This week I continue my treatise on Why Christianity is REAL, in response to an article at Atheists Alliance International by Bill Flavell, entitled “Eight Reasons Christianity is False”
Atheist Bill’s second reason against Christianity:
“2. There is clear evidence that humans invent gods. Humans have invented so many gods that the default assumption should be that a god is a supernatural entity invented by humans. Christianity would need solid evidence that the Jewish god is an exception to this rule but there is no such evidence..”
The core argument: The default assumption should be that a god is a supernatural entity invented by humans.
So how do we test his ‘default assumption’? An assumption is not worth anything until it is tested. Bill’s test is ‘we need evidence that any god exists, let alone a Jewish God’. I found an article by Dr Ian Carnaghan entitled “Philosophical Assumptions for Qualitative Research” which neatly describes the various philosophies related to making assumptions, and subsequently reviews the possible ways to interpret results. Using his explanations, we can make a case for dealing with Bills assumption.
Possible philosophies for making assumptions:
Ontological: Relates to the nature of reality and is tested by looking at evidence from different individuals’ perspectives and experiences. By far, this is what people of faith use as a proof text. Knowing God is based on what people of faith see and experience. Since Bill refuses to ‘experience’ God, an ontological approach will not work with him.
Epistemological: Assumptions are tested by getting close to the participants being studied. Subjective evidence is collected one person at a time from the field. Bill could hang out with Christians and gather evidence. This approach would not work for him either.
Axiological: Proving a Christian assumption is actively presented with values and biases that relate to the information gathered in the field. Most Christians would fall under this philosophy for making assumptions BUT, Bill’s perspective would disagree with starting from a Christian bias or value.
Methodology: The only philosophy that an atheist would settle on for proving the above assumption is to test an assumption using a method that is inductive, emerging, and shaped by the researcher’s experience in collecting and analyzing the data. As a science guy in college, this method is what drew me to Christ. There are tons of research sources that take a scientific and//or legalistic approach to proving assumptions about God. My favorite source of all time is written by an apologist named Josh McDowell Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Skeptical World . Another book source that is really helpful is The Case for Christ: A Journalist’s Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus by Lee Strobel.
So, my conclusions are based on Methodological Assumption, influenced by Ontological, Epistemological, and Axiological factors, and there is evidence out there.
Useful videos on the subject:
