CADRE Comments

There has been a major development in the field of cosmology, one that may have a bearing on apologetics in the future.  As atheist friend "Pixie" brought out in our discussions last week, a report  by  Ahmed Farag Ali (Benha University in Egypt) and   Saurya Das (University of Lethbridge in Alberta,  Canada), their model removes the singularity and posits a universe with "no  beginning  and no end." [1]  Some commentators have been saying the new model does away with the big bang, It does not but it does do away with the singularity, the theoretical mathematical point from which the universe supposedly emerged.  In order to end the singularity the new model assumes an endless universe, making the concept of big bang seem incomprehensible .[2]  But technically it doesn't actually do away with it. Brian Koberlein explains:   "The catch is that by eliminat...

It is a common misconception: In a religious worldview, morality is dictated by a god who has whimsically decided that X is good and Y is bad, therefore this god mandates that we humans follow his dictates or be punished eternally. If this god or these gods decree(s) murder is wrong then murder is wrong because the god(s) have the power to punish those who commit murder. The god or the gods could just as easily have decreed that helping widows or loving puppies is wrong, and while we might object that we cannot see any negatives to doing so, we would all need to fall into line because the god or gods have decreed it to be wrong and will punish us if we don't follow his decree. While I cannot speak for all religious views that may be out there, when applying this common view to the God of the Bible, the view is false. But saying it is false and explaining why it is false is not always easy -- not because the reason isn't clear, but because in many cases people have to come to ...

Church of Annunciation, Bethlehem Often Christian apologists will say I can't prove that God exists but you can't prove he does not exit. The problem is unless there are conditions under which something could be disproved then it can't be proven, Thus people sometimes begin to think an idea that can't be falsified is not rational. But even though God per se can't be falsified does that mean Christianity can't be falsified? I think being falsifiable is only important if one is trying to persuade others of the truth content of a proposition. The truth if a religion is a phenomenological apprehension and an existential matter. Thus it transcends the kind of propositional proof one strives for in debate. If one insists that only a proportional form of truth is sound then Christianity is falsifiable on three ways: (1) In terms of God correlates (Schleiermacher's co- determinate) (2) or in terms of certain aspects of belief that serve as propositional tests...