Wednesday, May 17, 2017


Many atheists claim that the various proofs for the existence of God do not work. Why not? Because:

• "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

Actually, this is a sound concept. If someone tells me that they just met the real Santa Claus and saw him ascend with his team of reindeer, I would require more than a photo as evidence. After all, photos can be doctored.

However, this sound principle fails to work when applied to the theistic proofs. This is because the existence of a Creator God has only one other competitor – naturalism (everything was created naturally without any intelligence or design). Therefore, the question of God’s existence should be restated:

• Which is more reasonable and evidential – that this world is maintained and designed intelligently or non-intelligently?

In light of this restatement, I find naturalism more extraordinary than supernaturalism (ID). There is not one shred of evidence that anything has ever happened naturally (without intelligence), meanwhile, there is a lot of evidence that events or things have intelligent causes.

No comments:

Post a Comment