How Can We Know Anything?

I found an interesting podcast today and heard the following statement, "According to Science, Pluto needs 200 some odd years to orbit around the Sun. We haven't even known about Pluto that long in Science so how do we know that or that it will ever will orbit the sun? We don't know... but we have the math, the science and the evidence that confirms this former planet is conforming to the laws of gravity, the laws of physics that govern the universe that are consistently reliable. It's not like science stops working on occasion. There is a reason why there is no documentation for a miracle because these are violations of natural laws. They just don't happen." —Matt Dillahunt, The Atheist Experience Podcast.

I turned to my fellow brother in the battle, SouldeSaenz and emailed him to ask him how many contradictions and refutations he can find in the quote. I found his response brilliant! Here it is:

"His presupposition is that because the other planets orbit around the earth, then Pluto must do so as well. He first needs to address the problem of Induction. Just because it has happened once in the past that does not mean that it will happen again in the future, that is Induction.

Next, his evidences are not proofs of it happening. Just because you have evidence or rather, data, that is not proof of anything. What kind of data do you have regarding Pluto anyway? It's mass? It's position in Space? What is that proof of? That says noting about it's orbit of the Sun.

Finally and this is the biggy, on what basis can this clown even begin to make an assertion as to Natural laws? [They are] are immaterial, universal, abstracts. How can these materialist who hold to the creation of the universe through material means account for the immaterial? Why does he commit a category error in assuming that miracles are proven by the same means as the orbit of a planet around the Sun. This is what Dr. Greg Bahnsen called the "crackers in the pantry error". One does not prove that there are crackers in the pantry by the scientific method just as you do not prove the validity of miracles by whatever means he claims are invalid. He also never demonstrated that miracles violate natural law. How does Jesus curing a blind man a violation of natural? Which law of nature does that violate?

Lastly, there is plenty of documentation of miracles—it's called the Bible! In the end, he is left with the being guilty of what he himself is accusing the Christian of! There is no proof that Pluto orbits the Sun, only evidence that it may.

Well put my brotha! And may I add, doesn't the Atheist at some point have to account for the Big Bang? [hypothetically speaking]. Did it happen naturally? If they believe this, how can they know?

To believe or not to believe, that is the question.

Today, I received a news alert that headlined, "To believe or not to believe, that is the question."

The article was posted on Sacramento State's School newspaper website. It is about how some students plan to create an atheist club on campus. Their purpose, " To debate and challenge theistic assumptions". Below are a few responses I posted to their site from the article. Quotes from the article are  in blue.

"'(One goal) is to debate and challenge theistic assumptions,' Owen said." 

No matter what religion, or lack there of, they all have assumptions. Call it circular reasoning, but atheists must also admit, they too reason in circular fashion. At least speaking as a Christian, my benchmark, my guide is the Bible. It's the only rational worldview that comports with nature and mankind. Assume the contrary.

"Often atheists don't make their feelings known for fear of abuse or attack" said graduate English student Robin Martin."
Well, obviously Mr. Martin has no "fear of abuse or attack" by getting free publicity for club in the school newspaper about making his "feelings known". What type of abuse or attack is he describing here? Getting his feelings hurt or physical pain? Well, unfortunately for Christians, they live in a world of fear, abuse and attacks on their faith. In this post modern society, Christians are often directed to the "back of the bus"...if that—Most of the time, Christians are not even allowed on the bus. Especially in the public square.

'It's essential to inspire people to think and question the historical and present inconsistencies, violence, and exclusivity of theism and to educate through public speaking, printed materials, and creative events..' said Rebekah Hall, a prospective graduate English student. "

Apparently, Ms Hall makes the assertion of "historical and present inconsistencies" but fails to mention any. And implying that religion is responsible for violence is empirically false. It's obvious Ms Hall has been asleep at the wheel of her history studies there at Sac State.

Yes. There have been many atrocities in the name of religion. To be specific, Christianity. A blight on Christianity? Certainty. Something wrong? Dismally wrong. A tragedy? Of course. Millions and millions of people killed? No. The numbers are tragic, but pale in comparison to the statistics of what the ideology of non-religion criminals have committed. Go to your library there at Sac State and look up, ""Crimes: Mass Killings." There, you'll find names like Mao Tse Tung, Lenin and Stalin and Khrushchev. These men certainly weren't practicing theologians.

My point is not that Christians or religious people aren't vulnerable to committing terrible crimes. Certainly they are. But it is not religion that produces these things; it is the denial of Biblical religion that generally leads to these kinds of things. The statistics that are the result of irreligious genocide stagger the imagination.

"Lopez, a senior English major, said she wants "to talk to people about being an atheist and to get them to see that an atheist isn't something bad or something that has a negative connotation."
So what? As an atheist, why should Ms Lopez care about what people think? Again, if she was consistent with her worldview of atheism, she should allow people to think, act, do whatever they want. "Survival of the fittest" right? We're just molecules-in-motion. Is there a greater purpose for you Ms Lopez for proselytizing the students of Sac State?

Once again, we have atheists borrowing from the theists, specifically Christianity to spread their gospel of "good news".

Best of Both Worlds

I will be posting the same blog on both Blogger and Wordpress. So it's obvious that some will have different comments. So check them both out. I decided to do this because each blog service is unique and has it's different features. I really like the video features. However, I like that Blogger will post YouTube videos that are relevant to the posting I choose. Enjoy!

Back Up and Running!

Hello all!
Well, after a few weeks of exhaustive backtracking of lost posts, I must stop and continue on with this blog without some of the past postings. I kept following the links that say, "Can't see your blog? Click here", but unfortunately, they said there was nothing they can do because I cancelled my original email I signed up with. Live and learn I guess. So from time to time, as often as possible, I will be posting again some great questions that are either posed to me or some that I hear in the Public Square (internet, TV, radio, newspaper, academia, etc.) in regards to faith, reason, logic and other aspects that help shape our beliefs and how we look at the world philosophically. But once-in-a-while, I'll go off subject with something else so I won't take myself too seriously ;)

"Senator Edwards, how can you live in a 26,000 sq.ft house and say you care for the poor and needy?"

Pat Mahoney, a pro-life activist, confronted Sen. John Edwards as he asks him those exact words outside the "Faith Forum" at George Washington University this past Sunday Night.

Listen to the confrontation by clicking here.

This audio clip is courtesy of Matt Slick, host of Faith and Reason.

Then, watch the video here leading up to the "faith forum" here!>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l8TFFaTSJs or click the video over on the right column.

And lastly, here's quote to remember; "I don't know if I know what a rich person is" said John Edwards, at the latest Democratic debate.

"What Democratic Debate?"

Going off the theme subject of the blog today, I have a political post. I asked my close and like-minded buddy Ivette, over in Washington D.C., who is plugged-in to the political climate, if she watched and heard the rants of what seemed to be 200 or so Democratic candidates from the Debate on Sunday night on CNN. She cleverly replied,

"One liberal is painful enough."

"What is 'Jesus Camp'"?

"Jesus Camp", is a documentary directed by Rachel Grady and Heidi Ewing about a Pentecostal summer camp for kids who spend the summer learning and practicing their spiritual gifts and being taught about hot political issues in America. A former coworker, whom shall I say is no fan of the political conservative Christian Right, recommended this documentary to me.

Kids speaking in tongues and prophesying, a ranting Leftist talk-show host, political hot topics such as abortion, separation of Church and State and so forth are all packed into the documentary.

What I want to point out are the obvious refutations in the documentary of the talk-show host from Air America.

Right at the beginning he states, "Up in the pulpit, it's this mean-spirited message,'Us against them' that's what the religious right is doing in the United States now. And it's dividing this country." He continues, "They are being told that George Bush, of all people, is a holy man whose been anointed with the job of creating a Christian society not only in America, but all over the world."

I believe a Christian society would benefit the world over an godless society that's for sure. Two minutes into the documentary, he also stated that he's "been a Christian all his life." Then he would agree with what the Bible says in Romans 13:1 that "EVERYONE must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is NO authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God." Hospitals, Universities, Science, History, feeding and housing the poor, all has it's origin because of the Christian God.

His outcries continue, "There's this entanglement with politics and religion. What kind of lesson is that for our children?" Not to be disrespectful, but that is a moronic statement! It's a GREAT lesson for our children. God established government in the first place. Our politics is driven by our view of the world, our view of reality, our belief...and disbelief.

He also comments "...and (stuttering) you wanna shake'em. And you wanna say, 'What is it about your understanding about the fundamentals of Christianity."

"Shake'em"? Earlier, he was crying out about the mean-spirited message coming from the pulpits of America.

This "life-long" Christian also said, "Our President is still telling Americans that we should teach creationism in our schools. That we should teach it right along side with... with Evolution. Did you hear about what happened in Kansas? That you have to teach Intelligent Design along with Darwin's evolution..."

Wasn't it Darwin who wrote, "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree." [p. 217, Charles Darwin, 1859. The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.

In conclusion, the charismatic Christians in this movie had nothing to hide. The film crew was allowed into their church, into their homes and into their lives. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the "Gifts of the Spirit" is an in-house theological debate and not one that non-Christians would understand.