The Narrow Path Ministries

Just to be clear, “god of the gaps” was a concern first raised by Christians, not atheists. Their concern was God was relegated to only being responsible for the things science can’t explain and not ALL of creation, including the things science CAN explain. Hence, using the "gotg" approach the more science explains the smaller and smaller God’s role becomes. I find that a strange approach and so have other Christians over the years.










Thanks for the info SteveF

Steve wrote:Even the leading atheist philosopher and debater of the twentieth century, Anthony Flew, became a believer in the reality of a Creator as a result of increased scientific knowledge.

Yes, Antony Flew was a convinced atheist who became a convinced deist at the age of 81 ("I'm quite happy to believe in an inoffensive inactive god." —Antony Flew)

Concerning other atheists, Flew wrote:I have been denounced by my fellow unbelievers for stupidity, betrayal, senility and everything you can think of and none of them have read a word that I have ever written.

Flew wrote:A deity or a 'super-intelligence' is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature.

He also wrote: I now realise that I have made a fool of myself by believing that there were no presentable theories of the development of inanimate matter up to the first living creature capable of reproduction.

According to Wikipedia, "He blamed his error on being 'misled' by Richard Dawkins, claiming Dawkins 'has never been reported as referring to any promising work on the production of a theory of the development of living matter.' "

Here is the Wikipedia article where I read this information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Flew

I don’t think there is any one evidence that proves God exists in a way that nobody could come up with a clever method to explain it away. I think it is the combination of the evidence together that is so powerful though. The most powerful evidence for most individuals of course are their own personal experiences with God, but there is also fulfilled prophecy, spiritual gifts, historical evidence, eye witness testimony, order in the universe, the collective change in the lives of those who come to Jesus and the list goes on and on and on.

Atheists sometimes think they are just being skeptical but in fact they are not. ( see here http://scottthong.files.wordpress.com/2 ... .jpg?w=450) They are making a claim that everything that is, randomly came into being from nothing somehow. That is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. The Christian claim is also an extraordinary claim of course but the evidence for it is substantial.

How did the Jon Perry debate in Corvallis go? Will it make it to the site?

Kevin

It went pretty well, except for the extreme brevity of the time allotted to the presentations. It seemed very limited. There was a big audience (over 200 people) who seemed to be about equally divided between his sympathizers and mine. There was a huge difference, it seemed to me, in the maturity level (based upon civility of behavior) of those who supported evolution and those who did not. Evolutionists in the crowd were often very rude to anyone with whose opinions they disagreed, though Jon himself was a gentleman.

By the way, mkprr was there also, with his family. Jon is his identical twin brother.

Evolutionists in the crowd were often very rude to anyone with whose opinions they disagreed,

Maybe they’re still evolving

Sorry, couldn't resist. BTW… I’m inclined toward the evolutionary position myself, so no harm intended.

Steve, I enjoyed reading your earlier post. It was well written!

In that time, my experience has never brought me into contact with anyone who followed the "god of the gaps" approach to belief in God (with the possible exception of small children). Every thinking person I know who has embraced Christ has done so not because they lacked information, but because the gained it.

I haven’t either, but I have, unfortunately, heard Christians use the “god of the gaps” approach to make the argument that it must be God behind something in nature since it isn’t currently understood by science. One example would be dark matter/energy. I’ve heard Christians say that since scientists don’t really understand what is holding the universe together then the force must be God in some way. This can leave the false impression to a scientist that once they understand more about dark matter and energy they are somehow explaining away the need for a creator.

I’m with you Steve. I think the more we learn about anything in nature the better. The more it seems we learn the more wondrous and fascinating God becomes. Whether we’re learning about gravity, electromagnetism, biology or dark matter, God has left us a treasure to be discovered.

Psa 8:3 When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,
Psa 8:4 what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him?

And to think David likely had no knowledge of the vastness of the universe or the complexity of the cell when he wrote this. I'm sure he would find the modern scientific discoveries as fascinating as we do.

TrumanSmith wrote:

only I also think there is no god.

Okay

According to this some group of atheists do attend church service or meetings. It also mentioned that some atheists are actually religious but in a non theistic way.

Although most atheists don't count themselves as part of religions which require regular attendance at churches or other houses of worship, you can still find some who do attend such services from time to time or even regularly.

The reasons for such attendance are varied. Some atheists do count themselves as members of religious groups which encourage attendance at Sunday morning meetings or services. Being an atheist means not believing in any gods — it doesn't mean not being religious in any fashion. Most religions are theistic and so atheists won't be adherents of those faiths, but it isn't true that all religions are theistic.

In the United States there are several groups which count themselves as religious but either don't require belief in any gods or actually discourage belief in the traditional god of orthodox Christianity. These groups include Ethical Culture, the Unitarian-Universalist Church, and a variety of Religious Humanist organizations. Many, many atheists are members of these groups and regularly attend meetings or services on Sunday mornings

FYI: Christian vs. Christian (big-name debate) on evolution:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =1&theater

Oct. 3, 2013 in Georgia, "Reasons to Believe" vs. "Biologos."

This has been a long time coming. It will be historical for the evangelical Christian movement. I think it will be highly technical, and Fuz will get creamed.

Most evangelicals don't know it, but evangelical leaders in academia are having a crisis over evolution, with some accepting and some rejecting. Nearly all the relevant science evangelicals accept it, and more and more of the theological experts are coming to accept it. For example, Baylor is one of the premiere evangelical universities, and their science dept. fully accepts evolution.

Since the year 2000 when so much DNA across all animals species has been read and compared, the evidence for evolution is overwhelming.