I always find the secular attacks on Christianity, or any other religion, rather entertaining. The utter ignorance abounds like a gazelle; that is until the claws of truth attacks.
I just found a secular website obviously out to misunderstand Christianity and endeavor to disprove God; *sigh*, another failing attempt. Nietzsche (the acclaimed atheist) realized disproving god was hopeless and thus said, “God is dead,” in a practical sense. He figured he’d just ignore god and live without. Nevertheless, not everyone is insane like Nietzsche and so they can’t just ignore God, they have to make some self satisfactory reason. So I will quote what I found on the site.
“Welcome! The Secular Web is a website operated by the Internet Infidels, a nonprofit educational organization dedicated to defending and promoting a naturalistic worldview on the Internet.
In the words of Paul Draper, naturalism is ‘the hypothesis that the physical universe is a ‘closed system’ in the sense that nothing that is netiher a part nor a product of it can affect it. So naturalism entails the nonexistence of all supernatural beings, including the theistic God.’ “
Naturalism is unapologetically atheistic (at the very least practically agnostic), that is there’s no rational for the statement and it is just a matter of presupposed fact. But how could such a hypothesis ever been proved and thus be made a law or theory? What tools does man have, other than purely ignoring the possibility, to prove only the physical exists? Science? Science is limited to the physical alone. Logic? Logically you or I would have to be god (omniscient or omnipotent) to know for sure. Ultimately the hypothesis is circular and open ended and does not prove anything but the ability of ignor-ance. Nevertheless, lets take the presupposition to one logical end, that of pure causality.
If there is only physical (materialism) then I am in a world of cause and effect. The billions of atomic interactions and chemical reactions all govern the universe. Our thoughts, emotions, beliefs, memories, morals, etc are merely cause and effect. If this isn’t so, then WHAT from a purely naturalistic presupposition can account for right and wrong and abstract thought which are actually immaterial? The ability for abstract immaterial thought logically doesn’t come from immaterial cause and effect!
By denying anything greater than the dirt we are made of, we inherently deny ourselves to be anything greater! Man wants to believe he evolved from an ape, but I believe man has made himself devolve into an ape due to his hatred of anything greater than him. For if nature has priority over man, then man can not be greater and is enslaved to nature’s laws, one of which is causality. It is ludicrous to think that from causality, chance and an amoral nature I could become greater than nature, the substance I am solely created from. The thinkers from Darwin to today realized this and chose the fork in the road which led to disregarding and ignoring god and endeavoring to create an entire worldview without god; the worldview generally called Humanism.
In Humanism science, history, government, religion (“faith”), education, family, morals/ethics, science, math, law, etc are all rewritten without god in mind. In doing this a dualism is instated as there is the rational/material realm and the irrational/supernatural realm; Francis Schaeffer speaks of this in his books. Thus man has become god in his own mind because none is greater; except nature. Evolution is the only great hope and justification for humanism; even for all of its holes. I find it ironic that even humanists have to believe in miracles like that of something from nothing, an eternal universe, life from non-life and molecule to man; none of which evolution can nearly satisfy. I believe these anti-theists will inevitably have to accept some god; but on his own terms of course.
By accepting a supernatural creator, man can logically conclude he is not totally bound to the natural realm and is able to make such things as thoughts and choice. The book of Genesis clearly states man was put in priority over the material world as he was created in God’s image. This image entailed, free-thought, choice, logic, morals, etc but most of all dominion (ie. be fruitful and multiply and take dominion). Man was and is not some ape being bound to causality. But seculars want to have the good but not the god. They want to have the free thought, the choice, the morals, etc, but not the allegiance to God. Yet when what they forget is god is the only piece that unifies anything. Man wants to give meaning and purpose to life and history and also determine what is right and wrong, etc. But who determines such things? The plurality of opinions makes everything meaningless. And for the sake of this discussion just come to the fact that a “god” is necessary; heck I haven’t even got to Yahweh!
When reviewing several of the other articles on the site, it is clear that it is all a matter if ignor-ance. Scriptures are grossly misinterpreted and misapplied, opinions are used instead of scripture, man is the judge of god, lack of context, and just the cloak of personal hate and distrust of God. They just don’t want an answer which is always the case.
The very first step to discovering anything about God is realizing first that you aren’t God; and secondly understanding that God is necessary.