Bible Inquirer

As I demonstrated in a previous post there is evidence for the existence of God, although atheists discount all such evidence as insufficient or irrelevant or fake.  Atheists also argue that belief in God is "illogical" because "...the existence of God has not been logically proven by anyone, ever."  [ The five best reasons not to believe in God ] Are all believers simply being illogical or irrational?  We know that many famous scientists and engineers have been religious people including Blaise Pascal, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Fred Brooks, Tim Berners-Lee, Donald Knuth, and Larry Wall just to name a few. [ List of Christians in science and technology ]  These are not people given to irrational thinking. Arguments for God There have been a lot of logical arguments for the existence of God.  I first learned of some these in a college Intro to Philosophy class.  Usually, the arguments that receive the most attention are classified as cosmological, ...

One of the most common objections atheists have against belief in God is that there is "no evidence".  Atheists know they cannot prove that God does not exist, because you cannot logically prove a negative, so they go for the next best thing. "There is no evidence that God exists. You may have had some kind of personal experience – what we [call] 'anecdotal evidence' that has convinced you personally that he’s out there. But most people would concede that that kind of evidence is not evidence at all. It can’t be repeated under test conditions and there are other possible explanations for what may have happened." [ The five best reasons not to believe in God ] First, argument from absence of evidence is a type of the logical fallacy called argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument from ignorance).  [ Argument from ignorance ]  Even if it is true that there is no evidence it in no way proves that believers are wrong. However, I challenge the assertion that ane...

Is Genesis history, fiction, or something else? There are many different ways of interpreting Genesis.  One list divides different theories into "concordist" ("God made the earth using the sequence of events described in Genesis 1") or "non-concordist" ("God created the earth using a different timing and order of events than those described Genesis 1") interpretations. "concordist" interpretations Gap theory (proposes a long time gap between the first two verses of Genesis) Day-age theory (the days in Genesis 1 actually represent many years) Young Earth (science should agree with Genesis) Appearance of age (God made the Earth appear old) "For concordists, the temptation is to interpret every Bible verse to match the current scientific picture. The meanings of particular phrases can be bent out of shape to match a particular scientific finding.... By focusing on trying to match the details of the ancient text to twenty-f...