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israel was surrounded and outnumbered, facing an imminent attack from all sides, and managed to not only fend off her enemies but enlarge her territory, partly through a series of critical miscommunications. Consider that to this day the still-tiny state of Israel remains surrounded by hostile enemies and somehow remains prosperous and relatively secure.
To me the history of Israel is a big problem for atheism, not Christianity.
If Judeo-Christian prophecies were as accurate (100%) as Christians tell us they are, this incredible track record should be noted somewhere in public university history textbooks. But it isn't. Christians may resort to inventing conspiracy theories in an attempt to explain away this glaring fact, but the fact remains: fortune telling, Christian or otherwise, does NOT have a good track record.
that is a totally fallacious assumption. I can think of several reasons why it would not be. not the least of which is bias.
Jesus Christ: King Messiah
Jesus story spells out the prophesies
Most educated people don't buy conspiracy theories. A college education has taught (most of) us that we can trust consensus expert opinion.
There is no conspiracy against Christianity, my conservative Christian friends. Conspiracy theories are for the uneducated. It is unbecoming of you to appeal to such ignorance.
Gary, consider these various ad hominem generalizations duly noted. Now is there a specific argument you'd like to make with all this?
My initial comment remains: I hope your book presents good evidence for the existence of Yahweh, and not just that of a generic Creator.
Peace and happiness, Don.
:)
First of all you are steriotypoing, you are speaking of all Christians as though ghey al think alike that is obviously just bigotry.
Secondly, there's no conspiracy there is a very open and obvious anti-religious bias in academic circles a lot of it is created by the stupidity of fundamentalists.
ThirdlyI was an atheist so I know that such bais exists, When I was a sociology major I talked openly withv professors about their anti religious views, I heard then say things like "here;s a job applicant who says he's a christian we don't want him in the department," I was an atheist so they weren't hiding it around me,I shared that bias at that time.
Most educated people don't buy conspiracy theories. A college education has taught (most of) us that we can trust consensus expert opinion.
you are trying to dodge the issue by painting it as a conspiracy theory,everyone in academia knows there are biases. you seem to have forgotten that issue came up because you asked why Christian arguments are accepted as fact by academic journals bias was one answer among others.
There is no conspiracy against Christianity, my conservative Christian friends.
I am not a conservative! call me that again and I will let fly a host of very un-Christian epithets I can use of atheists,
Conspiracy theories are for the uneducated. It is unbecoming of you to appeal to such ignorance.
as are slippery slope fallacies
My initial comment remains: I hope your book presents good evidence for the existence of Yahweh, and not just that of a generic Creator.
Peace and happiness, Don.
you did not answer anything i said,. you merely demonstrated your armature ignorance by making a slippery slope fallacy out of one of my many arguments and then using that to ignore all the rest,
I just gave you six links that blow away your entire thesis and you are too afraid to examine them how will you know good evidence when you see it? you afraid to look at evidence
my post on Monday will answer this
As for the book: Don't just hope it presents good evidence for Christian theism; buy a copy and decide for yourself. You can post a review on Amazon, and I would be happy to read it. I appreciate your interest in any event, and likewise wish you all the best.