My summery case for Christian Theism

[DRDS]

Hey everyone, I was wanting to share with you something I put together at another apologetics board several years ago. It's basically a summery case for the top and best arguments and evidences I could find for Christian Theism.

I want to share it with you all just to see if one, you all had anything you would like to add to it, or to share it in hopes of teaching you all something new and to get you more interested in looking further into the arguments and evidences listed. So without further details, here is what I was able to come up with.



Cosmological argument:

The big bang indicates that the universe had a beginning, it had a cause and lack of evidence from naturalists indicate it to be a personal cause outside of time and space. Also the question, "why is there something rather than nothing?" Gives additional philosophical weight to this argument.

Teleological argument:

Since living things appear to be intricately designed, even more designed than today's modern machines like cars and computers. Not to mention where dna appears to function just like a computer program. And the fact that it would be very difficult if not almost impossible as far as the amount of time and creative ability for natural forces, mutations (which are mostly natural or negative) and natural selection to create.

Ontological argument:

Since people can think up the concept of God and God is the greatest possible concept that human beings can think of, therefore God exists.

Moral argument:

Because most people over the years hold to some kind of moral law and because nearly every culture holds to some kind of moral absolutes (such as, torturing babies for fun is wrong) and the fact we have consciences therefore objective moral values exist, therefore God exists.

Fine tuning argument:

Because the earth is fine tuned and the universe seems to be finely tuned to allow for our existence and there is such a long list of things that have to be letter perfect and just right to allow for our existence, therefore this indicates purpose in the universe and the idea that someone had our future existence in mind before the universe came into existence. Therefore God exists.

Argument from biblical archeology:

Since archeology continues to uncover more artifacts about the people, places and events of the Bible and since archeology has yet to prove the Bible wrong in any major key area but instead agrees with therefore this gives credence that the Bible is right about everything it says.


Argument for the existence of Jesus (as a historical figure)

Since we have a lot of evidence from both the New Testament and evidences from non biblical sources about Jesus's existence and the existence of the early Christian church and just the early explosion of the Christian church itself, therefore Christ did indeed exist as a historical figure. This also indicates that since the church was able to exist and expand like they did early on gives good credence that the miracles do happen and the Bible is true about reality.

Minimal facts argument for Jesus resurrection (Habermas's argument for the resurrection)

Since nearly all scholars both liberal and conservative agree about Jesus's existence, ministry, crucifixion, death and the fact that Christ's disciples claimed to have seen the risen Jesus and the fact that all natural alternatives to Christ's resurrection (ie swoon theory, legend theory, mass hallucination theory to name a few) all fail at not explaining away all of the facts therefore it appears that Christ did indeed rise from the dead.


Shroud of Turin argument:

Since there exists a cloth featuring a 3d image of a crucified victim with blood stains and whip marks. And the fact that there was no way for a midlevel artist to create such a image (which bears no sign of being a painting). And since the latest research indicates that the 1988 dating experiment was done on a section of the cloth that was repaired during the midlevel ages due to fire damage (and as you work your way up on that cut piece, the uppermost portion of the piece gives a later date as early as 1700 years ago to 3000 years ago, and a conservative estimation thus could very likely put it at 2000 years ago. *This argument isn't necessarily needed but if the facts later do go the right way, it would be a great additional piece of evidence in favor of Christian Theism.


Near Death experiences:

Since there have been many reports over the last fifty years or so for people who have been clinically dead for minutes and a few for an hour or more and later came back to describe their experience of being in another world whether it be heaven or hell. Currently some of the best nde accounts invole those who have been blind since birth and claimed to see during the nde encounter. Since the best naturalistic explanations cannot currently explain the best nde accounts, this gives good argument for the existence of a afterlife and of the human soul.

Purpose and meaning argument:

Since human beings long for a sense of purpose and a afterlife and the fact that we do not feel "at home" with the implications of naturalism (ie no afterlife, no purpose, no objective morality) it therefore gives indication that there must be something out there than can quench of longings for purpose and meaning.




So those are some of the best that I know of currently. Again, feel free to add any that you all think would be good. And also feel free to use this list for yourselves or for any curious non believer with whom you are having dialogues with. Thank you all for your time, God bless.

[bippy123]

Very nice post bro.
I really enjoyed going through Habermas's minimal facts theory because it points to the resurrection as the most reasonablenes explanation for historical facts that even non Christian NT scholars agree with.

Well , you know how I feel about the shroud

You should also include KBC's Biology of life and 3D spatial positioning argument in here as I feel it will eventually have the greatest Impact on future generations in the field of scientific Philosophy and theory as it has a great chance to be a paradigm game changer in biology.

[B. W.]

I like how you defined the terms with concise short definitions - very good!

There is also the John 16:8 method as well too
-
-
-

[Silvertusk]

Could you give us a link to your website please.

Silvertusk.

[DRDS]

Hey Silvertusk, the website I first posted this case on was Matt Slick's CARM - Christian Apologetics Research Ministry website, carm.org . And I'll say the same thing I said on another thread a few days ago about the place, it's a great site as far as the general content goes, its very good at debunking all the various cults, heresy, and other religions.

But when it comes to their message boards, they are some of the worst out there. There are little to no mods, the atheists there are out of control or they used to be. And the believers there are very absent minded who act like trolls that want to preach at you no matter what kind of question you are asking. They will get on there, type in ALL CAPS like they are shouting at you and they will preach like a Fred Phelps style sermon as their response. And this is almost to any kind of question you ask.

Trust me, that place really needs to take a long look at this place as far as how a apologetics message board should be done. If apologetics message boards were food, this place is steak with a side of lobstah, and the carm message boards is more like uh, dead kitty cat in the middle of the road with a side of DIRT. I'm serious.

Be very thankful for this message board because it's a diamond in the rough for sure. So either way that's my assessment of the Carm site's boards. Again the site itself is quite nice, but the boards are AWFUL.

[bippy123]

Hey Silvertusk, the website I first posted this case on was Matt Slick's CARM - Christian Apologetics Research Ministry website, carm.org . And I'll say the same thing I said on another thread a few days ago about the place, it's a great site as far as the general content goes, its very good at debunking all the various cults, heresy, and other religions.

But when it comes to their message boards, they are some of the worst out there. There are little to no mods, the atheists there are out of control or they used to be. And the believers there are very absent minded who act like trolls that want to preach at you no matter what kind of question you are asking. They will get on there, type in ALL CAPS like they are shouting at you and they will preach like a Fred Phelps style sermon as their response. And this is almost to any kind of question you ask.

Trust me, that place really needs to take a long look at this place as far as how a apologetics message board should be done. If apologetics message boards were food, this place is steak with a side of lobstah, and the carm message boards is more like uh, dead kitty cat in the middle of the road with a side of DIRT. I'm serious.

Be very thankful for this message board because it's a diamond in the rough for sure. So either way that's my assessment of the Carm site's boards. Again the site itself is quite nice, but the boards are AWFUL.

Well bro, I don't know about carm but I'm glad we have you posting here
Bippy

[DRDS]

Let's see, another argument I could add to this list is God's extensive use of Irony along with using numbers and dates. I see Him using this not only in the Old and New Testaments but even more recently with things in my life. Though I will admit, it's one of the subtle things, you either see it or you don't. Atheists especially, would look at things like this and count it as mere coincidence, but we as believers certainly know better.

[DRDS]

Also, this may be slightly off topic, but in the general discussion area, I did a thread concerning this really cool God and Science.org race car that I designed for one of my auto racing simulation games.

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... =2&t=38206

[bippy123]

Also, this may be slightly off topic, but in the general discussion area, I did a thread concerning this really cool God and Science.org race car that I designed for one of my auto racing simulation games.

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... =2&t=38206

Awesome car bro. Looks like it could really truck

Hey what about the golden ratio?

[DRDS]

Yeah, I was just now going to add that as well, but if you want to, since that has been something you've been looking into quite a bit, why not do a thread on it, it would be really neat.

[bippy123]

Yeah, I was just now going to add that as well, but if you want to, since that has been something you've been looking into quite a bit, why not do a thread on it, it would be really neat.

It's something I'm thinking about in the near future bro, but it's so new to me and I really want to get up to par on it first.

Bip

[DRDS]

Here are a couple of new arguments for God's existence that I recently saw that I want to add to the list above. These were a couple that William Lane Craig used in his recent debate with Dr. Alex Rosenberg.

The argument from the applicability of mathematics applying to physical reality.

The argument from intentionality and states of intentionality (thinking “of” or “about” things).

[DRDS]

Plus if anyone is interested, Craig won that debate by a landslide. Here were the exact voting results.

The official judges voted 4-2 in favor of Dr. Craig

The Purdue audience voted Dr. Craig over Dr. Rosenberg by a count of 1390 to 303.

Among the online viewers Dr. Craig received 734 votes & Dr. Rosenberg received 59 total votes.

[bippy123]

Plus if anyone is interested, Craig won that debate by a landslide. Here were the exact voting results.

The official judges voted 4-2 in favor of Dr. Craig

The Purdue audience voted Dr. Craig over Dr. Rosenberg by a count of 1390 to 303.

Among the online viewers Dr. Craig received 734 votes & Dr. Rosenberg received 59 total votes.

Thanks for the link bro, Craig is a powerhouse who puts the fear of God into unbelievers as Sam harris noted

[Byblos]

Here are a couple of new arguments for God's existence that I recently saw that I want to add to the list above. These were a couple that William Lane Craig used in his recent debate with Dr. Alex Rosenberg.

The argument from the applicability of mathematics applying to physical reality.

The argument from intentionality and states of intentionality (thinking “of” or “about” things).

Is there a link to this debate?