圣经被认为是上帝的话. 如果你是无神论者，像我这样的, 你知道，所有的话都来自男人. 神无以言表. 这引起了人们对谁写下这些话的人一个有趣的问题. 为什么他们暗示 (或平出言) 他们分别说出神的话?
我想我是这个无神论系列做. 然而, 我碰到这一段距离韦恩戴尔斯的书, 你神圣的生命. 我的一个朋友是什么削弱了它作为一种告诫我们这些谁不相信.
I want to wrap up this series on atheism with a personal story about the point in time where I started diverging from the concept of God. I was very young then, about five years old. I had lost a pencil. It had just slipped out of my schoolbag, which was nothing more than a plastic basket with open weaves and a handle. When I realized that I had lost the pencil, I was quite upset. I think I was worried that I would get a scolding for my carelessness. 你看, my family wasn’t rich. We were slightly better off than the households in our neighborhood, but quite poor by any global standards. The new pencil was, to me, a prized possession.
The atheist-theist debate boils down to a simple question — Did humans discover God? 或, did we invent Him? The difference between discovering and inventing is the similar to the one between believing and knowing. Theist believe that there was a God to be discovered. Atheists “知道” that we humans invented the concept of God. Belief and knowledge differ only slightly — knowledge is merely a very very strong belief. A belief is considered knowledge when it fits in nicely with a larger worldview, which is very much like how a hypothesis in physics becomes a theory. While a theory (such as Quantum Mechanics, 例如) is considered to be knowledge (or the way the physical world really is), it is best not to forget the its lowly origin as a mere hypothesis. My focus in this post is the possible origin of the God hypothesis.
The only recourse an atheist can have against this argument based on personal experience is that the believer is either is misrepresenting his experience or is mistaken about it. I am not willing to pursue that line of argument. I know that I am undermining my own stance here, but I would like to give the theist camp some more ammunition for this particular argument, and make it more formal.
I have a reason for delaying this post on the fifth and last argument for God by Dr. William Lane Craig. It holds more potency than immediately obvious. While it is easy to write it off because it is a subjective, experiential argument, the lack of credence we attribute to subjectivity is in itself a result of our similarly subjective acceptance of what we consider objective reason and rationality. I hope that this point will become clearer as you read this post and the next one.
In the previous post, we considered the cosmological argument (that the Big Bang theory is an affirmation of a God) and a teleological argument (that the highly improbable fine-tuning of the universe proves the existence of intelligent creation). We saw that the cosmological argument is nothing more than an admission of our ignorance, although it may be presented in any number of fancy forms (such as the cause of the universe is an uncaused cause, which is God, 例如). The teleological argument comes from a potentially wilful distortion of the anthropic principle. The next one that Dr. Craig puts forward is the origin of morality, which has no grounding if you assume that atheism is true.
教授. William Lane Craig is way more than a deist; he is certainly a theist. 事实上, he is more than that; he believes that God is as described in the scriptures of his flavor of Christianity. I am not an expert in that field, so I don’t know exactly what that flavor is. But the arguments he gave do not go much farther than the deism. He gave five arguments to prove that God exists, and he invited Hitchens to refute them. Hitchens did not; 至少, not in an enumerated and sequential fashion I plan to do here.
最近, I have been listening to some debates on atheism by Christopher Hitchens, as recommended by a friend. Although I agree with almost everything Hitchens says (said rather, because he is no longer with us), I find his tone bit too flippant and derisive for my taste, much like The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. I am an atheist, as those who have been following my writings may know. Given that an overwhelming majority of people do believe in some sort of a supreme being, at times I feel kind of compelled to answer the question why I don’t believe in one.
我陷入麻烦的提问一次. 这个人我问的问题很生气，因为她觉得这是太个人化. 所以我不会问你是否相信上帝. 不要告诉我 — 我会告诉你! 我稍后会告诉你一点关于你的个性在这个岗位.
行, 这里是交易. 你把下面的小测验. 它拥有超过 40 关于你的习惯和举止真或假的问题. 一旦你回答, 我会告诉你，你是否相信上帝, 如果是这样, 多少. 如果你厌倦后说 20 问题或使, 它是好的, you can quit the quiz and get the Rate. 但是，你回答更多的问题, 更准确的我的猜测对你的信心将是.
Once you have your Score (或 Rate, 如果你没有完成测验), 点击相应的按钮，.
＆NBSP; ＆NBSP; ＆NBSP; ＆NBSP; ＆NBSP;
这里是如何工作的. 有分工在我们的大脑怎么回事, 根据脑功能半球专业化的理论. 在这种理论, 大脑的左半球被认为是逻辑性和分析性思维的起源, 而右半球则创造性和直觉思维的起源. 所谓左脑人被认为是线性, 逻辑, 分析, 而不露声色; 和右脑的人被认为是空间, 创意, 神秘, 直观, 和情感.
半球专业化这一概念提出了一个有趣的问题: 被无神论相关的逻辑半球? 是无神论者情绪少? 我想是这样, 与此测试是基于这样的信念. 测验测试你是否是 “左脑” 人. 如果你的分数高, 你的左脑占主导地位, 你很可能会比直觉或创意更具分析性和逻辑. 和, 根据我的猜想, 你可能是一个无神论者. 它是否适合你?
好, 即使没有, 现在你知道你是分析或直观. 请发表评论，让我知道它是如何工作的.