Since Christianity Has Greater Explanatory Scope, It Must Be True

Christ Walking on the Water
Jesus and Peter walk on water. Historical fact or silly nonsense?

Gary: Eyewitness accounts of people seeing a walking/talking resurrected Jesus is the best evidence Christians have for the central claim of their holy book—the resurrection of Jesus—but these alleged eyewitness accounts are disputed. Disputed eyewitness accounts for an event which allegedly happened 20 centuries ago is NOT good evidence

Christian blogger: That begs the question [petitio principii/circular reasoning] that the Bible isn’t self-attesting and self-authenticating and that there is no sensus divinitatis and the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit to the truths of the Gospel. I deny that non-Christians can make any sense of knowledge given their consistent use of their non-Christian worldviews and presuppositions. For example, let’s deal with atheistic worldviews. Not all atheists are materialists, but many/most are. Because of that, they have a hard time, if not are unable to account for things like the famous and enduring epistemological and metaphysical problems of induction; cannot overcome the problem of Eliminative Materialism and of Mereological Nihilism; cannot overcome the Hard Problem of consciousness; or even rationally assert atheism given the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism [the famous EAAN]. I could go on. Those are just some of the philosophical problems in atheism. While Christianity as a worldview can provide for the preconditions of intelligibility in a consistent way. It has greater explanatory scope, explanatory power etc.

Eliminative Materialism, for example, holds that human consciousness, thoughts, desires, beliefs, feelings, deliberations, decisions, intentionality, ratiocinations and acts of will aren’t real. Mereological Nihilism states there are no parts that make up wholes. In which case, there are no human beings made up of cells. There are only subatomic particles. I’ll limit my objections to these. I don’t want to Gish Gallop too much, myself.

Moreover, the miracle claims didn’t stop at the 1st century.

Gary: And there you have it, folks.

That begs the question that the Bible isn’t self-attesting and self-authenticating and that there is no sensus divinitatis and the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit to the truths of the Gospel. I deny that non-Christians can make any sense of knowledge given their consistent use of their non-Christian worldviews and presuppositions.

According to evangelical (and many other conservative and moderate) Christians: atheists are blind to the truths of Christianity due to the fact that we lack the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit: magical knowledge from a ghost!

This is why debating historical evidence with an evangelical Christian is a complete waste of time. Their belief is not based on historical evidence! Their belief is based upon the intense emotions they experience in their delusion that the ghost of a man who died 2,000 years ago lives somewhere within their bodies; a ghost who whispers secret wisdom and life guidance into their ears.

Regarding worldviews: Just because a particular worldview pretends to have all the answers to life’s big questions, does that automatically make that worldview true? The evidence indicates otherwise. Time and time again science has proven the Christian worldview wrong. (a six day creation, a flat earth, heliocentricity, etc..). It is always science causing revisions (reinterpretations) of the Christian worldview and not the reverse.

Orthodox (conservative) Christianity is a cult. It’s members are seriously deluded. That is why when backed into a corner, they appeal to vague philosophical principles in a desperate attempt to give respectability to their belief in ghosts and magic.

Virgins don’t give birth to babies. Humans can’t walk on water. Brain-dead corpses never come back to life. It’s that simple, folks. You don’t need a PhD in philosophy to know that.

.

.

.

.

End of post.

11 thoughts on “Since Christianity Has Greater Explanatory Scope, It Must Be True

  1. I don’t quite “get” that the Christian referred to is necessitating a belief in the Holy Spirit (etc), from my reading of what he said.

    It looks to me that he is just pointing out the obvious: If one holds to Materialism, and does not consider any aspects of Supernaturalism, then it’s utterly impossible that “non-Christians can make any sense of knowledge given their consistent use of their non-Christian worldviews and presuppositions. ”

    why do I say that? Because starting in the very next sentence, he gives an EXAMPLE of what he means.

    And, what he means appears to me to be very, very different than what you think he means.

    Of course, I can understand your desire, (or, “need”) to twist the guys words: You have absolutely no response whatsoever to the points he is making. Therefore, it is necessary for you to make it all about “something else”.

    This is why a lot of people can’t take you seriously.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. “Because of that, they have a hard time, if not are unable to account for things like the famous and enduring epistemological and metaphysical problems of induction.” Is there a Christian or non-materialist or supernatural solution to the problem of induction? I’m not aware of any.

    Sean Carroll, in his book “The Big Picture,” using the concept of emergent properties and levels, eliminates the problem of eliminative materialism and reduces the problem of mereological nihilism to nothing (hah! see what I did there?). Roughly, descriptions at one level (say, chemistry) are just as “real” as descriptions of atoms, sub-atomic particles, quantum fields, the wave function, etc. Lastly, if materialism has the problem of consciousness, then dualism (a la Descartes) has the problem of how the mind-stuff can possibly affect the material-stuff (without invoking any equivalent of magic).

    Liked by 2 people

    1. “Lastly, if materialism has the problem of consciousness, then dualism (a la Descartes) has the problem of how the mind-stuff can possibly affect the material-stuff (without invoking any equivalent of magic).”

      My father-in-law recently suffered a minor stroke. The morning after he had difficulty remembering a number of things that were quite trivial to him, and couldn’t even write his name. So the question to dualists is “what exactly is the role of the soul in mental functions?” because it certainly appears that everything is happening in the brain and no soul is needed.

      Dualism doesn’t seem to offer us much of anything except woo-woo.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. The classic dualist reply is that the brain is analogous to a radio receiver: the brain receives signals from the soul, so not being able to write your name is just the brain messing up, not the soul. Of course, this doesn’t help dualism, because this supposed explanation to save dualism is unfalsifiable.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s