Proving Christianity

February 16, 2015 • John Vandivier

Thx for the comment. Warning: Long response ahead lol.

I think the article is great for a number of reasons:

1) Well cited.

2) Interesting, or semi-provocative if you like. (People clicking is a measure of effectiveness after all, it's not baseless sensationalism.)

3) Practical.

4) Containing an important amount of good or accurate information.

Being an atheist is one thing. Being a reasonable atheist is another. Let's say that I know for a fact that God exists. Interestingly, this does not preclude me from becoming an atheist. It obviously precludes me from being a reasonable or justified atheist.

The article shows an indirect conflict between atheism and science in the following way: The article contains scientific evidence for the Christian story and against some of its alternatives.

Such alternatives are often affirmed by atheists as a matter of sociocultural reality, even if not as a matter of logical necessity or denotation. By making Christianity more plausible relative to alternative explanations of reality, the article indirectly weakens atheism.

Christianity is true and other stuff isn't. That is the argument for the article.

Two small tangential points:

1) Atheism per se and cultural atheism are two important and related but different things.

2) While many things can be disproved, not all things can be disproved, which is the basis for something like objective truth.

Lastly, using evidence to prove God would violate some people's interpretation of Christianity, but not mine and I would dare say it's a rare view, in particular for people who actually read the Bible.

Doubting Thomas in John 20, for example, was chastised for believing only after it was physically proven personally to him, but he was still accepted as a believer and he even went on to be a great Apostle or teacher. There are other such points throughout the scripture.

The definition of faith as lacking substance or evidence is absolute nonsense, but at the same time the idea that God should be invoked at will by people is equally absurd.

I think the best way (scientifically and theologically) to \"prove\" Christianity is simply to disprove the alternatives and at the same time show why Christianity cannot be disproved, though it can't be experimentally demonstrated at will.

But the theology of the evidence and God thing is surprisingly complex so if you want we can discuss more but atm I will leave that.