
In October 2012, 14 eminent scientists, philosophers and other thinkers met for 3 days in a workshop entitled Moving Naturalism Forwards. What should we learn from this meeting?

In October 2012, 14 eminent scientists, philosophers and other thinkers met for 3 days in a workshop entitled Moving Naturalism Forwards. What should we learn from this meeting?

I’ve always been interested in astronomy and cosmology, and sometimes wish I’d studied it. I find the universe fascinating and amazing to look at, think about and learn about.
Cosmology has also always been of interest to theists, as it seems to point to the existence of a creator God. The cosmological argument and, in particular, the teleological argument (see The universe points to God) have evolved over centuries based on the discoveries of cosmology. And therefore, of course, it is of interest to atheists, who wish to combat the arguments.
I want to introduce you to one atheist physicist with expertise in cosmology who I think you ought to know – an Aussie, Luke Barnes.

We can read the statistics which show that, in most western countries, church attendance has fallen in the last century. In some cases it is still falling, though in others it has levelled out. The ‘leavers’ are not necessarily giving up all belief in God – many list themselves as ‘not committed’ – but some are choosing to be atheists.
But this is all statistics. There is also a human face to these changes.

In philosophy, an idea is incoherent if it is self contradictory, and cannot even be properly defined.
There are many things about the idea of God that some atheists think are incoherent. Here is a brief summary and comment on seven arguments, all of which I have seen presented, sometimes by philosophers, as serious and telling objections to the idea and existence of God.

Creation out of nothing (ex nihilo) is one of the fundamentals of the christian faith. The Cosmological argument attempts to use the universe to show that God exists. The universe couldn’t cause itself to exist, the argument says, nor could it exist for no reason, so an external agent (what else but God?) must have caused it.
Despite various attempts to refute the argument, it remains a strong one, not least because of its basic common sense. But some atheists have argued that quantum physics shows that the universe could indeed have arisen out of nothing.
In christianity, faith is a virtue. Many christians believe in Jesus because they have been taught to believe by people they trust. Is this good or bad?
Some people say, faith is the opposite of reason. So does this mean believing in Jesus is unreasonable? Why do we have faith anyway?
And how do these questions fit in with our current theme of helping disciples to stand against attack?
These days, christians may have to face the common accusation that their belief is based on blind, reasonless faith, and not on evidence, and that therefore they should logically give up belief. “There’s no more evidence for the christian God than for Santa or Thor”, they may be told.
This can be a major source of doubt for some believers. But is the accusation fair?
We’re taking a look, over a few posts, in why it is getting harder to make disciples in the western world, and why more christians are dropping out.
This post looks at the many different reasons why christians stop believing, and is based my discussions with atheists on forums and blogs over the past six years, and on accounts people give of their own ‘deconversion’ on mainly atheist websites. (These are not too hard to find.)
Jesus told his followers to make disciples (Matthew 28:18-20), and for two millennia they did just that, and now about a third of the world follows Jesus, nominally at least. But it’s getting much harder to make disciples in western societies these days, and it is becoming more common for apparently strong disciples to turn away from following Jesus.
I think this is a crucial matter, and I want to devote a number of posts to it. Today, I just want to scope the problem.

I have been a CS Lewis fan since my youth. So I remember being impressed by his argument, in Mere Christianity, that Jesus was divine. He could not have been merely a great moral teacher, Lewis argued, for his claims were such that either he was mad, or evil, or truly the Lord.
These days, the argument, often called the trilemma and abbreviated (and changed a little) to Liar, Lunatic or Lord? is not so effective. It is important that we understand why.
I have blogged before on the atheist vs christian wars, most recently in Atheist vs christian internet wars. The latest instalment is the verbal slanging match between US christian philosopher William Lane Craig and UK atheist biologist Richard Dawkins.
I think there are some things we can learn from this unedifying exchange.
Christians want others to believe in Jesus, because we believe he is “the way, the truth and the life”. But why should they? Do we offer good reasons why we believe and why we think they should also?
Lately I have been pondering two facts:
Why is it so?
If you spend time on online religious discussion forums, you’ve probably heard someone say: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!” Ever since Carl Sagan said it, this aphorism (often abbreviated to the acronym ECREE) has been used to critique claims of miracles or the paranormal. It sounds neat and logical, and it can help you feel you have the ‘high logical ground’, but is it true? What should christians think about it?
In Worshipping the Irrational Jesus in the Huffington Post, Prof Mark Osler offers three approaches to those aspects of christianity we find uncomfortable or difficult to understand or accept.