on the existence of god
How atheism relies on "special pleading".
Atheism claims to be scientifically based but demands exemptions from accepted methods of scientific reasoning and from scientific laws.
How atheism impersonates science.
What atheists present as “science” supporting their views is actually extremely shoddy philosophy posturing or posing as science…a posing and posturing that would make Elvis impersonators proud.
Do Christ’s divinity and resurrection defy common sense?
The biblical claims about the divinity and resurrection of Jesus only violate common-sense when viewed from the lens of materialism (which says that only the world of material things is real). But materialism is a scientifically unsupportable stance.
Why calling theism “primitive superstition” shows primitive understanding.
Atheistic reasoning which judges belief in God to be a “primitive superstition superseded by science” fails to understand the nature and limitations of scientific knowledge.
Why believing precedes knowing…and EVERYONE has a faith.
The person who disbelieves in God can only do so from the vantage point of some other belief which precedes and therefore underlies scientific inquiry…not from the vantage point of a “skeptical“ lack of any belief. Atheists are “skeptical” of Christianity (etc.), but are very rarely skeptical of the scientifically and philosophically unsupportable belief system that is alternately referred to as materialism or naturalism. When it comes to materialism/naturalism, Christians (and other theists) are the skeptics, and atheists are the true believers.
Why trying to explain away God with science is an ERROR
Atheistic reasoning often suggests that “science explains things without the need for God.” But such a suggestion is what is known in philosophical terms as a “category error.” Science describes things in terms of natural laws, but does not explain where natural laws come from or how they are enforced.