The Many Faces, and Causes, of Unbelief - Apologetics Press

More documents

Recommendations

Info

tes 12:7). The writer of the book of Hebrews said: “Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live?” (12:9). Jesus was e ven more explicit when He affirmed that “God is Spirit” and then later stated: “Handle me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have” ( John 4:24; Luke 24: 39). The Bible not only teaches that there is a distinction between the material and spiritual realms, but also notes that there is an essential difference among the various orders of creation. The Genesis account of creation reports how God created plants, animals, and men separately. Thus, in a very real sense it is erroneous to speak of man as “one” with nature—for he most certainly is not. Paul wrote: “All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fish, and another of birds” (1 Corinthians 15:39). Far from “all being one,” nature’s inhabitants actually were created by God to fulfill separate roles. The idea that “all is one” simply does not fit the available facts—scripturally or scientifically. Furthermore, the Scriptures speak to the fact that God existed prior to, and apart from, that which He created. As he began the book of Revelation, the apostle John described God as “the Alpha and the Omega...who is and who was and who is to come” (1:8). The psalmist wrote: “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God” (90:2). Third, we need to expose the illogical and unscriptural position within pantheism which teaches that God is an “impersonal It” rather than a personal God. As Sauer remarked: “It is also a priori impossible to accept an unconscious intelligence. This is a contradiction in terms. Similarly it is impossible to speak of unconscious ideas, for ideas demand a conscious, rational principle which produces them” (1962, p. 157, emp. added). In commenting on the same problem, Geisler wrote: -45
[G]ranting that there are no real finite selves or “I’s,” then there is no such thing as an I-Thou relationship between finite selves nor between man and God. Both fellowship and worship become impossible. All alleged I-Thou or I-I relations reduce to I.... Religious experience is impossible in any meaningful sense of the term since all meaningful experience involves something or someone other than oneself with whom one enters the changing experience (1976, pp. 187 189). How, we must ask, is it possible to communicate (physically or spiritually) with an impersonal, unconscious “It”? Fourth, pantheists believe that God is the one absolute, unchanging reality. Yet they also believe it is possible for humans to come to realize that they are God. But if humans come to realize something, then they have changed along the way. A process has occurred that brought them from a point where they did not know they were God to a point where they now know they are God. That is to say, a “change” has occurred. As Geisler and Brooks put it: “But God cannot change. Therefore, anyone who ‘comes to realize that he is God’ isn’t! The unchanging God always knew that He is God” (1990, p. 46). The pantheist cannot have it both ways. Fifth, the concept of self-deification inherent in pantheism (e.g., MacLaine’s sandy beach proclamation, “I am God!”) must be opposed. It is here that the conflict between pantheism and Christianity is most obvious. Through the prophet Ezekiel, God told the king of Tyre: “Thou hast said, ‘I am a god, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas’; yet thou art man, and not God, though thou didst set thy heart as the heart of God” (Ezekiel 28:2). In the Bible, only the wicked elevate themselves to the status of deity. King Herod flirted with self-deification—and died in a horrific manner as a result. Luke reported the event in his gospel as follows: So on a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat on his throne and gave an oration to them. And the people kept shouting, “The voice of a god and not the voice of a man!” Then immediately an angel of -46
Page 2 and 3: APOLOGETICS PRESS
Page 4: CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 3 CHAPT
Page 7 and 8: For example, when Joshua—who had
Page 9 and 10: the truth, but they will not. The s
Page 11 and 12: obliged to acknowledge that it was
Page 14 and 15: 2 THE MANY FACES OF UNBELIEF Throug
Page 16 and 17: Impossible task, that—since one w
Page 18 and 19: Neither of these tasks is simple (n
Page 20 and 21: foundation, not in divine guidance,
Page 22 and 23: are monkeys” (see Leonard Huxley,
Page 24 and 25: Such a premise is flawed internally
Page 26 and 27: The development, over the past four
Page 28 and 29: Thus, in the end the skeptic does n
Page 30 and 31: le plethora of men and women who ma
Page 32 and 33: include “Hell” and “Some Mist
Page 34 and 35: In fact, in the late 1970s, while I
Page 36 and 37: future state of rewards and punishm
Page 38 and 39: tion to function on its own; some b
Page 40 and 41: Deism...refers to what can be calle
Page 42 and 43: a God strong enough to create the w
Page 44 and 45: ecomes indistinguishable from evil.
Page 46 and 47: Ryerson who allegedly was able to
Page 48 and 49: ...Every action, under certain circ
Page 52 and 53: the Lord struck him, because he did
Page 54 and 55: ook, Apologetics in the New Age: A
Page 56 and 57: at ease. Yes, it is! Therefore, in
Page 58 and 59: What should be the response of Chri
Page 60 and 61: principle of causality. In its pict
Page 62: a better world, but is limited by t
Page 65 and 66: every citizen enjoys. Or contemplat
Page 67 and 68: since that time that it has very gr
Page 69 and 70: cuse. Man’s failure to see this g
Page 71 and 72: With reference to men the use is pr
Page 73 and 74: in philosophy and science. Life has
Page 75 and 76: Indeed, it may “not be irrelevant
Page 77 and 78: The shock received by the inexperie
Page 79 and 80: there have been those from politics
Page 81 and 82: from the only God ye seek not?,”
Page 83 and 84: This is the first age, I think, in
Page 85 and 86: tle John brought the book of Revela
Page 87 and 88: self, but the fact that “[i]t is
Page 89 and 90: As this section on immorality as a
Page 91 and 92: Democratic Way of Life, a formal st
Page 93 and 94: But science is no synonym for spiri
Page 95 and 96: ate student asked: “Hundreds of t
Page 97 and 98: ather bluntly: “In contrast to th
Page 99 and 100: a joy to tell him that he does not
Page 101 and 102:
is Steven Weinberg, author of Dream
Page 103 and 104:
At Noel’s funeral, the minister b
Page 105 and 106:
Again, time and space would fail me
Page 107 and 108:
sin? No, they were no worse sinners
Page 109 and 110:
Just as suffering is real, so are t
Page 111 and 112:
The corruptions, or shortcomings, o
Page 113 and 114:
UNJUST ACTS COMMITTED BY BELIEVERS
Page 115 and 116:
million-dollar reward to anyone car
Page 117 and 118:
ted. For example, when law-enforcem
Page 119 and 120:
tain actions are sanctioned by God
Page 121 and 122:
of unbelief. I suppose that some wo
Page 124 and 125:
4 CONCLUSION Every person familiar
Page 126 and 127:
This latter observation needs a lit
Page 128 and 129:
REFERENCES Abelson, Phillip (1964),
Page 130 and 131:
Durant, Will (1980), “We Are in t
Page 132 and 133:
Huxley, Thomas Henry (1896), Darwin
Page 134 and 135:
Raymo, Chet (1998), Skeptics and Tr
Page 136:
Watkin, Edward I. (1936), Theism, A
show all

The Many Faces, and Causes, of Unbelief - Apologetics Press

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?