PHILOSOPHICAL WRITINGS

Major Representatives of The Three Models

INTRODUCTION


FOUR CLASSICAL ARGUMENTS FOR EXISTENCE OF GOD

Ontological Argument (Formulated by Anselm, 1033-1109, Archbishop of Canterbury, England)

First, If you can have the concept that God exists, then He must exist; otherwise, you are thinking greater than reality. In that case, you have undermined rationality; you would then no longer be able to be confident in what you are actually thinking.

    If God doesn't exist, then we have thought greater than reality. But can we think greater than reality? Probably one of the best examples of our inability to think greater than reality comes from the book/movie Contact which is based upon the writing of Carl Sagan, one of the premier atheists of the 20th century. In the book/movie, he has Ellie meet up with an alien. When she does, he looks just like her dad (the aliens had downloaded her memory so that they could present themselves to her in such a way that she felt comfortable). This part of the movie was such a letdown. When asked what an actual alien woudl look like, Sagan responded: "A squid." Even this great genius could not get beyond the bounds of reality.

    Invariably, whenever this topic arises, some will point to the unicorn as proof that we can think greater than reality? But have we thought greater than reality when we speak of the unicorn? What is a unicorn? A horse with a horn on its head. Well, horses exist, and so do horns. All we have done is take one part of reality and mixed it with another part of reality. It is like a bowl of alphabet soup. If you align the letters up one way, they spell one word; if you align them another way, you have another word. All you’ve done is to stir up the letters; you have NOT, though, gone outside the bowl. That is what happens when we “create” unicorns, etc. We’ve still not gone outside the “bowl,” outside the box.

    Others, though, will object that there is a difference between unicorns and concepts such as God. We can trust the part of the brain that deals with our senses but not the part of the brain that deals with concepts. Well, the problem here is that the brain that deals with senses is the same brain that deals with concepts. If you undermine it in the area of concepts, you’ve simply undermined it. Period. Now maybe you just simply can’t trust the brain. Since we do, then I think it is safe to trust it when it speaks to us about the concept of God.

    There is another way to look at this. It is interesting to note that everybody has a concept of God. Even the materialists/atheists have a concept of God. When they claim "No God," they are negating an actual concept, not a word, but a concept. Where does such a concept come from? If matter is all that exists, then it came from matter. If it came from matter but God does not exist, then matter has undermined itself as a trustworthy source of knowledge.

    St. Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin claim that there is actually a faculty God has placed within each and everyone of us so that we can recognize Him. Alvin Plantinga calls it the A/C Model (Aquinas/Calvin). It explains the reason that there is an almost universal concept of God within the human race. This is first-level knowledge, as opposed to second-tier/level knowledge produced by reason.

Second, life teaches you to think in terms of gradation: worse, worse, bad, neutral, good better, best, perfect. In fact, logically you won’t have good, better, best, etc. without the existence of a perfect standard. For example, if you were to tell me that this “_________” was an inch, but I said, “No! This ‘_________________________’ is an inch.” Well, who would be right, or who would be CLOSER to being right? We can argue all day long until finally someone produces a ruler. The perfect ruler is the one which will determine which was the BETTER inch and which was the WORSE inch. Without the perfect standard (ruler), such talk is meaningless. Yet life forces this kind of talk upon us. Now when you come to the area of perfection, you have entered into the arena of God.


Cosmological Argument (Thomas Aquinas, 1225–1274, Dominican scholar/Aristotle, 4th-century BC Greek philosopher)

This argument is based upon the concept of cause and effect.

Cause and effect works the following way. You are here (the effect) because your mom and dad came together in a romantic way (the cause). Your mom and dad are here (effect) because their parents came together in a romantic way (cause). Their parents (your grandparents) are here (effect) because their parents came together in a romantic way (cause). And so on and so on and so on until finally you come to the First Cause, the Cause that started it all. This First Cause is “God.”

God then is the First Cause of All Things.

    It is interesting that this is called the COSMOlogical argument because it appears that this is just the way the cosmos (universe) operates. Stephen Hawking (an avowed atheist) has to explain the origin of the universe, especially in light of his belief in the Big Bang Theory. For Hawking the Big Bang occurred 13.4 billion years ago. Well, when did the substance come from which was the source of the Big Bang? Hawking’s answer is that it either came from another universe, the multiverse theory or just materialized out of nothing (see The Grand Design). There is zero evidence that this multiverse system exists, at least if you accept Hawking’s view of ultimate reality. This is pure faith on his part; the same applies to everything materializing out of nothing. The belief that God created the universe has as much right to this discussion as Hawking’s mutiverse theory; both are based on the cosmological argument and both to some extent are based on faith.

    Recently, scientists have hailed the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle, "the God particle," which explains how mass can be created. Again, the question emerges, "Where does the Higgs Boson particle come from? It just moves the question back one step further, but the question remains the same.



Teleological Argument (William Paley, 1743 – 1805, English Philosopher)

Argument based on design and beauty in the universe. William Paley stated that if you came upon a watch in a field, you would rightly conclude that there existed a watchmaker who designed and made the watch. Watches don’t just appear. There is always a watchmaker for every watch. In the same way the fact that we see design and beauty in the universe leads us to believe that a Grand Designer designed the universe.

    It is interesting that one of the leading atheists of the 20th century, Antony Flew, now believes that God exists. (Flew was one of C.S. Lewis’ major opponents in the Socratic Debates at Oxford University.) His reason is similar to that of the theological argument. He claimed that the existence of the DNA molecule has convinced him of God’s existence. The reason is that the DNA molecule, which is basic for life, is too complex for a godless evolution to produce it. Its irreducible complexity argues that an unseen hand outside the natural process had to interfere with the process to create the DNA molecule. [It may be no coincidence at all that Christopher Hitchens has to admit in his debate with William Demski that the leading geneticist in the world happens to believe in the existence of God (in fact, he is a Christian). There may be a link between his being the expert in genetics and his belief in the existence of God.]

    Just how complex is the DNA molecule, the starting point of life? I was told that if you took the DNA from a person's body, it would stretch all the way from the earth to the moon. When I researched this, I discovered that all the DNA in your body would actually stretch all the way from the earth to the moon and back to the earth again FOUR THOUSAND TIMES and to and from the sun 4 times! That is the starting point of life for people. That is how complex life is. According to Flew, this poses serious challenges for those who promote a strictly materialistic view of the universe.

    A godless evolution doesn't seem to be able to account for the complexity of the universe. In fact, it seems to contradict the nature of the universe. The Second Law of Thermodynamics claims that everything moves to entropy, that is, it is in the process of breaking down, cooling down. One day the sun will run out of energy; the whole universe will become cold rocks floating around in space--unless something radically outside the system changes it.

    Moreover, look at the way life actually works. Things don't seem to progress; rather, they appear to regress unless a higher hand reaches down to lift us up. Take the dog, "man's best friend," as an example. Left to his own devices, is a dog man's best friend? No. He is a scavenger, a plague in the ancient world because they would rove around in packs and attack the vulnerable. It takes someone higher to reach down and civilize or domesticate the dog.

    "But we are progressing!" Really? Maybe in technology, but not anywhere else. We marvel at the benefits gained from nuclear technology. 75% of France's energy comes from nuclear power plants. That is wonderful! But place this nuclear technology in the hands of Ahmadinejad and you have nuclear global extinction. Scary.

    "But we are so much smarter than they were 2000 years ago?" Really?

    1. Alfred North Whitehead claimed that in Western Philosophy there is Plato...everything else is a footnote.
    2. Have we progressed morally beyond the teachings of Christ to love one another, to love one's neighbor as oneself?
    3. Have you ever tried to take an 8th grade English exam from the 1800's? You will fail it.
    4. Look at your English language. It is being slowly corrupted. Many "educated" people go around saying, "Please give the gift to Nancy and I," thinking saying "I" instead of "me" makes them sound so sophisticated, whereas saying "I" instead of "me" makes them sound uneducated.
      Compare modern English with Shakespearean English. English of the 1500's was so much more precise than it is today. It is constantly being watered down.
      Compare modern English with Greek of the 1st century. No comparison. Modern English is so dumbed down; Greek is highly tuned, precise, reflective of a very cultured people.
    "Man, though, started out so simple. He has truly progressed. Just look at the prehistoric man. He was ignorant, made grunting sounds, welded a club, and beat women on the head." Let's look at prehistoric man:
    1. How do we know all those things we claim about prehistoric man being ignorant? The reason we know so little about prehistoric man is that he was PREHISTORIC (thank you for this insight, Chesterton).
    2. Apparently, the guy was brilliant. He did invent the wheel and harness the power of fire.
    3. Whatever else was true about prehistoric man is that he was an artist. The latest finding of cave dwellings from 40000 years ago (Spanish cave of Cueva de las Monedas) again point to man as from the very beginning being an artist, someone who thought in terms of beauty, design...transcendence. He had to start from scratch, but with his brilliant man, he not only survived, he also launched us into the path of discovery and invention.
    The difference between man and the ape, even between PREHISTORIC man and the ape is not that the man paints better than the ape but that the man paints and the ape does not. There is such a qualitative distinction between man iand the ape n the realm of thought that to label him strictly as animal is preposterous.


Moral Argument (Immanuel Kant, 1724-1804, German Philosopher)

There exists within each of us the compulsion to do the good. In order for this compulsion to be logical, we must then be able to be good. The only problem is that none of us ever attain the level of goodness we feel we should attain. The reason we don’t reach that level is that we run out of time. Therefore, in order for this compulsion to be logical, we need more time. The result is that each of us then must be immortal; immortality gives us time to become perfect. God is necessary for immortality to exist. Therefore, God must exist.


WEAKNESS AND STRENGTHS OF THE ARGUMENTS

Weakness: They Are Not Conclusive

The fact is that these do not prove 100% that God exists. For example, David Hume challenges the claim of cause and effect. Simply because every effect we experience has had a cause does not, according to Hume, mean that EVERYTHING in the future will have a cause.


Strengths



FIRST MODEL
Materialism


MATERIALISM


The first ontological system we will view will be materialism. With each system we will first state the claim the system makes, next give the arguments in support of the claim, and last present some challenges to the claim.

Some people unfortunately get upset whenever their beliefs are challenged. Well, every system faces challenges...EVERY system. The question each person has to decide is whether or not the challenges actually defeat the claims. If the challengers are defeaters (something only YOU can determine), then you need to abandon that system and find one whose challengers are not defeaters.


THE MAJOR CLAIM OF MATERIALISM

The Claim

According to Encyclopedia Britannica, materialists/atheists make up between 2.4-3.8% of the world's population. According to materialists, matter and its component parts are all that essentially exist. This does not claim that matter exists (even the third model asserts that); rather it claims that matter (and its component parts) is the only thing which exists.


Characteristics of Materialism

  1. Ethical Systems Produced by Materialism

    • Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre: There is no absolute standard of right and wrong, therefore, a person cannot speak of right in any true sense of the word. This is also heavily supported by noted 20th-century philosopher Richard Rorty (Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature).
    • Survival of the fittest: the strong wins.
    • Modern Versions: Although materialists reject the belief that God exists, many materialists today claim that man is valuable and possesses certain rights. As a result, ethics should be based upon what is best for society as a whole.

  2. Epistemological Claim by Some Materialists

    Some materialists, especially Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Bertrand Russell, assert the supremacy of reason in dealing with knowledge. Coupling reason with an absolute certain belief in the existence of matter, these have claimed that God does not exist. They seem to be following in the train of Bertrand Russell, a prominent British materialists of the 20th century.

  3. The Cry for Freedom

    Starting with the great French existentialists Sartre and Camus, the materialists have rejected God because of the negative impact of belief in God on personal freedom. In his debate with William Demski, Christopher Hitchens makes the plea: "Don't you want to be free?" According to Hitchens and Sartre, personal freedom can exist only if God is dead. Usually whenever there is a cry for freedom from these quarters, it is a cry for sexual freedom (e.g. Bertrand Russell).

    In his debate with Dembski, Hitchens likens God to an overbearing father. He simply asks who would really want such a person in their life 24/7.



ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF MATERIALISM

Negative Attacks Against Belief in God

Materialists commonly approach a defense of materialism in a negative way: instead of trying to show that mere matter explains all of life, they attempt to prove that God does not exist. If God does not exist, but matter does, then, according to their stance, materialism is the explanation for ultimate reality.

Two contemporary works which espouse materialism are Stephen Hawking’s The Grand Design and Christopher Hitchens’ god is not Great. The arguments for this view will come primarily from these 2 contemporary works. Also reference will be made to Bertrand Russell’s arguments found in Why I Am Not a Christian.

  1. The existence of evil in the world argues against the existence of God. When C.S. Lewis was an atheist, he claimed that a good, all-powerful, loving God could not exist in light of the fact that there is so much evil and suffering in the world. According to this line of reasoning, either God is not love or God is not powerful, or even better, He does not exist.
  2. Hitchens in particular rails against not only evil in the world but also against the evil which religionists have committed in the name of their religion. In god is not Great, Hitchens points to the 6 B’s to prove his point: Belfast, Beirut, Belgrade, Bombay, Bethlehem and Baghdad. All these once great and beautiful cities have been scenes of great strife and turmoil because of religious conflicts.
  3. Christianity, according to Hawking, is attached to an Aristotelian view of the universe which has been widely proved to be false.
  4. Hitchens claims that all the so-called proofs for God’s existence are ineffectual at best (in agreement with Bertrand Russell, a strict empiricist).
  5. Christian ethics lead to deleterious side effects; for example, Christianity teaches people to be humble. Humility can lead to the destruction of the humble (this is according to Bertrand Russell, a strict empiricist).
  6. According to Stephen Hawking, religion is only faith-based, whereas materialism is based upon reason and hard empirical data. In the meantime, although not everything can be explained scientifically, so much has been explained scientifically that it is only just a matter of time before science is able to explain EVERYTHING. Hitchens makes this same point in god is not Great.
  7. Atheists claim: “I have not experienced God.” If God existed, then surely everybody would experience Him.
  8. According to Hitchens, the documents upon which Christianity is based (the NT) are not only late in date but also contradictory.
  9. Materialism is progressive, whereas belief in God is outdated.

Responses to Negative Attacks from Materialists

Before looking at the challenges to materialism, it seems only fair to respond to the attacks which materialists have launched against belief in God. Then we will look at the challenges to materialism.

  1. Response from C.S. Lewis Regarding Evil/Suffering: Argument from the Existence of Evil is a Self-Defeater

    C.S. Lewis, when an atheist, claimed this world is not a good world because of all the evil and suffering he experienced during WW1 and also in his own personal life, the early death of his mother and the untimely death of his best friend; therefore, he must have a standard of good by which he judges the world. Since this standard does not come from this world, it must come from another sphere that is better than our own; actually it will be perfect. His own argument against God’s existence actually demonstrates God’s existence. (Because evil and suffering is a huge topic in philosophy, we will devote a whole section to it later on in the readings.)

    It is interesting is that Hitchens promotes a strictly materialistic view of reality which cannot support any type of ethic logically. In god is not Great and in some of his debates, he launches into some vicious attacks against Mother Teresa and Roman Catholics because of the "evil" they have perpetrated upon mankind. Is Hitchens being inconsistent by claiming that matter is all that exists and then railing against the evils committed by Roman Catholics?


  2. Responses to the Challenges of Russell/Hitchens

    • The so-called proofs for God’s existence take reality seriously: cause and effect, the ability to conceive of God’s existence, etc. Russell basically dismisses these facts in reality.
    • Simply because an atrocity is committed in God’s name does that mean He does not exist. Might the truth be that He exists and yet people who claim to be Christians are not living genuine Christian lives? If you turn Hitchens' logic around, should we reject materialism in light of the tens of millions of people who were killed by materialistic regimes (Communism in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, and Viet Nam)?
    • Deleterious side effects to the Christian ethic. There may be bad side effects on this side of death: we may get used, we may get run over; however, if Christianity is true, would the pay-off on the other side of death more than make up for these deleterious side effects?

  3. Responses to Camus/Sartre/ Nazism/Nietzsche: Inconsistency

    • If there is no right and wrong—and hence no God, then why did Camus rail against the French occupation of Algeria?
    • If there is no right and wrong—and hence no God, then why did Sartre condemn western culture in favor of Stalinism?
    • If there is no right and wrong—and hence no God, then why did H.G. Wells (a strict materialist) criticize Nazism?
    • If there is no right and wrong—and hence no God, then why did Nietzsche go insane after watching a man beat a horse to death? He should have rejoiced over the whipping of the horse because it showed the stronger exercising power over the weaker; at the least he should not have cared.


  4. Responses to Other Claims

    • Science is unable to prove or disprove the existence of God because of its limitations. Science deals only with this universe. If a transcendent God truly exists, would He by His very nature stand outside this universe? If so, then would scientific experiments be too limited to prove or disprove God’s existence? Moreover, Hitchens undermines his own claim when he admits that because science has not been able to explain everything, he shows that even faith is required to claim that materialism is the ultimate answer to life.
    • Could our own personal experiences be too limited?
    • It is a fact that 95% of mankind believes in the existence of God. Moreover, you must ask yourself the question: “If 95% of the world believes God exists and if we all have the same data, then why don’t materialists believe in His existence?”
    • Atheism is as old as belief in God and therefore is not any more progressive than belief in God. For example, Psalm 14:1 claims that the fool has said in his heart that there is no god. Apparently, at least some people in the day of David, according to this verse, were strict materialists. David lived 3400 years ago. Therefore, is discarding God really an advance in human thought since materialists have been around at least as long as theists have been around? In fact, the first recognized philosophers (Thales, Heraclitus, etc.) were strict materialists. Socrates and especially Plato and Aristotle emphasized the existence of God. It appears then that belief in God is really the progressive attitude, whereas materialism is actually regressive. (Have we actually discarded some thoughts without examining them to determine whether or not they should have been discarded in the first place?)
    • The Hawking Claim about Christianity being based on Aristotelian view of the universe.
      • The Roman Catholic papacy of the time of Galileo held to an Aristotelian view of the universe, not Christianity. In fact during the Middle Ages the cosmology of Ptolemy (which claimed that the earth was in fact infinitesimally small compared to other bodies in the universe-almost like a mathematical point) was taught in the Christian universities (see The Timeless Writings of C.S. Lewis, pages 349-350).
      • If the de Medici popes had been in power at the time of Galileo, he would not have been persecuted. In fact, one of the de Medici's was his chief sponsor until the Inquisition came after Galileo.
      • Finally, whereas many equate Christianity with the "flat earth" theory, it needs to be mentioned that two of the greatest Christian monarchs of the Middle Ages (Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain) financed Columbus' expedition which proved that the earth indeed was round.

Positive Evidence for Materialism

Logically, you can't prove a positive by a negative. Just like Theists need to present evidence that the existence of God explains reality, so materialists need to present evidence that a strictly materialistic view of the universe explains all of life. Materialists claim that for the most part materialism has been able to explain most of reality. There are some things out in the universe which they have not been able to explain; however, they claim that given enough time, one day they will be able to explain and account for everything from a materalistic viewpoint.


CHALLENGES TO MATERIALISM

  1. The Reality Challenge

    • It is interesting that most of these philosophers did not live consistently with what they claimed to be true. In other words, their views about God were not REALISTIC. If reality is anything, it is realistic, that is, it works.
    • Atheism fails to take into account many aspects of life, especially cause and effect, the reality that people can conceive of God, the feeling within us that we SHOULD do the right thing, and the presence of design in nature. G.K. Chesterton put it this way: when you remove the mystery of God from life, everything becomes mysterious; when the mystery of God is injected into life, everything becomes understandable. Richard Rorty, when faced with the categories of ethics, aesthetics, and transcendentalism, replied that he didn’t resolve these issues; he rather "dissolved" them, that is, he just simply acts as if they don’t exist. Whereas Rorty is to be commended for thinking consistently, the question remains whether or not a person can live consistently with that mindset.
    • If God does NOT exist, then what is your basis for claiming that man is valuable and that he has certain rights? If man gives value and man gives rights, then man can take them both away. Again, we are forced back to the ethic of survival of the fittest: “Because I am stronger than you, I can determine your value and your rights. Once somebody else gets stronger, s/he can make that determination. This seems to be a very precarious way to determine value and rights.
    • Moreover, many today claim that ethics should be based upon what is best for society. But who is going to determine that? The majority? If we always went along with the majority, then we would still have segregation in the South. The smartest? Few are as smart as C.S. Lewis and William Buckley were; yet both were devoted Christians, believers in God. (In fact, the noted atheist Ayn Rand once complained to William Buckley: "You are much too intelligent to believe in Gott." Her statement affirmed the fact that one can be smart and yet still believe in the existence of God. The strongest? That can lead to Nazi Germany.


  2. The Epistemological Challenge

    Probably even a greater challenge materialists must respond to concerns epistemology, the basis and confidence in knowledge. If materialists are right, then matter is all that exists. The issue then is if matter is all that exists, then why did matter come up with such ideas as right and wrong, God, transcendence? If matter came up with these false ideas and beliefs, then how can you trust that matter is right when it claims that only matter exists? Matter has created at the minimum a dubious environment for knowledge, if not downright hostile one. Either we live in an congenial environment for knowledge in which we can trust knowledge, or else we live in one that is hostile towards knowledge.

    Moreover, if matter is all that exists and if matter is not rationle (for example, does anybody believe that a rock thinks rationally?), then our reason comes out of non-rationality (C.S. Lewis: Miracles, A Preliminary Study). Can we be confident in our reason if that is the case? As Chesterton wrote: "Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all." (Orthodoxy).


  3. The Three Major Challenges from Chesterton

    1. If God does not exist, where does the universe come from? Although Hawking has no evidence for this, he claims that it probably comes from another universe (the multiverse theory). Hawking may be right, but he is basing his claim purely upon faith, something he attacks believers in God for.
    2. If God does not exist, where does life come from? This is the argument posited by Sir Antony Flew in 2004.
    3. If God does not exist, why man? From all appearances, man is unique. There are many common features between man and animals; however, there are some radical distinctions. It is not that man doesn't paint better than animals; he actually paints to create beauty. It is not that man talks about animals better than the animals do; he actually talks about animals and his relationship to them, whereas animals do not. There is such a huge qualitative difference between man and the rest of the animal world that it is mind-boggling.

    G.K. Chesterton wrote that if we take the mystery (God) out of the equation, then everything becomes mysterious; on the other hand, if we inject the mystery (God) into the equation, then everything becomes lucid.


  4. The Freedom Challenge

    Finally regarding freedom, the concept which seems to be the driving force for materialists. First, regarding sexual freedom, an element very much at play in our materialists' ethics. Maybe a case can be made for complete sexual freedom. However, there may be another way of looking at sex. Suppose it is this wonderful, precious gift that is meant to be shared only with that one special person and which is to be presented initially on that one special night. Engaging in sex before marriage and with multiple partners may be like a young person who is given an expensive set of clothes. He takes those clothes and wears them to sporting events, to play intramural sports with his friends, eats in them at some pig-out parties. They get worn out and are no longer special. One day, though, he wants to make an impression on a young lady. His problem is that the special set of clothes he had are no longer that special and no longer that impressive. He has lost a golden opportunity to do something special for the young lady who is now the great love of his life.

    Regarding wanting an overbearing father in one's life: who could disagree? However, suppose God is not an overbearing Father but one who loves His family, wants only the best for them, who is interested in guiding them in a real life, a life of adventure (not the life many times portrayed in some churches but a life that has meaning and is adventurous? Dads can be like that. If God is like that, then who wouldn't want Him in their lives 24/7?

    Finally, there is something to be said for the existentialist's view of freedom: the freedom to do anything one wants without any restrictions, without anybody telling you what to do, even the person who wrote the manual on the best way to keep your car operational. On the other hand, there is something to be said for another kind of freedom: the kind which comes from "obeying" the car manual. Those who don't obey the car manual will be stuck in Corsicana and end up just walking in order to get from one place to another, whereas the person who "obeyed" the car manual will have the freedom to drive in his car around the country and enjoy the wide open road. Maybe the right and wrong which come from the existence of God are like the owner's manual; they help us keep running and keep running smoothly so that we can truly enjoy the open road of life. In other words, there is more than one way to look at freedom. (P.S. Remember that there are only TEN Commandments, not 2,000 pages worth like there are in the health care law that was passed last year.)


EPISTEMOLOGICAL BASIS FOR MATERIALISM

Because materialism cannot prove that matter accounts for all of reality, its knowledge base is going to be intuition. The materialist is going to have to intuit that matter is all that exists. This does not mean that the materialist is wrong; it just means that intuition plays the determinative role for him than he initially thought.


SECOND MODEL
Pantheism/Panentheism


HINDUISM


The second major ontological system we will examine is Hinduism. As with each system we will first state the claim Hinduism makes, next give the arguments in support of Hinduism, and last present some challenges to Hinduism. (Much of the following can be found in Wikipedia and Encyclopedia of Philosophy.)


THE MAJOR CLAIM OF HINDUISM

Introduction

Hinduism falls within the second model of reality in which the universe is considered divine; or rather the essence of all things is divine. God DOES exist; the essential elements in the universe are divine (for example, my body may not be divine; however, the real me—the soul—is divine). In this system God is called “Brahman,” whereas man is called “Atman.” The claim then is that Brahman and Atman are one.

Unlike Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Hinduism does not teach that the body is a major part of who a person is. If reincarnation is true, you may be male one time but female next time. The body is more of a cage than a true picture of who a person is.

This has major implications not only for the here and now but also for the future. According to Hinduism, a person is basically sexless; according to the third model which claims that your body will be resurrected, you don't only have a male or female body but you ARE male or you ARE female. Next, according to Hinduism, Nirvana is escape from bodily existence; whereas the third model teaches that you are stuck with your body in eternity...in a radically transformed body but nevertheless still YOUR body--without the warts and wrinkles.


Elaboration of Hinduism

Originating in India, Hinduism is a religious tradition sometimes referred to as Santana Dharma (in Sanskrit, "eternal law"). The word "Hindu" (Persian in origin) is derived from Sindhu, Sanskrit for the "Indus" River. The Rig Veda speaks of the land of the Indo-Aryans as Sapta Sindhu (the land of the seven rivers in northwestern South Asia, one of them being the Indus). The term was used for those who lived in the Indian subcontinent on or beyond the "Sindhu".


In one sense, Hinduism in is the world's oldest extant religion (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam would disagree with this assessment); its beginnings are to be found in the ancient Vedic civilization. A mixture of various beliefs and traditions, Hinduism is not founded upon a single person (unlike Buddhism, Christianity, or Islam). It is the third largest world religion following Christianity and Islam, having approximately a billion believers; over 900 million live in the Indian subcontinent. Other countries with large concentrations of Hindus: Bangladesh, Malaysia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Mauritius, Fiji, Suriname, Pakistan, Guyana, Indonesia, and Trinidad and Tobago.

Hinduism contains a vast body of scriptures. Divided as revealed and remembered and developed over millennia, these scriptures expound on theology, philosophy and mythology, and provide spiritual insights and guidance on the practice of dharma (religious living). In the orthodox view, among such texts, the Vedas and the Upanishads are the foremost in authority, importance and antiquity. Other major scriptures include the Tantras, the sectarian Agamas, the Puras and the epics Mahrata and Rmyaa. The Bhagavad Gita, a treatise excerpted from the Mahbhrata, is sometimes called a summary of the spiritual teachings of the Vedas.


Beliefs

Being an extremely diverse religion. even though some beliefs are accepted by most Hindus, scholars have found it difficult to identify any doctrines with universal acceptance among all Hindu sects. Getting a handle on Hinduism would be comparable to sticking your hand into a pale of water and trying to grasp some of the water. Although your hand will come up empty, some water will nevertheless cling to the hand.

The same applies to Hinduism. Just when you think that you have a handle on Hinduism, you will discover something in Hinduism which completely contradicts what you earlier believed to be true about the system. For example, although it is true that prominent beliefs include Dharma (duties and ethics), Samsra (reincarnation: birth, life, death and rebirth), Karma (action and reaction), Moksha (freedom from reincarnation), and the various yogas (paths or practices), included within Hinduism are monotheism, polytheism, panentheism, pantheism, monism and atheism. At times Hinduism is viewed as henotheistic, that is the belief that although many gods may exist, there is one supreme God. Whatever else is true of Hinduism, it appears to be a system which divinizes or deifies all of reality.


  1. Concepts of God and Man

    What, though, are some of the unifying themes in Hinduism. First, most Hindus believe that the true "self" or soul of every person, called the atman, is eternal. According to the monistic/pantheistic theologies of Hinduism, this Atman is ultimately indistinct from Brahman, the supreme spirit. Brahman is described as "The One Without a Second;" hence these schools are called "non-dualist."

    The following then is the essence of Hinduism:
    The goal of life according to the Advaita school is to realize that one's atman (soul) is identical to Brahman, the supreme soul. The Upanishads state that whoever becomes fully aware of the Atman as the innermost core of one's own self, realises their identity with Brahman and thereby reaches Moksha (liberation or freedom).


  2. Karma, samsara and moksha

    Karma translates literally as action, work or deed and can be described as the "moral law of cause and effect". According to the Upanishads, an individual, known as the jiva-atma, develops sanskaras (impressions) from actions, whether physical or mental. The "linga sharira", a body more subtle than the physical one, but less subtle than the soul, retains impressions, carrying them over into the next life, establishing a unique trajectory for the individual. Thus, the concept of a universal, neutral and never-failing karma intrinsically relates to reincarnation as well as one's personality, characteristics and family. Karma threads together the notions of free will and destiny.

    This cycle of action, reaction, birth, death, and rebirth is a continuum called samsara. The notion of reincarnation and karma is a strong premise in Hindu thought.

    The ultimate goal of life, referred to as moksha, nirvana or samadhi, is understood in several different ways: as the realization of one's union with God; as realization of one's eternal relationship with God; realization of the unity of all existence; perfect unselfishness and knowledge of the Self; attainment of perfect mental peace; or as detachment from worldly desires. Such a realization liberates one from samsara and ends the cycle of rebirth. The exact conceptualization of moksha differs among the various Hindu schools of thought. For example, Advaita Vedanta holds that after attaining moksha an atman no longer identifies itself with an individual but as identical with Brahman in all respects. The followers of Dvaita (dualistic) schools identify themselves as part of Brahman and after attaining moksha expect to spend eternity in a loka (heaven).

    From World Religions Today 4th Ed. (Oxford Press): "The central idea they introduced is that of samsara, 'the world,' in which all phenomena are really only secondary appearances. But blinded by illusion (maya), humans act foolishly and thereby suffer from samsara's pains and privations. These last until the realization dawns that the underlying reality is everywhere the same, and it is the unchanging spirit (Brahman). The individual soul (atman) wanders from birth to death again and again until it finds release from the cycle by realizing that it is nothing other than Brahman, the ultimate reality of the world, the universal spirit."


  3. Yoga

    In whatever way a Hindu defines the goal of life, there are several methods (yogas) that sages have taught for reaching that goal. A practitioner of yoga is called a yogi. Texts dedicated to Yoga include the Bhagavad Gita, the Yoga Sutras, the Hatha Yoga Pradipika and, as their philosophical and historical basis, the Upanishads. Paths one can follow to achieve the spiritual goal of life (moksha, samadhi, or nirvana) include:

    • Bhakti Yoga (the path of love and devotion),
    • Karma Yoga (the path of right action),
    • ja Yoga (the path of meditation) and
    • na Yoga (the path of wisdom).

    An individual may prefer one yoga over others according to his or her inclination and understanding. For instance some devotional schools teach that bhakti is the only practical path to achieve spiritual perfection for most people, based on their belief that the world is currently in the age of Kali yuga (one of four epochs part of the Yuga cycle). Practice of one yoga does not exclude others. Many schools believe that the different yogas naturally blend into and aid other yogas. For example, the practice of jnana yoga, is thought to inevitably lead to pure love (the goal of bhakti yoga), and vice versa. Someone practicing deep meditation (such as in raja yoga) must embody the core principles of karma yoga, jnana yoga and bhakti yoga, whether directly or indirectly.


ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF HINDUISM

The basic argument FOR Hinduism is that it nearly takes everything into account. Some philosophies simply do not address ALL of life. Hinduism does because EVERYTHING is divine. For example, Hinduism has a high regard for the concept of death and resurrection as formulated in its belief in reincarnation. Although it could be claimed that Hinduism has basically transferred the cycles of the seasons to a person's soul, it may be that Hindus have intuitively grasped a truth that death and rebirth are integral parts not only of reality but of ultimate reality. Are death and resurrection tangential to reality or are they accurate reflections of ultimate reality?


EPISTEMOLOGICAL BASIS FOR HINDUISM

Because there is no concrete evidence that the essence of everything is divine, the Hindu must base his claim epistemologically upon intuition.


MAJOR CHALLENGES TO HINDUISM



BUDDHISM


The third major ontological system we will examine is Buddhism. As with each system we will first state the claim Buddhism makes, next give the arguments in support of Buddhism, and last present some challenges to Buddhism.


THE MAJOR CLAIMS OF BUDDHISM

The major claim of Buddhism is that evil and suffering exist because of desire. The way to eliminate desire according to Buddha is to follow the 8-fold path.

Because Gautama claimed that the existence of a perfect God and the existence of evil and suffering in the world could not be reconciled; as a result, he claimed that a perfect God did not exist.

Buddhism basically draws from all 3 models of ultimate reality.

  1. Buddha taps into the first model when he claims God does not exist.
  2. He taps into the second model when he claims that man can attain to Nirvana by himself.
  3. He draws from the third model when he claims that right and wrong actually do exist.

Because Buddhism supports the idea of reincarnation, a person’s body is not of the real “you.” You may have a male body, but you may not necessarily be male (the same applies to femaleness).


Life of Buddha

Siddhartha Gautama was born in Lumbini (a Himalayan town situated in modern Nepal near the Indian border). Gautama's father was a chieftain, and Gautama was born a prince, destined to a life of luxury. It is said that, before being born, Gautama visited his mother during a vision in the form of a white elephant. During the birth celebrations, a seer announced that this baby would either become a great king or a great holy man. His father, wishing for Gautama to be a great king, shielded his son from religious teachings or knowledge of human suffering.

As the boy came to marrying age, his father arranged a marriage to a young woman, Yashodhara, and she gave birth to a son, Rahula. Although Gautama had everything he could want, he was dissatisfied.

At the age 29, Gautama was escorted by his attendant Channa on one of his rare visits outside of the palace. There, he came across the "four sights": an old crippled man, a diseased man, a decaying corpse, and finally an ascetic. Gautama realized then the harsh truth of life -- that death, disease, age, and pain were inescapable. Thus inspired, Gautama left his home and his family and chose to become a monk.

Abandoning his inheritance, he dedicated his life to learning how to overcome suffering. He pursued the path of Yogic meditation with two Brahmin hermits, and although he achieved high levels of meditative consciousness, he was not satisfied with this path.

Gautama then chose the robes of a mendicant monk and headed to southeastern India. He began training in the ascetic life and practicing vigorous austere practices. After 6 years, and at the brink of death, he found that the severe ascetic practices did not lead to greater understanding. Once discarding them and concentrating on meditation, he discovered the middle way, a path of moderation away from the extremes of self-indulgence and self-mortification. Under a fig tree, now know as the Bodhi tree, he vowed never to leave the position until he found Truth. At the age of 35, he attained Enlightenment under the full moon in May. He was then known as Gautama Buddha, or simply "The Buddha", which means "the Enlightened one".

The Buddha claimed he had realized complete Enlightenment and insight into the nature and cause of human suffering, along with the steps necessary to eliminate it. This understanding manifested itself in the Four Noble Truths. This supreme Awakening, possible to any being, is called the state of Bodhi, and at that moment, he achieved Nirvana.

At this point, the Buddha had to choose whether to be content in his own salvation, or whether to teach his new understanding to all people. He considered that the world may not have been ready for such a deep teaching, but he decided in the end to travel to Sarnath and give his first sermon in the Deer Park. This sermon described the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path.

The Buddha emphasized that he was not a God but that the position of Buddhahood is reserved for the human, in whom possesses the greatest potential for Enlightenment. Explained by Gautama Buddha, he also stated that there is no intermediary between mankind and the divine; distant gods and God are subjected to karma (sorrow, suffering, angst) themselves in decaying heavens. The Buddha is solely a guide and teacher for those sentient beings who must tread the path themselves, attain spiritual awakening, and see truth and reality as it is. The Buddhist system of insight, thought and meditation practice was not divinely-revealed, but rather, the understanding of the true nature of the human mind which could be discovered by anyone for themselves.

For the remaining 45 years of his life, he traveled the Gangetic Plain of central India (region of the Ganges/Ganga river and its tributaries), teaching his doctrine and discipline to an extremely diverse range of people, from nobles, street sweepers, outcastes, and including many adherents of rival philosophies and religions. He founded the community of Buddhist monks and nuns (the Sangha) to continue the dispensation after his Paranirvana or complete Nirvana.

At the age of 80, Gautama Buddha realised that his bodily end was fast approaching. He told his disciple Ananda to prepare a bed between two Sal trees in Kushinagar. His last meal was a mushroom or truffles delicacy which he had received as an offering from a blacksmith. Just before his passing, a 120 year-old mendicant monk named Subhadra, walked by. Being earlier turned away by Ananda, Buddha overheard this and called the Brahmin to his side. He was admitted to the Sangha (Buddhist order) and immediately after, Gautama passed away on that full moon day in May. The Buddha's final words were, "All things must pass away. Strive for your own salvation with diligence".


ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF BUDDHISM

The primary arguments in favor of Buddhism are (1) that it takes seriously the idea that evil and suffering do exist, an issue Hinduism basically skirts and (2) that ethics is important in life.


Major Tenets of Buddhism



CHALLENGES TO BUDDHISM

The major challenge to Buddhism is does it appear to be “big” enough? For example, when dealing with the issue if God exists or doesn’t exist, the evidence of evil and suffering is only one part of this consideration. Buddhism simply doesn’t account for all the evidence which led philosophers to articulate the 4 classical arguments for God’s existence. Moreover, if Buddha claims that right and wrong actually do exist, then has he undermined his contention that God does not exist? The existence of absolute right and wrong would seem to support dramatically the claim that God in fact does exist.

The other challenge is that of verification. Buddha claims that he achieved “enlightenment”; whereas that claim may be true, can it be verified?

Finally, there is the ontological challenge. According to Buddha, Nirvana exists? The question, then, is what or who supports Nirvana? God? Is Nirvana God? Buddha tends to reject an ontological analysis of ultimate reality; however, that question still persists for most people.


THIRD MODEL
Transcendence


JUDAISM


The fourth major ontological system we will examine is Judaism. As with each system we will first state the claim Judaism makes, next give the arguments in support of Judaism, and last present some challenges to Judaism.


THE MAJOR CLAIM OF JUDAISM

Judaism, like Christianity and Islam, fall within the third model of reality in which the universe does exist; however, it is not divine. Rather, unlike the first model (materialism), a perfect Being (God) does exist but exists outside the universe. All 3 representatives of this model claim that man is NOT God, that a person’s body is part of who he really is, that ethics is a huge part of the system, and that one day all people will be physically resurrected from the dead.

Judaism is a monotheistic religion, that is there is only ONE GOD, based upon principles and ethics embodied in the Hebrew Bible, as further explored and explained in the Talmud and other texts. Unlike the God of Hinduism, this God is separate from the world. Although His touch can be seen on the world, the world is totally separate from Him. Historically, Judaism has considered belief in the divine revelation and acceptance of the Written and Oral Torah as its fundamental core belief.

Moreover, God has revealed Himself in a dramatic way to the Jewish people. Nearly 3,000 years ago God revealed Himself to Abraham, promising to bless him and his SEED if he would follow God to a place He would lead him to.

According to the Jewish Scriptures Abraham followed God. God’s blessing (salvation) then falls upon Abraham and his seed. (The word “seed” here can be either singular—“descendant”, or plural—“descendants.”)

Genesis 12:1-3
1. Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Depart from your country, and from your family, and from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you: 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless you, and curse him that curses you: and in you shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Just a casual look at these 3 verses shows us that the key word here is “bless.” This word is huge not only in Judaism but also in Christianity which claims to be built upon Judaism. The key idea here is that God is going to bless Abraham.

Blessing later includes the idea of salvation, peace, prosperity. The “blessed” person then is truly the “saved” person.


Gen. 17:7
7. I will establish My promise between Me and you and your seed after you.

The question becomes, just who is this seed? The identity of this seed determines who actually is “saved.” According to Judaism the seed refers to Abraham’s second-born son, Isaac, the father of the Jewish people. If Isaac is that seed, then God has promised to bless (“save”) the Jews and those who attach themselves to the Jewish religion. Muslims claim that the “seed” refers to Ishmael, Abraham’s first-born son, who fathered the Arab race. Christians claim that the “seed” refers to Jesus, Abraham’s greatest Son.

Does the Jewish claim have any preference over the other 2? For example, Ishmael was the first-born son of Abraham, whereas Isaac was only the second-born son. Yet, Ishamel according to the documents was actually the son of an Egyptian servant named Hagar, whereas Isaac was the son of Abraham's wife Saran. Second, whereas Ishmael was born according to natural means, Isaac was the result of a miracle.

The story of Abraham in Gen. 22 is pivotal for our understanding of which claim is preferred. Whom did Abraham take on top of Mt. Moriah with him: Ishmael or Isaac? We shall examine this more closely when we come to Islam.


ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF JUDAISM

Is there any support for Judaism being the true religion?

  1. The major piece of evidence which supports Judaism as being true is the fact that it has maintained its cultural and religious heritage. Now that doesn’t seem all impressive until you study the history of the Jew. Every other culture is based upon land. For example, what makes you an American? The fact that either you or one of your parents was born in the USA. If there is no USA, then there is no American.

  2. In 125 AD the Roman emperor Hadrian drove the Jews away from the land of Israel because of their constant rebellions against the Roman Empire. For the next 1823 years the Jew had no land to call their own. They were noted as the “Wandering Jew.”

  3. Few if any other races have ever experienced the hardships the Jewish race has endured. The Holocaust conducted by Nazi Germany was just the latest in a long line of sufferings the Jews had to endure. For a more recent movie treatment of the plight of the Jew, see Fiddler on the Roof.

  4. It is amazing that the Jewish people retained their cultural and religious identity without their having a country to call their own. It is so remarkable that Benjamin Disraeli, the great Jewish prime minister of the late 19th century, said when asked if he knew of any infallible proof of God's existence, gave a terse but classic answer, "The Jew, sir, the Jew."


MAJOR CHALLENGES TO JUDAISM

Judaism needs to respond to 3 major challenges.

  1. Many claim that the miracles in OT as fantastical and illogical, for example, the crossing of the Red Sea and the collapse of the city wall of Jericho. HOWEVER, these are illogical only if God does not exist and does not perform miracles. On the other hand, if God does exist and does do miracles, then these miracles would be logical. The fact that scholars today primarily try to explain away the miraculous nature of events such as the crossing of the Red Sea and the fall of the walls of Jericho means that these scholars admit that something actually did happen.

  2. If the Jews are God’s chosen people, then why have they suffered so much during the past 2,000 years? This is an argument Mohammed leveled against the Jews’ claim to be God’s chosen people.

  3. If the Jews are God's chosen people, then why (according to their own documents) did they consistently reject God's messengers (and hence God)?

  4. If the Jews are God’s chosen people, then why are there so few of them? It would seem strange for only 14 million people out of 7 billion will be saved. It would seem unreasonable that out of 6 billion people, only 14 million would connect with ultimate reality.


Response to the question about suffering. Judaism along with Christianity claims that suffering actually serves as a type of birth pangs. The sufferings are not necessarily negative; they can be positive like birth pangs. The woman experiencing birth pangs is actually producing something wonderful, a little baby. In the same token God uses birth pangs to produce something wonderful in us—a strong, developed, mature person. Moreover, according to the great Jewish prophet Isaiah God uses suffering to produce a new heaven and a new earth.

The third challenge appears more challenging.


THE CASE FOR CHRISTIANITY


INTRODUCTION

THE CLAIM OF CHRISTIANITY

The Claim: Jesus is God the Son

Whatever else Christianity claims, its ultimate claim is that 2,000 years ago God (the Son) came to the earth to reveal the Father to us and then to die to save us from our sins (the fact that we are in a hostile relationship with God). During His lifetime Jesus claimed to be God the Son. His resurrection from the dead validated His claims to deity.

Now the title "God the Son" may surprise some because we normally think of Jesus as being solely "the Son of God." Although both "Son of God" and "God the Son" mean the same thing, I use the title "God the Son" because it stresses the deity of Jesus. Some think that the title "Son of God" makes Jesus less than God. It does not. For example, a son of man is not less than man because he is a man's son; on the contrary, because he is a son of MAN, he actually is going to be man. The same hold trues for Christ: being Son of God indicates that He is God, not the Father but the Son.


The Significance of the Resurrection

Before looking at the evidence, we first need to understand exactly why the resurrection (if true) would validate Jesus’ claims to deity. The reason is that the resurrection is a kind of event which only God Himself could perform. The resurrection of Christ was not merely resuscitation from the dead which happens occasionally during surgery. Rather this resurrection was the radical transformation of the body of Jesus into such a glorious state that He will never die again. It is the kind of event which only God Himself could do. If the Father resurrected Jesus after Jesus made the claims to deity, then either one of 2 things is true: Jesus is God the Son like He said, or else God resurrected and validated a blasphemer (something God most likely would never do).


Jesus' Claim to Deity



THE EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION

When it is all said and done, if the resurrection occurred, then Jesus is truly God the Son; if the resurrection did not occur, then He is NOT God the Son.


The Empty Tomb

Now an empty tomb does not prove that Jesus rose from the dead; HOWEVER, if Jesus was resurrected in the way that NT claims He was, then the tomb when He was buried must be empty. Well, the tomb is empty and no body has been produced to show that He did not rise from the dead. In fact, the claims of Jesus' early opponents show that the tomb is empty. For example, Jesus' opponents claimed that His disciples actually stole the body from the tomb after overwhelming the Roman guard which had been sent to protect that body from being stolen by His disciples (Matt. 27:13-15). When Jesus' opponents made this claim after Easter Sunday morning, what are they admitting? They are admitting that the tomb is empty! Now the reader has to decide for himself which account for the empty tomb is more believable: a group of cowardly disciples attacking the Roman guard so that they could saw Jesus rose from the dead so that they could be persecuted terribly for their claim OR Jesus actually was resurrected from the dead. To deny the resurrection may be harder to swallow than to claim the resurrection really did occur.


Eyewitnesses

Many people from the time of Jesus claim that Jesus not only died and rose again but that they also saw Him die on the cross and then met Him after He rose from the dead. (See John 19:35; 20:30; 21:24; Acts 1:1, 2; 10:39-41; 2 Pet. 1:16). Paul actually claims in 1 Cor. 15:1-8 that at least 500 people saw the resurrected Jesus at the same time. Whereas 500 people can be guilty of mass hysteria, they will not be guilty of mass hallucination. (What is so important about 1 Cor. 15 is that NT scholarship has universally declared Paul to be its author. Whereas NT scholarship may doubt Pauline authorship of 9 of his letters, 1 Corinthians along with 2 Corinthians, Romans, and Galatians are universally believed to have come from the hand of Paul; these are called the "indisputable letters"--see Markus Barth in his Commentary on Ephesians.)

So, are these witnesses credible? Evidence:



Miracles/Spectacular Feats

Evidence that He did miracles supports His claim to be divine. (None in the first century claimed He did NOT do miracles because so many of these miracles were done before too many people for them to be denied. His opponents merely claimed that He got His power from Satan.) Look at the nature of Jesus’ miracles though. Jesus healed the eyes of the blind man; Satan would blind the eyes of a healthy man. Jesus raised the dead; Satan would kill a man. Jesus fed 5,000; Satan would starve them. The very nature of Jesus’ miracles demonstrates that He got His power from God and not from Satan. If Jesus was not God the Son but was only a demon from hell, then God affirmed the ravings of a demon when He worked miracles through Jesus, something a perfect God would not do.


MAJOR CHALLENGES TO CHRISTIANITY: SUFFERING, MYTHOLOGY, AND DOCUMENTATION

Doubts About the Existence of Christ

This challenge is a more recent challenge to Christianity. Hitchens throws out this challenge but doesn't really develop it in god Is Not Great. Hitchens, though, has the luxury in making this claim that the early opponents of Christianity apparently did not enjoy. If a person today claims that Jesus existed 2,000 years ago, Hitchens could counter: "You don't know; you weren't there."

Moreover, according to many who reject Christianity, there are no sources outside the NT which claim that Christ ever existed.

Hitchens is 100% correct in that counter-attack. There are some problems, though, with Hitchens' claim.

  1. Why didn't the early opponents of Jesus ever come up with this counter-charge? It would have been so easy just to show that Jesus had never existed in order discredit Christianity once and for all. Yet this is one approach they never took. Why didn't they make this charge? If Jesus truly existed and they made this charge, then they would have been made to look foolish since according to the earliest Christian documents, Jesus did so much of His ministry in the wide-open public. That probably explains best why Christianity's earliest opponents never made this charge.

  2. The earliest opponents of Christianity claimed that Jesus actually was a sorcerer whose powers were derived from Satan (see the Babylonian Talmud). When Christianity's opponents charged this against Christianity, it is establishing 2 pieces of valuable evidence: (1) Jesus did exist and (2) He performed some kind of "magic."

    These charges actually date back to the ministry of Christ according to the earliest documents (Matt. 13). His opponents apparently couldn't deny the supernatural aspect of His ministry but claimed Satan was the source of His ministry. Jesus, though, according to the documents dispelled those attacks by pointing to the nature of the "miracles" themselves: He healed the blind and raised the dead, miracles beyond the scope of Satan's power. Satan could blind a man or kill him but never heal or raise from the dead since these are life-giving miracles.

    Moreover, according to the documents many of these miracles could not have been faked since Jesus supposedly performed healing miracles upon people who have been certifiably ill, demon-possessed, or dead (John 5, 11).

  3. Finally, if Jesus never existed, then the early Jewish followers of Jesus created a "Jesus" who just doesn't make sense. They claim that He is God the Son and yet

    1. They make Him appear weak at times: He actually sweats drops like that of blood in the Garden of Gethsemane because He is under so much stress.

    2. He cries out: My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?

    3. He weeps at the tomb of His friend, Lazarus.

    4. He dies on a cross, an act of infamy in the eyes of any Jew (Deut. 23:23--"cursed is anyone who hangs on a cross").

  4. Finally, look at the way the challenge goes: "There are no extra-biblical sources which mention Jesus. There are extra-biblical sources which do mention Jesus, but they are counterfeit; therefore, Jesus did not exist." The fact is that there are several extra-biblical sources which do mention Jesus and the persecution of the early Christians. Whereas I would agree that some of them seem a little fishy, the fact is that some of them do NOT seem fishy (the Tacitus Annals, the testimony of Suetonius (who actually seems hostile to Christianity), and the Josephus' reference to James the half-brother of Christ. Moreover, the fact remains that there are extra-biblical references to Christ: the question is whether or not they are legitimate. The answer to that last question is a matter of opinion. Like Hitchens would say, "None of us were there," not only those who defend the claim nor those who throw out the challenge.

None of these are logical if the early Jewish followers of Jesus made up these stories about Him, especially in light of the fact that they claimed He is God the Son.



Evil and Suffering

According to Christianity, God is love. If that is true, then how can Christians account for all the evil and suffering in the world? Because this topic is HUGE and has been used not only against the third model of reality but specifically against Christianity, we will devote an entire study just on this one topic. For right now, it is sufficient to say that whereas Christianity acknowledges the harshness of suffering, it also claims that God uses it to accomplish wonderful things in our lives.


The Nature of the Documents

Christianity and Its Resemblance to Mythology

In the past one hundred years, Christianity has been attacked because of the numerous similarities between the story of Christianity and other mythologies, especially the myth of the dying and rising God. In fact, C.S. Lewis initially rejected Christianity even after he came to believe in God because he claimed that Jesus was no more than another dying and rising corn king like all the other dying and rising corn kings found in other ancient religions. J.R.R. Tolkien was the one who showed him the crucial difference between the "Christ myth" and the other ancient myths of the dying and rising gods. According to Tolkien, the difference was that the "Christ myth" was an historical event which had historical verification, whereas these other myths occurred in some mythological past unverifiable in history.

But why would there be similarities between Christianity and pagan myths if Christianity was supposed to be true? First of all, make sure that the myths are based upon sound documentation. (For example, some have tried to make Jesus a "Christian" counterpart of the Egyptian god Horus (see http://creativecounterpart.wordpress.com/2008/01/10/ending-the-myths-of-horus-jesus/). Lewis has 2 responsess to such a challenge:
"Nowadays it seems to be so forgotten that people think they have somehow discredited Our Lord if they can show that some pre-Christian document (or what they take to be pre-Christian) such as the Dead Sea Scrolls has ‘anticipated’ Him. As if we supposed Him to be a cheapjack, like Nietzsche, inventing a new ethic! Every good teacher, within Judaism as without, has anticipated Him. The whole religious history of the pre-Christian world, on its better side, anticipates Him. It could not be otherwise. The Light which has lightened every man from the beginning may shine more clearly but cannot change. The Origin cannot suddenly start being, in the popular sense of the word, ‘original’" [C.S. Lewis, The Timeless Writings of C.S. Lewis (Reflections on the Psalms), 345]. First, check to make sure the document you are citing really pre-dates Christianity, and also make sure that the documents you are citing actually say what you have been told they say (e.g., see http://kingdavid8.com/Copycat/JesusHorus.html which discusses the supposed parallels between Jesus and Horus, the Egyptian god). Many times people will jump at a supposed claim simply because it supports what they want to hear.

Second, be surprised if there are no similarities between Christianity and previous religions. According to Lewis, that would be more concern for alarm than there being no similarities.

According to Lewis, if Christianity is true, then myths are not false. Such a statement surprises many people because, in their view, myths by their very nature are false. That depends on what you mean by "myth." There are actually 3 ways that "myth" can be understood.

  1. Explanations about natural phenomena (Greek, Roman, and Nordic myths). For example, why does it thunder? Because Thor, the god of thunder, has just wielded his mighty hammer.

  2. Stories which express what goes on inside of us (Nietzsche and Freud). The persons in the myths are just archetypes of major human characteristics. The myths are basically stories about what goes on inside of us.

  3. Windows into the supernatural (J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis). The myths (especially the myth of the dying and rising god) are good dreams for God which prepared the ancient world for the true, historical version of the myth: the death and resurrection of God the Son 2,000 years ago in Jerusalem.

The first way (that of a way to explain natural phenomenon) is definitely false. Thor does not cause the heavens to thunder. The second way may be true: myths basically explain the inner life of a person. The third way, though, is true if Christianity is true. The myths/fairy tales/fantasy would then be incredibly important ways that Ultimate Reality speaks to us.

If Lewis is right, then myths are windows into the supernatural. Cinderellas do become princesses; the beast turns into a prince; the little wooden puppet becomes a real boy; and we all do live happily ever after.

In one of the most famous dedications to a book ever written, Lewis writes (in The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe):

My Dear Lucy,
I wrote this story for you, but when I began it I had not realized that girls grow faster than books. As a result, you are already too old for fairy tales, and by the time it is printed and bound you will be older still. But some day you will be old enough to start reading fairy tales again. You can then take it down from some upper shelf, dust it, and tell me what you think of it. I shall probably be too deaf to hear, and too old to understand, a word you say, but I shall still be your affectionate Godfather,
C.S. Lewis.


ISLAM


CLAIM

Like Judaism and Christianity, Islam represents the third model of ultimate reality: that not only does the physical universe exist but that a perfect Being (God/Allah) exists outside the universe. This perfect Being (Allah) is concerned about ethics and has chosen Mohammed to be His prophet.

This topic has become more and more relevant as the more moderate secular governments of the Middle Eastern have melted away in the Arab Spring and its aftermath (the fall of Mubarack in Egypt, the fall of the Tunisian goverment, the fall of Ghadaffi in Libya, and now the assaults against the governments of Syria, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia. In Tunisia and Libya, the new governments are basing their laws upon Sharia Law, the official law of Islam.


EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM

The Life and Character of Mohammed

Mohammed, whose name means "the Praised One", was born at Mecca (20 August?) A.D. 570. At that time Arabia was torn by warring factions. The tribe of Quraish, to which Mohammad belonged, had itself established in the south near Mecca, which itself was, even then, the principal religious and commercial centre of Arabia. The power of the tribe was continually increasing; they had become the masters and the acknowledged guardians of the sacred Kaaba (the large black box), within the town of Mecca — then visited in annual pilgrimage by the heathen Arabs with their offerings and tributes. From Mecca Mohammed will inaugurate his religious reform and his political campaign, which ended with the conquest of all Arabia and the fusion of the numerous Arab tribes into one nation, with one religion, one code, and one sanctuary.

Mohammed's father was Abdullah, of the family of Hashim, who died on a business trip before his son's birth. At the age of six he lost his mother and was thereafter taken care of by his uncle Abu-Talib. . At the age of twelve, he accompanied Abu Talib with a merchant caravan as far as Bostra in Syria. Under the guardianship of Abu Talib, Muhammad began to earn a living as a businessman and a trader. Muhammad was popularly known as ‘al-Ameen’ for his unimpeachable character by the Makkans and visitors alike. The title Al-Ameen means the Honest, the Reliable and the Trustworthy, and it signified the highest standard of moral and public life.

Upon hearing of Muhammad’s impressive credentials, Khadijah, a rich merchant widow, asked Muhammad to take some merchandise for trade to Syria. Soon after this trip when he was twenty-five, Khadijah proposed marriage to Muhammad through a relative. Muhammad accepted the proposal. At that time, Khadijah was forty and Mohammad was twenty five. She bore him six children. His first son Qasim died at the age of two. His second son Abdullah died in infancy. The four daughters were: Zainab, Ruqayyah, Umm Kulthum, and Fatima. (Make a note of Fatima because she will figure prominently later in Islam.)

Mohammed was claimed to be a man of retiring disposition, addicted to prayer and fasting. Muhammad was forty when, during his one of many retreats to Mount Hira for meditation, during the month of Ramadan, he received the first revelation from the Archangel Gabriel. Muhammad (s) was terrified by the whole experience of the revelation and fled the cave of Mt. Hira [Qur'an 81:19-29]. When he reached his home, tired and frightened, he asked his wife: ‘cover me, cover me,’ in a blanket. After his awe had somewhat abated, his wife Khadijah asked him about the reason of his great anxiety and fear. She then assured him by saying: "Allah (The One God) will not let you down because you are kind to relatives, you speak only the truth, you help the poor, the orphan and the needy, and you are an honest man. Khadijah then consulted with her cousin Waraqa who was an old, saintly man possessing knowledge of previous revelations and scriptures. Waraqa confirmed to her that the visitor was none other than the Angel Gabriel who had come to Moses. He then added that Muhammad is the expected Prophet. Khadijah accepted the revelation as truth and was the first person to accept Islam. She supported her husband in every hardship, most notably during the three-year ‘boycott’ of the Prophet’s clan by the pagan Quraish. She died at the age of sixty-five in the month of Ramadan soon after the lifting of the boycott in 620 AD.

Because of his preaching and his attack on heathenism, Mohammed was persecuted, being driven from Mecca to Medina in 622, the year of the Hijra (Flight) and the beginning of the Islamic Era. At Medina he was recognized as the prophet of God, and his followers increased. He took the field against his enemies, conquered several Arabian, Jewish, and Christian tribes, entered Mecca in triumph in 630, demolished the idols of the Kaaba (the big black box Muslims today march around during their pilgrimage to Mecca), became master of Arabia, and finally united all the tribes under one emblem and one religion. In 632 at the age of 63 he made his last pilgrimage to Mecca at the head of One hundred twenty thousand followers; soon after he died of a violent fever (AD 633).


The Quran

Islam claims that Gabriel visited the Prophet as commanded by Allah revealing Ayat (meaning signs, loosely referred to as verses) in Arabic over a period of twenty-three years. The revelations that he claimed to have received were sometimes a few verses, a part of a chapter or the whole chapter. Some revelations came down in response to an inquiry by the nonbelievers. The revealed verses were recorded on a variety of available materials (leather, palm leaves, bark, shoulder bones of animals), memorized as soon as they were revealed, and were recited in daily prayers by Muslims [Qur'an 80:13-16]. Angel Gabriel taught the order and arrangement of verses, and the Prophet instructed his several scribes to record verses in that order [Qur'an 75:16-19 and 41:41-42]. Once a year, the Prophet used to recite all the verses revealed to him up to that time to Gabriel to authenticate the accuracy of recitation and the order of verses [Qur'an 17:106]. All the revealed verses (over a period of 23 years and ending in 632 AD) were compiled in the book known as Qur’an. The name Qur’an appears in the revealed verses. The Qur’an does not contain even a word from the Prophet. The Qur'an speaks in the first person, i.e., Allah's commandments to His creation. Gabriel also visited the Prophet throughout his mission informing and teaching him of events and strategy as needed to help in the completion of the prophetic mission. The Prophet’s sayings, actions, and approvals are recorded separately in collections known as Hadith. Beliefs

The principal tents of Islam are laid down in the Quran. The system may be divided into two parts: dogma, or theory; and morals, or practice. All Islamic dogma is supposed to be expressed in the one formula: "there is no God but the true God; and Mohammed is His prophet."

There are 2 major components to this claim.

  1. When it claims that there is no God but the true God Allah, Islam is rejecting Christianity's view of monotheism: one God but three Persons. The monotheism of Islam is a rigid view monotheism.

  2. When Islam claims that Mohammed is God's prophet, it means that Mohammed is God's prophet in a final sense. First, he is the last or final prophet who will ever come from God. There will be no more prophets after him. Second, he is final in the sense he is the ultimate prophet. If any other prophet who came before Mohammed disagrees with Mohammed, then that prophet is wrong and Mohammed is right. In fact, all other prophecies are to be understood in light of what Mohammed has communicated to people.


In summary: The formula of the Creed has been given above, and its recital is necessary for salvation. This one confession implies for Islam’s six distinct articles:

  1. belief in the unity of God
  2. in His angels
  3. in His Scripture
  4. in His prophets
  5. in the Resurrection and Day of Judgment
  6. in God's absolute and irrevocable decree and predetermination both of good and of evil

The four points relating to morals, or practice, are:

  1. prayer, ablutions, and purifications: The daily prayers are five in number—before sunrise, at midday, at four in the afternoon, at sunset, and shortly before midnight. All prayers must be made looking towards Mecca (house of God), and must be preceded by washing. Public prayer is made on Friday in the mosque, and is led by an imam (religious leader or scholar). Men and women both attend the public prayers.

  2. alms: Almsgiving is highly commended: on the feast-day after Ramadan it is obligatory, and is to be directed to the "faithful" (Muslims) only, yet you can still help non Muslims.

  3. fasting: Fasting is commended at all seasons, but prescribed only in the month of Ramadan. It begins at sunrise and ends at sunset, and is very rigorous, especially when the fasting season falls in summer. Muslims follow the lunar calendar.

  4. pilgrimage to Mecca: Pilgrimage to Mecca once in a lifetime is a duty incumbent on every free Muslim of sufficient means and bodily strength.


CHALLENGES TO ISLAM

Islam and the Jews

A major area of disagreement with Islam centers on the Jew. According to Islam even though many of the prophets God sent to Israel are legitimate prophets (for example, Abraham and Moses), the Jews are not God's chosen people. According to Mohammed the hostile treatment many of the prophets received from the Jews is evidence that they are not God's chosen people.

Islam agrees with both Judaism and Christianity that Abraham is a significant person in the history of the true religion. According to Genesis God was going to bless Abraham and his son. The idea of blessing basically means that salvation is going to come to Abraham and to his descendant(s). According to the Old Testament and to Judaism that son was Isaac, the father of the Jewish people. Mohammed disagrees, claiming that the son was Ishmael, the father of the Arabic nation. (While agreeing that Isaac was the son of Abraham, Christianity teaches that Jesus is the greater son of Abraham God promises to bless in Genesis 12 and following.)

Islam disagrees with Judaism about one of the most important events in the life of Abraham. According to Judaism and Christianity, Abraham took Isaac up to the top of Mt. Moriah to sacrifice him. Islam though teaches that it was Ishmael and not Isaac Abraham took to sacrifice on top of Mt. Moriah. Why is that significant? Isaac is the father of the Jewish nation; Ishmael is the father of the Arab nations. By substituting Ishmael for Isaac at this most critical moment, Mohammed has claimed that God worked through Ishmael and not through Isaac. The Arab nations now become the focus of God's attention and not the Jews.


Islam and Jesus

Introduction

The greatest point of departure between Christianity and Islam concerns the person of Jesus. According to Christianity Jesus is God the Son; while He is not the Father, Jesus is as much God as the Father and Holy Spirit are. Christianity teaches that the death of God the Son on the cross has provided for the forgiveness of sin and for our salvation. Christians believe that He will return one day to raise all mankind from the dead and then vindicate His followers and condemn His enemies. Christianity teaches that our eternal destiny depends upon our response to Jesus.

Islam, on the other hand, totally rejects the belief that Jesus is God the Son. The main confession of Islam is: "there is no God but the true God; and Mohammed is His prophet." Islam rejects Jesus' resurrection and the saving element of the cross. According to Islam although Jesus was a prophet, He was misinterpreted by early Christians. Moreover, although Jesus was a great prophet, Mohammed was even greater. In fact he is supposed to be the greatest prophet, so great in fact that none greater will come after him.


The Crucifixion

God clarified in the Quran that Jesus was not crucified; rather, it was made to seem that way to the Jews, and that God raised him to the Heavens. The Quran does not explain, though, who was the person crucified instead of Jesus.

“They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but (another) was made to resemble him to them.” (Quran 4:157)

“God lifted him up to His presence. God is Almighty, All-Wise.” (Quran 4:158)

As such, Islam denies that Jesus came to this earth with the purpose of sacrificing himself for the sin of Adam, Eve, and the rest of humanity, freeing them from its burden. Islam strictly rejects the notion that any person bears the sin of another. God says:

“No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another.” (Quran 39:6)

Also, Islam stresses the notion that God is able to forgive all sins, if a person truly repents and then refrains from repeating it. God does not need any blood sacrifice for that, let alone descend in the form of man himself and die for every man's sins. Rather, God’s mercy extends to all creatures, believers and disbelievers alike. The door to forgiveness is open to anyone who seeks it.

Next, the documents which claim that these witnesses saw the resurrected Jesus come from the very time these witnesses were supposed to have lived. Islam which claims that Jesus didn’t even die on the cross is based upon the teachings of a person who lived 600 years after the time of Jesus’ death; all the major Christian documents though were written within 60 years after the event, well within the lifespan of those witnesses who could have rejected those accounts if they had proved to be false. Mohammed may definitely be right when he claims that Jesus didn’t even die on the cross; however, the fact that he is removed 600 years from the event raises legitimate questions about his version. He may be right; however, this is one issue Islam needs to address if it is going to hold sway.


A SIDE NOTE: Difference between Shia and Sunni Muslims

Both Sunni and Shia Muslims share the most fundamental Islamic beliefs and articles of faith. The differences between these two main sub-groups within Islam initially stemmed not from spiritual differences, but political ones. The division between Shia and Sunni and the question of who was to take over the leadership of the Muslim nation dates back to the death of the Prophet Muhammad. Sunni Muslims agree with the position taken by many of the Prophet's companions, that the new leader should be elected from among those capable of the job. This is what was done, and the Prophet Muhammad's close friend and advisor, Abu Bakr, became the first Caliph of the Islamic nation. The word "Sunni" in Arabic comes from a word meaning "one who follows the traditions of the Prophet." Majority of the Muslims today are Sunnis.

On the other hand, some Muslims share the belief that leadership should have stayed within the Prophet's own family, among those specifically appointed by him. The Shia Muslims believe that following the Prophet Muhammad's death, leadership should have passed directly to his son-in-law, Ali. The word "Shia" in Arabic means a group or supportive party of people. The commonly known term is shortened from the historical "Shia-t-Ali," or "the Party of Ali." They are also known as followers of "Ahl-al-Bayt" or "People of the Household" (of the Prophet).

SUMMARY


MODEL First Model Second Model Second Model (?) Third Model Third Model Third Model
SYSTEM Materialism Hinduism Buddhism Judaism Christianity Islam
CORE CLAIM ONLY Matter Exists Brahman and Atman are One: The Deification of All Reality The Esssence of Life is Evil and Suffering Caused by Desire which can be Eliminated by Following the 8-Fold Path A Transcendent God Has Revealed Himself in a Dramatic Way to His Chosen People, the Jews Christ is God the Son demonstrated by His resurrection from the dead There is only One God, Allah, and Mohammed is His Final Prophet.
EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT CLAIM The reality of matter; the fact that so much in life has been explained on the basis of materialism; the negative arguments against the existence of God The vastness of the system (it embraces ALL of reality and not just merely its physical aspects). 1. Insight that reality is laced with evil and suffering
2. takes seriously the area of ethics.		 1. The continual existence of the Jew in spite of severe persecution and the loss of a homeland for over 1800 years
2. takes seriously the area of ethics.		 The credibility of those who claimed to have been eyewitnesses of the resurrected Jesus. The credibility of Mohammed in his claim to have had visions from the archangel Gabriel.
CHALLENGES TO THE CLAIMS 1. It dismisses so many categories in life: ethics and confidence in knowledge
2. the epistemological challenge: non-reason is the basis for reason AND matter then is the source of ideas about God (therefore, can you trust knowledge from matter)
3. Does materialism adequately account for the universe, for life, and for humanity?		 1. The knowledge challenge: because it embraces logical contradictions, the explanation for a logical universe is illogical AND if I am Brahman the Supreme Being, why don't I automatically know it?
2. The salvation challenge
3. The ethical challenge		 1. The ontological challenge
2. Question: is desire really the source of all evil and suffering in the world?
3. Is life essentially evil and suffering?		 1. The number of Jews
2. The challenge from Christianity (Judaism is true but only complete in Christ)
3. The suffering challenge
4. The historical/archeological challenge		 1. The document challenge
2. "Did Christ ever really exist" challenge
3. The challenge from Evil and Suffering
4. The mythological challenge		 The documentation challenge
EPISTEMOLOGICAL/KNOWLEDGE BASIS FOR THE CLAIMS Intuition Intuition Intuition Intuition and Sensory Perception Intution, Sensory Perception, and Reason Intuition