25-0216p - Detailed Summary

Following the scripture reading, the speaker introduces the evening’s topic, which is part two of a series titled "Seven Reasons to Believe in God." This brief section serves as a transition, preparing the audience for a detailed exploration of arguments supporting the existence of God, building on content presumably covered in a previous session.

The speaker poses a rhetorical question: how can one know God exists when He cannot be perceived through the five senses, measured scientifically, or subjected to physical experiments? The speaker highlights the limitations of empirical methods in detecting God, noting that He cannot be photographed, probed, or summoned to appear in a classroom to counter atheistic challenges. The speaker contrasts atheistic and agnostic positions—atheists deny God’s existence outright, while agnostics argue there is a high probability He does not exist—with theism, which the speaker describes as the rational belief in God’s existence. The speaker asserts that a sincere pursuit of truth through available evidence logically leads to the conclusion that God exists, though this belief does not stem from direct sensory experience of God’s essence.

The speaker introduces the concept of "irrefutable, indirect, credible evidence" that supports the existence of an eternal, supernatural creator. The discussion is framed around seven lines of evidence, with the morning session having already covered the first three. This section sets the stage for a detailed examination of these arguments, emphasizing their cumulative weight in warranting belief in God.

The speaker recaps the first three reasons to believe in God, presented earlier. The first reason, "matter demands a maker," argues that every material effect requires a prior, simultaneous, and greater cause, and since the universe is a material effect, it must have such a cause. The second reason, "life demands a life giver," asserts that life in the material universe only arises from pre-existing life of its own kind, rejecting spontaneous generation from non-living chemicals and concluding that a supernatural, intelligent mind must have created life. The third reason, "design demands a designer," posits that complex functional design, as observed in the universe, necessitates an intelligent designer, thus implying the universe has one.

The speaker introduces the fourth line of evidence, "intelligence demands an intelligent creator," defining intelligence as the capacity to acquire and apply knowledge, learn, understand, and handle new situations. Examples of human intelligence are provided, such as building spaceships, artificial hearts, and advanced computers, as well as creating cultural artifacts like poetry and video games. The speaker acknowledges that animals, while less intelligent, also exhibit some measure of intelligence, such as dogs learning tricks, dolphins performing tasks, birds using tools, and cuttlefish demonstrating problem-solving abilities. The argument is made that anything possessing intelligence must have been caused by an intelligent source. The speaker critiques atheistic evolution, which posits that intelligence emerged from a mindless Big Bang and subsequent formation of galaxies from unintelligent particles, arguing that observation consistently shows intelligence arising from prior intelligence, not from inanimate matter like dust or mud.

The speaker continues the critique of atheistic evolution, emphasizing that human and animal intelligence cannot logically arise from non-intelligent sources. The argument is reinforced by the observation that intelligence in humans and animals is inherited from intelligent ancestors, not from inorganic matter. The speaker dismisses the evolutionary idea that intelligent life emerged from "mindless mud" as delusional, unsupported by empirical evidence, and concludes that the first intelligent beings must have been created by a self-existent, miracle-working intelligent creator.

The speaker introduces the fifth line of evidence, "morality demands a moral lawgiver," exploring why humans universally recognize certain actions as right or wrong, independent of subjective opinions. Examples of universally condemned acts, such as torturing children, raping innocent women, or abusing children, are cited to illustrate the concept of objective morality—moral truths that exist beyond human perception or cultural norms. The speaker notes that even many atheists, including prominent philosophers like Antony Flew, Wallace Matson, and Michael Ruse, acknowledge the existence of objective moral values, comparing moral truths to mathematical truths (e.g., 2+2=4). The argument is made that objective morality requires an objective standard or higher law, which can only exist if God, as a transcendent moral lawgiver, exists. The speaker concludes that since objective moral values such as good, evil, justice, and injustice do exist, God must exist.

The speaker challenges atheism’s ability to account for morality, arguing that if humans are merely "matter in motion" evolved from rocks and slime, as atheism suggests, there is no basis for moral value. The speaker uses analogies, such as rocks, minerals, or animals not being judged morally, to highlight the absurdity of deriving morality from inanimate or non-human sources. The speaker cites atheistic evolutionist George Gaylord Simpson, who admitted that morals are a human construct, irrelevant in nature except from a human perspective. The moral argument is presented as exposing atheism’s self-contradictory nature: atheists must either deny objective morality, accepting that acts like genocide or rape cannot be condemned as inherently wrong, or illogically claim that morality emerged from non-moral sources. The speaker concludes that the only reasonable explanation for objective moral law is a supernatural moral lawgiver, reinforcing the necessity of God’s existence.

The speaker transitions to discussing evidence beyond philosophical arguments, focusing on the Bible’s supernatural attributes as proof of God’s existence. The speaker clarifies that Christians do not believe in God or the Bible’s inspiration merely because of claims within the text, but because the Bible exhibits superhuman qualities, such as accurate predictive prophecy. The speaker references American atheist Dan Barker, who acknowledged that evidence of God speaking to man with specific future knowledge would falsify atheism. The speaker highlights that the Bible contains detailed prophecies fulfilled centuries later, a characteristic that skeptics attempt to discredit by claiming the prophecies were written post-event or lack detail. The speaker cites the prophet Jeremiah to emphasize that fulfilled prophecy verifies divine inspiration, concluding that the Bible’s supernatural qualities, such as predictive prophecy, necessitate a supernatural author, further supporting the existence of God.

The speaker elaborates on the sixth line of evidence for God’s existence, focusing on the Bible’s supernatural attributes, particularly its accurate predictive prophecies. A specific example is the prophecy concerning Cyrus, recorded by the prophet Isaiah around 700 B.C. Isaiah prophesied the fall of Babylon, described as the "glory of kingdoms," to the Medes and Persians, and named Cyrus as the conqueror who would overthrow the "golden city." This prophecy is remarkable because Cyrus was not born until nearly 150 years after Isaiah’s writing. Isaiah further predicted that Cyrus, acting as God’s anointed shepherd, would release the Jews from captivity, assist their return to Jerusalem, and facilitate the rebuilding of the temple. The speaker emphasizes the extraordinary nature of these predictions, noting that they were documented almost 200 years before Cyrus conquered Babylon, highlighting the Bible’s predictive accuracy as evidence of divine inspiration.

The speaker underscores that secular history confirms the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecies, verifying the existence of a historical figure named Cyrus who ruled the Medo-Persian Empire, conquered Babylon, and aided the Jews in returning to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple. This historical corroboration supports the claim that biblical prophecies are not of human origin but were inspired by God, as stated in Scripture: prophecy does not come by human will but through holy men moved by the Holy Spirit. The speaker concludes that the Bible’s supernatural attributes, such as fulfilled prophecy, logically demand a supernatural author, thereby providing evidence for God’s existence.

The speaker introduces the seventh line of evidence, asserting that the historical, miracle-working, resurrected Jesus demands a supernatural explanation. While humans can achieve remarkable feats, such as running marathons or displaying courage, certain actions—walking on water, giving sight to the blind, instantly reattaching severed ears, or raising the dead—are humanly impossible. The speaker argues that if a person performed such feats, their life would logically testify to the existence of a supernatural being. Atheist Dan Barker is cited, acknowledging that if Jesus materialized and performed miracles, atheism would be disproven, and theism established. The speaker asserts that Jesus, 2,000 years ago, provided this proof by fulfilling precise prophecies and performing supernatural miracles, including His resurrection, thus demonstrating His divinity in a manner consistent with what a reasonable person would expect of God on earth. The life and works of Jesus, therefore, testify to the existence of a supernatural being, as such feats are impossible in a purely materialistic world.

The speaker argues that the evidence provided by Jesus' life, miracles, and resurrection constitutes proof of a supernatural being, God. To illustrate atheistic resistance to this evidence, the speaker references a 2012 interview with renowned atheist Richard Dawkins, who was asked what proof would change his mind about God’s existence. Dawkins suggested a dramatic, hypothetical scenario—a 900-foot-high Jesus with a commanding voice—but expressed skepticism even about that. The speaker contrasts this with Dawkins' rejection of the historical, miracle-working, resurrected Jesus, describing such disbelief as irrational and hard-hearted. The speaker notes that this rejection mirrors the unbelief of some first-century witnesses to Jesus' miracles, suggesting that resistance to evidence for God’s existence is not surprising but persistent.

The speaker critiques atheism, challenging its claim to be logical, reasonable, and intellectual. Atheism, the speaker argues, irrationally posits that everything came from nothing, that an explosion (the Big Bang) caused exquisite order, that random chance produced precision, and that life emerged spontaneously from non-life. It further contends that a well-designed universe arose without a designer, that humans evolved from fish and frogs, and that intelligence resulted from non-intelligence. The speaker ridicules atheism’s moral framework, suggesting it either equates human morality with that of animals (e.g., a moose) or claims morality evolved from amoral creatures (e.g., mice). This critique portrays atheism as foolish, contrasting it with theism, which the speaker presents as rational and grounded in common sense.

The speaker concludes by affirming the rationality of theism, summarizing the seven lines of evidence: matter demands a maker, life demands a life giver, design demands a designer, intelligence demands an intelligent creator, morality demands a moral lawgiver, the Bible’s supernatural attributes demand a supernatural author, and the historical, miracle-working, resurrected Jesus demands a supernatural explanation, all of which demand God. The speaker quotes former atheist Antony Flew, who described his journey to belief in God as a "pilgrimage of reason," accepting the existence of a self-existent, immutable, immaterial, omnipotent, and omniscient being. The speaker confidently asserts that Christians can know God exists and extends an invitation, presumably to the audience, to consider this evidence and accept theism.