Absolutely! There Are No Absolutes!
Very often people adopt a worldview without thinking through it and this sometimes leads to some interesting contradictions. In the case of Relativism, the belief that there are no absolute truths, a bold contradiction must be affirmed. One has to use an absolute statement in order to deny absolute statements.
Someone may say to me: "I am glad you have your faith. It is good for you that you believe God exists. But please do not try to push your faith upon me. For me, God does not exist."
This sounds very nice and appealing. It is a way of saying, "Let's not fight, after all, these are mere faith issues." I am not looking to fight either. I'd rather be at peace with folks.
But there is a problem and I am compelled to point it out. We both agree that if you walk out in the front of a moving vehicle, you will be in danger and serious bodily harm could result. We also both believe that (in an absolute sense) 2+2=4.
Well, I believe, with good reason, that God actually exists and His existence is fact for every person in every place. If He actually exists in this way, then He cannot not exist as well. He either does or does not. In order for someone to say, "God exists for you but not for me," the person would have to affirm that there are no absolutes. But this is a contradiction because in order to affirm that there are no absolutes, an absolute affirmation must be used.
Let's face it. Either God exists or He doesn't. Better to be atheistic (God does not exist) or agnostic (We can't tell if God exists) then to be a relativist (God exists for you, but not for me).
Someone may say to me: "I am glad you have your faith. It is good for you that you believe God exists. But please do not try to push your faith upon me. For me, God does not exist."
This sounds very nice and appealing. It is a way of saying, "Let's not fight, after all, these are mere faith issues." I am not looking to fight either. I'd rather be at peace with folks.
But there is a problem and I am compelled to point it out. We both agree that if you walk out in the front of a moving vehicle, you will be in danger and serious bodily harm could result. We also both believe that (in an absolute sense) 2+2=4.
Well, I believe, with good reason, that God actually exists and His existence is fact for every person in every place. If He actually exists in this way, then He cannot not exist as well. He either does or does not. In order for someone to say, "God exists for you but not for me," the person would have to affirm that there are no absolutes. But this is a contradiction because in order to affirm that there are no absolutes, an absolute affirmation must be used.
Let's face it. Either God exists or He doesn't. Better to be atheistic (God does not exist) or agnostic (We can't tell if God exists) then to be a relativist (God exists for you, but not for me).
8 Comments:
The argument for agnosticism basically comes down to this:
"It is the property of God that we cannot know if God has the property of existence."
This is self-refuting because in order to have any properties at all, God must first have the property of existence.
>> "It is the property of God that we cannot know if God has the property of existence."
The dictionary definition is: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
I agrue that it is not a property of God that agnosticism refutes, but a property of humans:
We exist. We have properties. A property of us is that we lack the ability to know whether God exists.
The vote is in, the results: "God" doesn't exist.
Now can we get on with our lives and perhaps concentrate a bit more on that great dictum, to "Know thyself."
With this dictum in mind, there is a beautiful Catholic church up on a hilltop and appropriately enough it is named Holy Hill. It is a splendid example of human enginuity, craftsmanship, architecture, stone workmanship and construction. The point is, "God" didn't build the damn thing, men did, they also built the concomitant dogmas, religious intellectual perversion, religious spiritual arrogancy, Jesuit machinations, sectarian violence, hate and warfare to bring to Sunday services with them. The world is dazed and confused and religion is leading us straight to hell.
And the really amazing thing is, the front entrance of the church is a perfect representation of a woman's virgina.
Coffe Bean has fallen into a common logical fallacy. He is looking at the fact that people who have claimed they were Christians have acted in terrible ways and continue to do so. This is indeed true. But he illogically infers from this that all religions are false and God does not exist. That is a big jump!!
My point, people mess up, Christian or not. Christians do not deny this, in fact the Bible says that many will come in the name of Jesus and have wrong motives, self-centered desires as they work. (Heck, religion can be a big business you know).
But it does not necessarily follow that Christian theology is false or that God does not exist.
One must look beyond the actions of imperfect people in order to determine what is true and false.
I often wonder why people that write in this blog,and claim that God does not exist ,are doing here in the first place.They like to debate our beliefs as Christians,and will try to push that off on us.But what they don't realize is that when we become Christians,we rarely ever go back to our old selves,the sinful man.Who would want to go back to that?I know I would'nt and I am confident saying that you would not either,Jason.But we must realize that just because we are saved,and Christian,it does not mean that we will not make mistakes.I make mistakes,not huge ones thank God,but I do.We are not in some bubble and shut off from common mistakes.But,we do become aware of our words and actions more so,because Jesus is in our hearts.We know that we do not want to "fall back".But,we are not going to fall back because our place with God is secure. Yes,we do mess up,and yes we do stupid things.We are still human.This is not enough to base "coffee beans"assumption that God does not exist.Coffee bean is basing that on human actions,rather than looking at the big picture.No,God did not build that church,but He did allow it to be built.He also allows us,Christians, to mess up,make mistakes,and do dumb things.God does not care for the mistakes,but He created us as human and knows that we will make mistakes.Coffee bean needs to find a more legitimate arguement than the one he/she posed.
coffee bean also seems to think that it is only religion and religious people who perpetrate violence. History will not bear this out, of course. Though Christians (or those who call themselves Christians) have done violence, religion has actually been a great force for peace and humanitarianism in the world.
The real source of hatred and violence is the secular (atheistic/agnostic) mindset. I would even contend that the so-called religuous people who coffee bean attributes violence to, were actually caught up in secular thinking.--yes, people who claim to be religious, but who resort to violence (like the Crusaders and Inquisitors) are not really "religious" at all, but are capturerd by a secular attitude in which they have wrongly come to think that the weapons of "this world" (war and politics) are the appropriate means to advance spiritual ends. As Michael Horton so aptly argues, this is nothing but secularism dressed up as religion. A Christian should care about making the world a better place and fighting evil in the world, but he is supposed to use the spiritual weapons of preaching and persuasion.
That's right Dr.Steve Cowan.We are supposed to use the spiritual weapons of preaching and persuasion.Also,to add another,witnessing is not just a vocal thing.It is living our Christian life and letting people witness this.Not in any means should we boast about it,but rather by being loving to others and when people see us act lovingly toward others,and are helping others by perhaps holding a door open for the elderly,and making donations to third world countries,and just being genuinely open and humble,they may start a conversation with you,and that gets the ball rolling and you can tell them what God has shown you.It's awesome how this happens.So,we are to witness verbally and non-verbally.Thanks.
What I find most intriguing about Coffee Bean's comments is the fact that he bases his dislike for religion on moral presuppositions. Apparently, he seems to regard things like intellectual perversions, violence and hatred as negatives. If the vote on God is in and He doesn't exist, then the vote on Coffee Bean's values is certainly still out. If the sources of his moral sensibilities didn't come from God, then the came from the same place as that Church building, and that does not seem to provide any compelling motivation to follow them. Or does he claim that morality exists by virtue of human instinct, the very thing that he would likely use as disproof of our notion that there is a God?
Post a Comment
<< Home