Jesus Show Himself?
Greg Koukl responds to the claim, “If Jesus would just show himself, I’d believe.”
#StandtoReason #Apologetics #Christianity
————— CONNECT —————
Website: https://www.str.org/
Stand to Reason University: https://training.str.org/
Stand to Reason Apps: https://www.str.org/apps
Twitter: https://twitter.com/STRtweets
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/standtoreason93
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/standtoreason
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/stand-to-reason/
Have a question or comment? Call Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason live Tuesdays 4-6pm Pacific Time – (855) 243-9975. If you’d like to submit your question ahead of time, fill out the online form here: https://www.str.org/broadcast.
————— GIVE —————
Support the work of Stand to Reason: https://str.org/donate
source
@thorbeckes Apologies if this sounds redundant, but you do understand how simply stating (yet again) that the Bible is God's word, you know how to interpret it, and then listing "absolute moral truths" is unconvincing, right?
That's merely the claim. You need to back that up with compelling evidence.
@thorbeckes Materialist naturalist? I dunno–how do you define that?
I've seen no compelling evidence of any supernatural anything, so my working assumption is that the supernatural doesn't exist, if that helps.
@thorbeckes God says that slavery is A-OK. Is that an absolute moral truth, too?
These moral claims are *your opinion*. Show me that God exists and that we can reliably know what he wants and I'll see that these are indeed absolute moral statements. Until then, you've only made an unsubstantiated claim.
@thorbeckes I'm still missing the absolute part. You're simply stating your own moral opinion and then slaping an "absolute" label on it. Not very convincing.
You could find millions of people who call themselves "Christian" who reject your opinions on abortion and capital punishment. Sounds like nothing more than individual opinions to me. Show me why this natural explanation is insufficient.
@thorbeckes Everyone thinks Hitler was wrong. Sounds like a shared opinion to me. Where's the absolute morality?
Does absolute moral truth exist? And can humans reliably access it? If so, show me. Show me the absolutely correct moral answer on capital punishment, abortion, or any other of today's important moral issues.
All you can do is offer your own opinion. You might make a strong argument, as someone could on the other side of the issue, but where's the absoluteness?
@thorbeckes (If you leave the space between my name and your comments, I get an email informing me of your post. Otherwise, I need to use telepathy–pretty unreliable.)
@thorbeckes You reduced my argument to absurdity? I have to at least admire your confidence!
This is not that difficult. When Hitler does something that you don't like, *you* judge it as wrong. That's it–just you. Is there an Absolute Rulebook that you consult to determine this judgment? If so, show us! Of course, it may well be that I agree with you. And others. And now we have a consensus view and can act *as a society*.
That's how morality works. You think differently? Show me.
@thorbeckes Your simply stating that there are absolute rights and wrongs isn't the same thing as evidence. Show me! Give me some reason to buy your claim.
@thorbeckes (And I think if you avoid putting periods after my name, I'll get an email notification of your post …)
@thorbeckes WHY do we need an absolute right and wrong? I certainly see no need for it. Everything seems well enough explained without that presupposition.
I've already told you how I account for humans' moral sense: instinct, just like animals. Society adds quite a bit as well. No need for a supernatural explanation.
"That is right/wrong" comes from my platform. Or yours, if you say it. There's no absolute anything behind that statement (that I can see, at least).
@thorbeckes (Part 2) I agree that the Christian worldview can account for absolute moral truth. But the plausible natural explantion always trumps the supernatural one, and the natural explanation for human morality (evolution giving us a moral sense, with society building on top of that) seems sufficient. Neurobiology has lots of questions, of course, but the natural explanation has a lot going for it. No need for the supernatural one.
@thorbeckes We see compassion and sympathy and a sense of fairness in other primates. They have a moral instinct. Not the same as ours, of course, but similar. And let's not get too excited about our moral instinct. Along with empathy and generosity and love comes hate and revenge and jealousy–each to a level that other primates don't approach.
I see no evidence of absolute morality, so I don't feel compelled to explain it.
BTW, that @ in front of the name means that I'll get an email message. I respond faster that way.
Is there a reason why some notes addressed to me don't have it?
@thorbeckes [i]Is it[/i] always wrong to torture babies? In an absolute or transcendental sense? Show me. "An absolute universal truth"? Wow–that's a bold statement. Again, I need evidence.
To simply say that we all have a moral instinct (like that which you see in other great apes) explains things well enough. Show me what about morality an atheistic worldview can't account for.
@thorbeckes Not sure what you're saying.
I'm saying that most people would say that "torturing babies is wrong" is true for them. Natural explanation. Show me why (1) the natural explanation for why we have a (mostly) shared moral instinct doesn't explain what we see and (2) we have evidence that for a supernatural explanation.
The (mostly) universal moral opinion is a shared moral instinct from evolution. You see similar morals in other apes.
@PatientWolfBP Nope. It was more the "I made a mistake and am not too proud to admit it" kind of thing.
No requirements for perfection to be here, I'm guessing?
@BobTheAtheist2 Now you are guilty of a No True Scotsman fallacy. First it was no absolute truths exist. Now no absolute MORAL truths exist.
@thorbeckes I agree that it's true. You agree that it's true. So where does the universal/absolute/transcendetal/whatever truth come in?
A universal truth and a universally-held moral opinion look a lot alike. How can you tell the difference? More important, why opt for the supernatural explanation when a natural one is sufficient?
@thorbeckes Sure, evolution is science. It's the scientific consensus.
I agree with your truth statements. "All bachelors are single" is true by definition. "1 + 1 = 2" also sounds like an absolute truth statement. What I should have asked for was an example of something interesting: absolute moral truth. Sorry for being unclear.
@thorbeckes In Science class we teach, y'know, *science.* When ID is science, then no problem. Until then, it stays out of the science classroom like alchemy and astrology.
As for prayers in city councils, are you saying that you're OK to Wiccan or Satanist or Muslim prayers in city council meetings? My vote would be to follow the Consitution and just leave them out of government.
And everyone wins.
(Then there was something about bachelors and babies that made no sense to me …)
@PatientWolfBP I guess there's a lot of rubbing the wrong way going around. For me, it's when someone points to a statement and then says, "Aha! An absolute statement, hypocrite!" Sure, let's call "I make no absolute statements" and absolute statement. And then I say, "Whoops–I should've left it at 'I see no evidence of absolute truth.'" A simple rephrase, and problem solved. Your big rebuttal fizzles.
And we're back to the Christian's burden of showing absolute truth. So far, nothin'.
@BobTheAtheist2 Bob I made no attempt to argue one way or the other regarding absolute truth. I have no interested in debating the topic on either side online. However, I get rubbed the wrong way when someone on either side of the debate says something as mind numbingly stupid as "I make no absolute statements". It invites ridicule regardless of your position and based on such a statement if I were a theist interested in debate I would be highly disinclined to take you seriously.
@PatientWolfBP *That's* your evidence of absolute truth?! Gee, I was kinda hoping for something more profound. Maybe "Slavery is always wrong" or "Abortion is always wrong."
Give me the good stuff, gang! Pointless platitudes don't do much for me. Let me try again: I see no evidence of absolute truth. If you do, make the case!
@BobTheAtheist2 "I make no absolute statements" is an absolute statement you idiot.
@thorbeckes If Christianity didn't affect me then, you're right, Yahweh would be in the same bin as Zeus, unicorns, and the Loch Ness Monster–things that are largely irrelevant. But Christianity *does* affect me–Creationism in public schools, prayers before city council meetings, and so on.
As for absolute truth, I've seen no evidence of it. (Uh, no–there's no contradiction there. Giving it the old kindergarten try, eh?!) I make no absolute statements. But back to the issue: show me.
@johnnywybenga2 I dunno–why would you expect nothing rather than something? Which one is the default position?
Newton revolutionized physics when he realized that motionless indeed *wasn't* the default. Vic Stenger argues that nothing is unstable.
The problem with brain teasers like this is that this is simply the clever line of the moment. When science has a decent answer, you'll just jump to the *next* question that science can't answer and declare victory. As has happened thru history.
@johnnywybenga2 You gotta read my posts a little better. I *said* that life has meaning.
I've simply seen no evidence that it has absolute meaning. Does it? If so, show me.
@thorbeckes Is there absolute truth? Prove it! I certainly see no evidence of it. That I can't account for it troubles me not at all.
Any "proof" that Yahweh is the foundation for anything (morality, logic, whatever) could have "Yahweh" replaced by "Brahma" or any other god's name.
Don't you see the problem? There are a bazillion gods out there. Obviously, societies invent them. Your task is to show that *one* god is actually real, not a myth. They all look about the same to me.
@thorbeckes Those verses don't do it. My claim is that the NT makes clear that hell is one size fits all. Heb. 10:20 talks about different amounts of deserving of punishment, and Rom. 12 doesn't address the issue at all.
@johnnywybenga2 Anyone can make up answers to life's questions. But is there reason to believe them? Why the Christian answers instead of those from any other religion?
Life indeed doesn't have an *absolute* or *transcendental* meaning, but so what? It has loads of meaning that I add and find and create myself! Pretty good deal, eh?
As for my explanation of life, Dawkins had a good observation, IMO. He said, “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.”
Let me know if this clarifies things for you.
@johnnywybenga2 To me, an atheist is someone who doesn't have a god belief. That describes me.
My biggest question is understanding belief and where Christians are coming from, but I'm also interested in apologetics in favor of Christianity.
@npotts89 Who said I'm the *ultimate* standard of justice? It's simply that, for me, the buck stops here. I decide what is right and wrong for me. Isn't that how you do it?
In every case where you say, "This is right" or "that is wrong," *you* are the authority (at least, in your own domain). Even when you say that God is the authority, it's *you* who says that!
@thorbeckes You say that I'm without excuse. Am I without excuse when I reject Zeus? or Shiva? Or Quetzocoatl? I presume I am. Then why am I without excuse for rejecting Yahweh?
Dude, there's no evidence here! It's just a mythology. If you've got some evidence that makes Yahweh dramatically more likely to be a real being instead of simply the musings of an Iron Age desert tribe, then trot it out. Simply saying "yeah, but you are without excuse!" doesn't make much of a case.
@thorbeckes If you could provide the exact Bible verses, I'd be interested in looking them up. The only ones that come to mind for me don't specify differing levels of torment. Perhaps I've got something to learn here.
@thorbeckes I haven't heard of levels of justice in hell. Show me the Bible references, please.
"Without excuse"? God gave me a brain, presumably to use. I have no evidence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and I have no evidence of Yahweh. When I'm standing before God, you better believe that I will give a good accounting that I didn't fall for gullible, pleasing nonsense. Rather, I used my brain. And you?
@thorbeckes Justice? A one-size-fits-all approach to punishment isn't justice. If you were a judge, you wouldn't give the jaywalker and the murderer the same punishment.
Sounds more like the musings of a primitive people 2000 years ago rather than the principles of the wisest being in the universe.
@npotts89 "God is just, therefore all men deserve God's justice and wrath….which is hell." Assuming that the English words (justice, wrath, good, etc.) are defined as everyone knows them, I'm not sure why God acts so unlike a human would in the same situation. When someone offends me, y'know what I do? No–I don't roast them for eternity. Very often I just … forgive them. It can take a big man to forgive the insult, but I do it sometimes.
God can't?
@npotts89 "What does all men deserving hell have to do with God's creative power?" You imagine a god who created everyone deserving an eternity of punishment in hell. If that doesn't seem perverse to you then there's not much I can do to advance the argument. Suppose we could create a race of intelligent robots. Would our first demand be that they worshipped us? Would we torture them if they didn't?
Poor analogy? OK–show me. What analogy would be appropriate?
@thorbeckes All men deserve Hell? Doesn't say much about the competence of the Creator if he made creatures so flawed that they deserve eternal punishment.
High schools, as flawed as they are, seem to successfully graduate people at a higher rate than God does! Is God just not a very good teacher?
@grandconjunct Yes, the biblical story has lots of remarkable points. Show that it's true, and it'll go beyond simply being a story. Until then, it's just a mythology.
@grandconjunct I find Science a good bit more reliable than Christianity for finding truth (or at least good approximations of it) about the world.
Perhaps you can at least see where I'm coming from, given that we're communicating using means that would be magical (or supernatural!) to the people of the first century. Science delivers … but Christianity? Not so much.
@beefs2sl "This story is quite believable"? Which story? The one in the Bible, where men rise from the dead?
Doesn't sound very believable to me! That's why I'm an atheist.
Extraordinary Miracles only creates Extraordinary excuses among willful skeptics . Atheists work tirelessly to miss the point , to make the evidence for the Universes beginning & design etc go away with desperate herculean efforts to invent Infinite numbers of imaginary universes to make all the "Non" evidence go away. Miraculous quail, manna , parting of red sea , incarnation, resurrection the biggest miracle of all the universe , created rebellion not faith , rebellion is prob not disbelief
I think the point is our presuppositions greatly color our reactions. Both the Christian and the atheist need to acknowledge this. This story, or better, account strikes me as quite believable and characteristic of human behavior that I have observed.
Jesus performed miracles and people still didn’t believe? Yeah, in the story. It’s a story that I don’t find especially believable. Sure, it’s possible that even if you had an amazing Jesus appearance, skeptics would still not believe. But that’s the rationalization you’d offer if you were trying to cover up for the failings of your mythology. Make a statement that differentiates your position from that of the kook who’s just trying to make excuses for his nonexistent god. You look identical.
@MrBongers I don't think it's a hard-hearted commitment to materialism, but a responsible testing for natural explanations before we move to a supernatural one. It is true that there are many mentally ill people who see and hear things – Jesus being a favorite, and other famous people from the past. I was a Pentecostal Christian as a teen where everyone seemed to be getting supernatural communication all the time but was mostly delusion. I think we do need to be really careful.