Friday, March 16, 2007

Contending for the Truth 2.4 - Ravi Zacharias

Now, here we are again after lunch. I've seen two old friends here: Bobby Thompson (from LCS) who is now at Faith Baptist Church in Winter Haven and Mark Hiers from Flagler YL who is now at Good News Presbyterian in St. Augustine.

Big Topic for 1 hour:

The Intense Philosophical Problems that Arise When We Deny God's Existence
He didn't coin "God is dead" - he made it popular (1844-1900) - F. Nietzsche. With all due respect to FN - his candor is good. He brings up the right questions. He asks pointed questions about the denial of God's existence - we will have to redefine everything. (Wow, geisler taught Ravi). Sam Harris The End of Faith, A Letter to a Christian Nation. This is what happens - 1. They have an intense problem then defining morality (if God is dead). Is everyone right in his own eye? B Russell - "on the basis of feeling" - that is how he defines good/bad. When you raise the question of good - you have to have a moral law - then a giver. Dawkins - he denies there is any evil (b/c he doesn't want to give credit to good). If God is dead - you can't make any moral dictations of any kind. There is no bad, there is no good. There is no hope? Look at kids who are longing for an authority figure in their life b/c they have none. They do not want chaos - chaos isn't the best thing for this world. If we have no Perfect Law Giver - there is no HOPE. We must actually live our lives like we have hope. We can't live without hope.
Argument: (Aquinas, Augustine)
proofs, evidences, arguments
Dallas Willard -
3 stages of argument
1. Nature and existence of physical reality that we see. However concrete physical reality is sectioned up, the result will be the state of affairs owes its being to something else and is not self-existent. No physical quality explains its own existence. All of these somewhere have to be explained by one self-existent cause which is not physical. CS Lewis quote from God in the Dock
An egg which came from no bird is no more 'natural' than a bird which existed from all eternity. And since the egg-bird-egg sequence leads us to no plausible beginning, is it not reasonable to look for the real origin...outside of sequence altogether? You have to go outside the sequence of find the real originator of the rocket. Is it not equally reasonable to look outside Nature for the real Originator of the natural order?-- C.S. Lewis, God In The Dock, "Two Lectures", p211.
2. To Design, not from Design. Evolution is not an explanation for ultimate origin. What caused the Big Bang? Wouldn't we want to know what a little bang is, much less a big bang? What is the big bang - everything is reduced to a singularity. Even then your starting point is unnatural. Oh, but we retain a selective sovereignty over things. Whatever - that is a good argument. But isn't that where we've been all weekend. I'll believe truth when it works for me. That can't be. Truth has to be Truth even when Truth isn't popular. Ps 8. Dec 1968 - the view of the moon from the shuttle. "In the beginning God..."
3. Course of Human events are the course of human events—historical, social and individual—within the context of a demonstrated extra-naturalism (stage one) and of a quite plausible cosmic intellectualism (stage two). The Real Gardener. Description of the human condition - so accurately, when you finish Jesus' description of you - you know He knows you so very well (John 4). Auschwitz was ordinary people - the first time of slaughter I hated it, then I got used to it. As Jesus describes God - the absolutes that He lives His life with. Love, evil, justice, forgiveness - what is one event where the 4 converged: The Cross of Jesus. Marvelous depth of truth against the atheist - their argument looks so shallow.

No comments: