What was there before there was a universe? Before the Big Bang? From the moment we realized our universe had a beginning, we have been wondering what caused it. Could there have just been nothing? Can something come from nothing?
The watchmaker argument has been a pinnacle argument for Christian apologetics for a very long time. Evolution has been propped up as an appropriate piece of evidence serving to debunk the argument. Is this really the case?
Makugutu, a naturalist blogger over at this site, disagrees with some of my reasoning regarding evil in the world. The quote below is from my article here. I think it is interesting to note that when we began to elaborate on this topic, the conversation moved very quickly away from the nature of God and more towards human perspective.
If God knows everything that we will ever feel, think, say, or do, then do we have free will? It is certainly hard to imagine how we might be capable of freely deciding anything if all of our decisions are already known. But it may be possible to reconcile free will and "destiny" or "fate". Let's unpack the titular question and see where it leads.
The burden of proof is the idea that a person or party making any particular claim has to provide sufficient evidence that their claim is true. While this sounds a good idea conceptually, just how difficult is it to provide proof for simple, everyday actions. Lately, in an effort to find out, I have been disputing claims made by my friends in an effort to establish whether or not it is reasonable to put the burden of proof on the individual making the claim.
He has inscribed a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness -Job 26:10 What sort of imagery does the verse above cause in your mind? For me, it causes me to envision the planet earth from space, mostly blue, circular, surrounded by darkness. Does that image seem familiar to you? It should, I am describing earth as it appears from space. This is one example of the way that language can be interpreted depending on the context of our preexisting notions. If I believed in a flat earth, for example, I may interpret it more like this:
We all know the story of Adam and Eve. If you have spent any amount of in Sunday school, you were no doubt exposed to the story of the first two people on the planet. Set in paradise, with one simple rule to leave the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil alone. Unfortunately, Eve is deceived into betraying the single rule God has put in place and commits the first sin. But what do we really know about the Tree of Know of Good and Evil? What was its purpose? How exactly did it effect Adam and Eve? We know that it made them ashamed, but what can we derive from that?
Critics of Christianity often seem to pose the question; If God is all-knowing, why doesn't He share all of His knowledge with us? I believe this to be a fair question. It does seem, initially, to be rather misguided to purposefully withhold information that could drastically improve our lives, especially considering that God would likely have the ability to create us in such a way that all knowledge is already known to us. So I thought I would take a close look at this subject and see what conclusions I can come to.
If we need Jesus in order to be saved and no one can go to Jesus unless God has enabled them, does this mean that we cannot choose to be saved? This is quite the paradoxical question and has been the subject of much debate in the theological community. Can mankind choose to be saved? Does God call all of us? Does God want all of us?
This is a question that many non-believers pose to themselves internally. It is usually used as an easy reason to dismiss the idea of following a religion when there is no other reason that can be thought of to do so. Since God allows people to commit acts that we deem to be evil, the conclusion drawn is that God cannot be good and is therefore not worthy of our attention. This is a logical fallacy found merely in the definition of the word good.