At the God's Hammer website there is a written response to an Australian atheist's video critique of Dr. John Robbin's assertion that in John 1:1 that the term for "Word" is "Logos" in Greek and therefore God is reason. While I do not think this excuses atheists in their unbelief, Kelly Jones quite rightly points out that this is a categorical error and a confusion of two distinct entities. First off, God is a person. He is not pure logic in and of itself. This would turn God from a personal being into an "it." Logic itself can be described in purely mathematical and philosophical theorems and statements. Dr. Robbins' error here is in confusing one of God's attributes as an absolutely omniscient and omnipotent being with God Himself as a person. Furthermore, Scripture has a lot more to say about God than merely that He is of the very essence of pure reason and pure logic in His very nature and being and that reason or logic is one of the many attributes of God's nature or being. Scripture also says God is love, God is judge, etc. Most Christian theologians take John 1:1 as a reference to Jesus Christ as the personal manifestation of the Word, the second person of the Godhead prior to the incarnation of Christ.
I think a more precise statement would be that all reason, logic, and scientific or philosophical truth is God's truth since all knowledge humans possess originates from God who is the source of all being, including our ability to think and reason. Thus, Robbins' point is well taken that we exist because God exists first. This is essentially a variation on the ontological argument, which I find convincing even if an unbelieving atheist does not. Robbins is also correct that atheists merely presuppose the non-existence of God and cannot prove He does not exist.
On the other hand, atheists also commit categorical errors like placing the idea of an absolutely perfect source of being in the same category with "mythology" or "fairy tales." This is so far from the truth that the argument itself approaches the absurd. Ms. Jones cannot explain the source of logic, mathematics, reason or even of the human ability to conceive of these noumenal manifestations within human consciousness. Where does consciousness itself originate? As the author of the God's Hammer site points out, logical positivism is a circular argument itself, thus Kelly Jones is logically inconsistent in pointing out circular logic which she herself utilizes in trying to discount the existence of God. The fact of the matter is that mind, thought, memory, etc., are all greater than merely biological functions of the brain. This remains a mystery as to how consciousness and thought can arise out of biological matter and in fact says little about how the universe itself exists. Atheism is therefore logically inconsistent in condemning Christianity as "circular logic."
To see the video posted at YouTube and the response written at God's Hammer go to Foolish Atheist.
I think a more precise statement would be that all reason, logic, and scientific or philosophical truth is God's truth since all knowledge humans possess originates from God who is the source of all being, including our ability to think and reason. Thus, Robbins' point is well taken that we exist because God exists first. This is essentially a variation on the ontological argument, which I find convincing even if an unbelieving atheist does not. Robbins is also correct that atheists merely presuppose the non-existence of God and cannot prove He does not exist.
On the other hand, atheists also commit categorical errors like placing the idea of an absolutely perfect source of being in the same category with "mythology" or "fairy tales." This is so far from the truth that the argument itself approaches the absurd. Ms. Jones cannot explain the source of logic, mathematics, reason or even of the human ability to conceive of these noumenal manifestations within human consciousness. Where does consciousness itself originate? As the author of the God's Hammer site points out, logical positivism is a circular argument itself, thus Kelly Jones is logically inconsistent in pointing out circular logic which she herself utilizes in trying to discount the existence of God. The fact of the matter is that mind, thought, memory, etc., are all greater than merely biological functions of the brain. This remains a mystery as to how consciousness and thought can arise out of biological matter and in fact says little about how the universe itself exists. Atheism is therefore logically inconsistent in condemning Christianity as "circular logic."
To see the video posted at YouTube and the response written at God's Hammer go to Foolish Atheist.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment