The thing is though, there are many out there who believe they are a skeptic when in reality, they are mostly in denial. Some say they choose not to believe anything that they cannot sense through touch, sight, or hearing. However, unless one has some mental disability, that is not true for anyone.
Take Ethiopia for example. I have never seen Ethiopia, heard it, or sensed it in any way with my own senses, but I am 99.99% positive such a place as Ethiopia exists. I have seen pictures and heard testimony of people who have been there and seen video taken from a place they claim was Ethiopia.
None of that is 100% irrefutable proof that Ethiopia exists, however, it is certainly reasonable evidence to support the claim. In fact, it is reasonable enough that if you walk down the street, you will not find many people who will claim that Ethiopia is a mythical place.
Believing that Ethiopia does not exist does not mean one lives in denial. Claiming there is no evidence at all for Ethiopia's existence does. The best a skeptic who denies its existence can say is that they believe the evidence for Ethiopia is insufficient for them.
When I debate atheists and they start out by saying "there is no evidence for the Christian God" or "God" in general, there are two conclusions for me that I have to go through. Either they are not educated on the mounds of archaeological and historical evidence which surrounds Jesus and the resurrection or they live in denial.
Anyone who is seeking evidence for Jesus and his resurrection, I encourage you to read "Evidence for Christianity" by Josh McDowell or "Cold-Case Christianity" by J. Warner Wallace. If you want an easy-to-read introduction to the evidence, try "Case for Christianity" by Lee Strobel.
Do any of them contain "proof"? Let's first define proof. It is not as easy as you might think. Rene Decartes is famous for saying "I think, therefore I am." This statement is the conclusion to his long journey to attempt to find proof that he, himself, existed and was not a part of some cosmic dream. The statement is not "proof" that he existed, but as he claims, is evidence to support it.
So if Rene Decartes could not find "proof" that he himself existed, what hope do we have to suggest there is "proof" of anything at all. I challenge anyone to provide irrefutable proof of anything. We are all simply absorbing evidence and believing what we feel best fits that evidence.
To the atheists who say "there is no evidence for God," I say either feel free to study the evidence yourself or if you believe you already know it, stop living in denial.
No comments:
Post a Comment