Apathy, Atheism, and the Absurdity of Life Without God

Here is a truth I wish everyone would take the time to earnestly and honestly contemplate:

If God does not exist and there is no life after death, then there is no ultimate meaning, value, or purpose in life.

The question of God’s existence is the most important question we can seek to answer. If God does not exist and we do not survive the death of our bodies, life is ultimately absurd. J.P. Moreland provides an illustration which helps bring this truth home:

Suppose I invited you over to my house to play a game of Monopoly. When you arrive I announce that the game is going to be a bit different. Before us is the Monopoly board, a set of jacks, a coin, the television remote, and a refrigerator in the corner of the room. I grant you the first turn, and puzzlingly, inform you that you may do anything you want: fill the board with hotels, throw the coin in the air, toss a few jacks, fix a sandwich, or turn on the television. You respond by putting hotels all over the board and smugly sit back as I take my turn. I respond by dumping the board upside down and tossing the coin in the air. Somewhat annoyed, you right the board and replenish it with hotels. I turn on the television and dump the board over again.

Now it wouldn’t take too many cycles of this nonsense to recognize that it didn’t really matter what you did with your turn, and here’s why. There is no goal, no purpose to the game we are playing. Our successive turns form a series of one meaningless event after another. Why? Because if the game as a whole has no purpose, the individual moves within the game are pointless. Conversely, only a game’s actual purpose according to its inventor can give the individual moves significance.[1]

As Moreland articulates, if the game of Monopoly as a whole has no purpose, the individual moves within the game have no meaning or value. The only way your moves within the game of Monopoly have significance is if you discover the purpose of the game and you align yourself with that purpose.

Atheism: No God is Real, No God Actually Exists

In his book A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test, Ken Samples recalls a conversation he had with an atheist who claimed that God did not exist.(1) The conversation went something like this:

Ken: "Is it correct to define atheism as the claim that 'no god or gods are real' or that 'no god or gods actually exist'?"

The atheist eventually agreed.

Ken: "If atheism asserts that 'no god is real' or that 'no god actually exists,' then isn't it making a universal claim about 'all reality' and 'all existence'?"

What is Just War Theory?

(Reasons to Believe) by Kenneth Samples

Through the centuries Christian thinkers have taken different positions on the controversial subject of war. Three broad theories concerning the morality of war for the Christian can be identified: activism, pacifism, and selectivism. Activism asserts that it is virtually always right to participate in war. Strict pacifism insists that it is never morally right to partake in war. Selectivism argues that it is sometimes right to take part in war.

Just war theory is a type of selectivism contending that while war is always tragic and often evil, it is sometimes morally right, just, and practically necessary. Some leading Christian advocates of just war theory have included Augustine of Hippo (354-430), Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), and Francisco Suarez (1548-1617). Just war theory involves two main moral categories of evaluation.

1. Jus ad bellum (Justness of War)
Concerning the moral justness of waging war, a just war must conform to the following moral considerations:

A Just War will

• Be waged by a legitimate authority (government or state, not private individuals)
• Reflect moral deliberation (last resort after sincere diplomacy)
• Have probability of success (reasonable belief that victory can be achieved)
• Have a just cause (e.g., defense of innocents and freedom against direct aggression)
• Be just in intent (establish peace, freedom, justice; not unlimited destruction of the enemy)

2. Jus in bello (Justice in war)
Concerning the conduct of war, strategy and tactics must be just:

A Just War will be conducted

• With proper proportionality (sufficient, but not excessive force will be used; good should outweigh evil)
• With proper discrimination (noncombatants [civilians or innocents] should not be targeted

Just war theory has been criticized for various reasons through the years (e.g., by failing to appreciate the benefits of a preemptive strike, being unrealistic in its moral expectations, being practically unworkable), yet it nevertheless remains the most commonly accepted position among Christian thinkers when it comes to evaluating the moral considerations of waging war.

For further study on the ethics of war, see John Jefferson Davis, Evangelical Ethics, 3rd ed. (P and R Publishing, 2004) and J. P. Moreland and Norman L. Geisler, The Life and Death Debate (Praeger, 1990).

How Can Yahweh Be Perfectly Good and Just and Yet Command Extermination?

(Reasons.org) by Kenneth Samples

Richard Dawkins, the world’s most famous atheist, asserts that the God of the Old Testament is “a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser.”¹

Yahweh, the Hebrew name of the personal God of Israel in the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, reveals himself to be the Creator of heaven and earth. As the one true Lord, he is an infinite, eternal, and morally perfect personal deity. Historic Christianity identifies Yahweh as none other than the Triune God who is more specifically unveiled in the New Testament as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Tension arises when examining the Scriptures. The Bible reveals God to be perfectly good (Psalm 145:8-9) and perfectly just (Deuteronomy 32:4) in the very nature of his being. However, the Old Testament states that God personally commanded the army of the Hebrews to destroy the Canaanite nations.

During the conquest of Canaan, God commanded the following to the Hebrews:

“When the LORD [Yahweh] your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy” (Deuteronomy 7:2).

“However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes” (Deuteronomy 20:16).

In response to this frightening divine command, the Hebrew army carried out the following:

“They devoted the city to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys” (Joshua 6:21).

How can this seemingly brutal genocidal command be reconciled with God’s perfect goodness and justice?


Moral Justification for God’s Command

The following seven points help provide the moral context and justification for Yahweh’s command to destroy the Canaanites:

1. While God doesn’t always reveal all the details concerning his sovereign decisions, Scripture indicates that God’s moral will flows from his perfectly good and just nature. Therefore God has morally sufficient grounds for his commands even if those reasons are not fully revealed to humankind. However, in this specific case some of those reasons are evident.

2. God’s command to destroy the Canaanites was motivated by his intention to preserve Israel from the deep moral corruption that would have inevitably resulted through cultural assimilation with the pagan nations. God’s wrathful justice upon the Canaanites resulted in an act of mercy (protection) upon the Israelites. Therefore God’s command to destroy an entire people group nevertheless constituted a moral good.

3. The Canaanites were a morally decadent and reprobate people. Archaeological discoveries have revealed that they practiced such moral abominations as temple prostitution, child sacrifice, and bestiality.² And for hundreds of years they consistently ignored God’s call to repent of their wicked ways (Genesis 15:16). In God’s eyes they were beyond moral rehabilitation.

4. Life in the ancient Near-Eastern world was extremely brutal. And the Canaanite nations viewed the Israelites as their enemies. In this context of warfare among nations God’s command to destroy the pagan peoples was a necessary act of war.

5. God, as the sovereign creator and sustainer of life, has the prerogative to take life at his just discretion (Deuteronomy 32:39; Job 1:21). Because the cosmos belongs to the Lord, he has the ontological right to do as he wishes with his creatures. His only constraint is his moral nature. God is therefore in a different moral category of being than his creatures. He is the ultimate judge of all things. As Christian philosopher Paul Copan notes: “Like Narnia’s Aslan, Yahweh, though gracious and compassionate … is not to be trifled with.”³

6. God’s order to exterminate the Canaanites was not a command to murder (to take human life without just cause). Rather, it constituted a command of capital punishment on a grand scale and therefore reflected a retributive form of justice (the punishment matched the crime).

7. The divine command for the Hebrew army to destroy the Canaanites took place in a unique historical and biblical context. This was not a common or normative event in the life of God’s people. Yahweh is compassionate and patient and remains, in spite of this act, a God of mercy (Exodus 34:6).

Why Such Utter Devastation?

Yet while God had just cause to destroy the Canaanites for their wicked ways, was it necessary to kill all life? Couldn’t the innocent children have been preserved?

Unfortunately, the abominable evil of the Canaanite society had polluted the children as well.⁴

God, who knows the thoughts and intentions of people (Hebrews 4:12), knew that if these children had been allowed to live they would have inevitably infected God’s people with terrible iniquity. The Hebrews had to be “preserved” because they were the very people from which the Messiah would emerge. Additionally, it may be that God took mercy upon these children and granted them divine acceptance in the next life. God’s compassion is deep and wide even in the midst of temporal judgment.

An important lesson to be learned from this great and terrible event is that God loves his people and he will take extreme measures to protect them from moral and spiritual ruin (Romans 8:28).
___________________________________________________

References:

1. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2006), 31.

2. Gleason L. Archer Jr., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody, 1964), 261.

3. Paul Copan, “Is Yahweh a Moral Monster?” Philosophia Christi 10, no. 1 (Summer 2008), 31.

4. Ronald A. Iwasko, “God of War,” in Christianity for the Tough-Minded, ed. John Warwick Montgomery (Minneapolis: Bethany, 1973), 99-107.
______________________________________________

Please Note: If you have the chance, I highly recommend reading Clay Jones' article, also on this topic, entitled "We Don't Hate Sin So We Don't Understand What Happened To The Canaanites" (Philosophia Christi 11, no. 1).

5 Reasons God Exists

(Reasons.org)

Kenneth Samples discusses the following 5 reasons for God's existence:

1. God uniquely accounts for the physical universe's beginning.
2. God uniquely accounts for the order, complexity, and design evident in the universe.
3. God uniquely accounts for the reality of objective ethical values.
4. God uniquely accounts for the enigma of man.
5. God uniquely accounts for the claims, character, and credentials of Jesus Christ.

The Tricky Topic Of Halloween

(Reasons.org) written by Kenneth Samples

In terms of holiday commercial sales, Halloween ranks second only to Christmas. But is this extremely popular tradition (especially in the United States) the devil's night, a literal satanic and occult extravaganza? Or is Halloween a harmless celebration?

Many Christians raise questions and express concerns about holidays that have some historical connection, at least in terms of dates, to ancient pagan beliefs and practices. Some refuse to allow their children to participate in Halloween celebrations. Others would like to abolish the event. Addressing common questions about this scary holiday may alleviate some of the concerns surrounding this controversial cultural issue.

Isn't the origin of Halloween connected to an ancient form of paganism?

Like the dates of a number of major holidays (including Christmas), Halloween can be traced, at least in part, to an ancient pagan celebration. The winter festival "Samhain" was celebrated on or near October 31^st by the ancient Celts. Samhain was a pagan tradition that commemorated the end of harvest, the beginning of winter, and the recognition of the physical cycle of death, which included crops, animals, and humans.

In conjunction with this festival, many pagans believed that the human spirits of the recent dead would not pass on to their final resting place in the next world until being placated with gifts. The restless spirits' "tricks" could be avoided only if appropriately "treated," thus originated the present-day Halloween practice of children dressing up like spirits and arriving at the front door chanting (or demanding) "Trick or Treat."

But while Halloween has distant connections to ancient pagan beliefs and practices, the holiday has also been strongly influenced by Christian belief and practices. The word "Halloween" comes from "All Hallows' Eve," a reference to the evening before the Christian celebration of All Saints' Day (November 1^st). The so-called hall of fame for the faithful in the book of Hebrews (11:1-40) initiated All Saints' Day, which was (and is) devoted to remembering Christian believers who have died, sometimes suffering as martyrs.

By overlapping this practice of honoring and thanking God for the example of faithful believers with the Samhain festival, the church attempted to counteract heathen thought and influence. This was especially true in areas of Europe where Samhain was popular. Christian apologists Bob and Gretchen Passantino note the church's apologetic reasons for doing so: "The Church not only sought to give Christians an alternative, spiritually edifying holiday; but also to proclaim the supremacy of the gospel over pagan superstition."¹ Historically, Halloween has been influenced by both pagan practices and Christian devotion.² Therefore, to view Halloween as only a pagan holiday is inaccurate.

Since the origin of Halloween is tied, at least to some degree, to pagan beliefs and practices, shouldn't Christians avoid any involvement with its celebration (e.g., avoid having their children go trick-or-treating)?

Christians need to use good reasoning to support their moral and/or spiritual convictions. Drawing and applying biblical inferences to life's questions and challenges takes intellectual skill and care. To condemn the practice of trick-or-treating outright on the basis that Halloween has certain pagan origins is, in this author's mind, to come perilously close to committing the genetic fallacy.

The genetic fallacy is committed when an idea, person, practice, or institution is evaluated solely in terms of its origin, without giving appropriate consideration to how it has changed or evolved in contemporary practice.³ For example, one would be foolish to reject the scientific discipline of astronomy because its origins were connected to the ancient occult practice of astrology. Why? Because the practice of astronomy has changed significantly over time. While the Bible expressly forbids a believer's involvement in certain pagan and/or occult practices (Deut. 18:9-13), for the vast majority of American families Halloween has nothing to do with the practice of, or belief in, occultism. Rather, this celebration gives children an opportunity to dress up in funny, spooky, and/or outrageous costumes and accumulate candy by the pillowcase full (a little known metric measurement).

Aren't many of the seemingly benign practices of Halloween directly connected to paganism and occultism?

Christians have a biblical mandate to discern what is evil and resist and/or avoid its influence. However, to what extent should one go to avoid evil people and their practices? And to what extent are practices evil in themselves?

Since Adolf Hitler brushed his teeth, should one rather knock one's teeth out to avoid any association with an evil person and his practices? Could practices that were once associated with pagan superstition (such as carving pumpkins and bobbing for apples) be purely benign for people with a totally different motivation and intent? Should one avoid eating meat (especially lean and inexpensive meat) that has been offered to idols, even if one is convinced the idols don't really exist? The apostle Paul assured the first-century Christians that they could eat such meat in good conscience knowing that the idols were not real.⁴

Doesn't participation in Halloween open a door to the occult?

According to the Bible, the world of the occult is real and energized by demonic powers. This realm therefore must be recognized and resisted by Christians. Spiritual beliefs and practices bear consequences in this world and in the next. However, this author distinguishes a clear difference between the real occult practices of spiritism, magic, and divination and the contemporary practice of trick-or-treating, carving pumpkins, and bobbing for apples. The door of the occult world must be entered through human interest and initiative. General Halloween practices engaged in by most people do not draw them into occult activities.

The intent here is not to engage in hairsplitting over potentially dangerous activities but rather to make logical and moral distinctions. Of course, if any Halloween practice is perceived as violating one's conscience and commitment to biblical truth then that person should rightly abstain.

Isn't the apparently harmless practice of trick-or-treating really a subtle concession to and promotion of an occult worldview?

Again, one must follow his or her conscience on the matter, but this author finds it hard to believe that the systematic collection of candy in a given neighborhood by "Spider-Man" and his "Rugrat" friends constitutes the promotion of an occult worldview or spiritistic racketeering. Personally, it seems difficult not to heartily treat a young child dressed up as "Captain America" or "G.I. Joe." Even the recognized Christian authority on cults and the occult, Walter Martin, said: "If Big Bird comes to my door, he's definitely going to get a treat."

Doesn't the present-day practice of Halloween carry a strong association with dark occult images?

When images are offensive, one should by all means avoid them. But is the use of all dark images in every context wrong? How about the use of dark images in the realm of literature? Was it wrong of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien (both Christian writers) to include dark images (witches, monsters, etc.) in their writings? At what point does a Halloween costume become a dark image that should be avoided? Again, this is largely a matter of conscience.


Suggestions for Christians when it comes to Halloween

Put the arguments and conclusions found in this article to the test of Scripture, reason, and conscience (1 Thess. 5:21) and accept or reject them accordingly.

Consider that not everything is a morally black-and-white issue for Christians. Halloween may be a gray area. Therefore, allow Christians to follow their own conscience on the issue. Avoid the temptation to judge those who hold different convictions on secondary issues.

Whatever is decided about Halloween, try to avoid using bad arguments to support moral convictions. Using sound arguments to support convictions carries great weight with others.

If trick-or-treating violates a Christian's conscience, alternative events (fall parties or celebrations of All Saints' Day) allow children to view Christianity as a religion that permits them to have fun. Sinful activities should always be avoided, but be careful that children do not develop a "party-pooper" view of God.

Use Halloween as an opportunity to discuss how Christian families should confront questionable cultural practices. Discuss the worldview differences between classical paganism and Christianity.

Different people do have different ideas about whether or not to celebrate Halloween. However, one thing is certain. October 31^st not only commemorates All Hallows' Eve, but also honors Martin Luther's protesting of certain medieval Catholic beliefs and practices, which sparked the 16th century Reformation. And, the central truth of the gospel can be celebrated in a variety of ways every day of the year-even on Halloween.


References

1. Bob and Gretchen Passantino, "What about Halloween?" available from www.answers.org/issues/halloween.html; Internet; accessed 26 March 2002.

2. Answers In Action, a ministry that specializes in the study of cults and the occult, offers a thoughtful, balanced, and informative treatment of the subject of Halloween from an evangelical Christian perspective.

3. Britannica Junior Encyclopedia, vol. 7 (Chicago: William Benton, 1967), s.v. "Halloween."

4. See T. Edward Damer, Attacking Faulty Reasoning, 3d ed. (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1995), 36-37.

5. 1 Cor 8:1-13.

Why Christians Should Value Philosophy Part 3 of 3

(Reasons.org) Kenneth Samples

What is the number one reason that people give for not believing in God?

All of the sources that I have ever read over the last thirty years indicate that the answer is "the problem of evil, pain, and suffering."

In parts one and two of this series I presented two reasons why Christians should value philosophy. First, philosophy is the best discipline in terms of preparing a person to think critically. Second, many of Christianity's most important doctrines clearly have philosophical implications. In this final article, I offer one more reason.

The Importance of Philosophy for Christians

1. Philosophy Promotes Critical Thinking
2. Christian Doctrine Contains Philosophical Implications
3. People Reject Christianity on Philosophical Grounds

If Christians hope to engage in evangelism and apologetics, then they will inevitably encounter people's objections to the faith. Many, if not most, of those objections involve direct philosophical connotations.

When it comes to philosophy of religion, questions about God's existence, his attributes, and the relationship between faith and reason immediately come to the fore. This area of study also focuses upon the issue of theodicy (the justification of God's goodness in light of evil in the world). Some of the very best Christian responses to the challenge that evil poses to the truth of the faith have come from philosophers (see the writings of such contemporary Christian thinkers as Richard Swinburne and Alvin Plantinga listed below).

The philosophy of science is another area where Christians can benefit from possessing an understanding of philosophy. When my scientific colleagues Hugh Ross and Fuz Rana present RTB's creation model to secular scientists on college campuses they often receive an interesting response. According to Hugh, most of the objections are not scientific–but philosophical! For example, skeptics assert that religion and science are two separate spheres of inquiry that cannot be integrated. Or they claim that science by definition can only entertain purely naturalistic causes and explanations. Both of these issues are discussed specifically through the philosophy of science.

As the great medieval Christian philosophers recognized, good philosophy seeks to critically analyze life's most important questions. It can also serve as a useful handmaid to the study of theology and in the apologetics enterprise as well.

Recommended resources:

Philosophy and its benefits to the Christian: A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test.

God and the problem of evil: God, Freedom, and Evil by Alvin Plantinga and Is There A God? by Richard Swinburne.

Philosophy of religion: God and Reason by Ed L. Miller.

Philosophy of science: Science & Its Limits by Del Ratzsch.

Why Christians Should Value Philosophy Part 2 of 3

(Reasons.org) Kenneth Samples

During the Middle Ages theology was hailed as the "Queen of the Sciences." Consequently, medieval Christian thinkers described philosophy as a "handmaiden" to theology.

The Importance of Philosophy for Christians

1. Philosophy Promotes Critical Thinking

In part one of this series I presented the first reason for Christians to value philosophy. It is the best discipline for preparing a person to think critically. Logic, after all, is defined as the science of "correct thinking" and logic is one of the major branches of philosophical inquiry.

1. Philosophical Implications in Christian Doctrine

Believers should study philosophy because Christian doctrine contains many philosophical implications. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity involves one "essence" (being) but three "subsistences" (persons). Both of these critical terms (used to describe the triune nature of God) are philosophical in nature.

The same is true for the doctrine of the Incarnation (God coming in the flesh), where Jesus Christ is understood as being one "Who" (a distinct and unified person) but two "Whats" (possessing both a divine and a human "essence"). Again this essential Christian doctrine is loaded with subtle philosophical meaning and implications. Analysis of Christian theology also extends to God's being and characteristics. God's attributes–whether incommunicable (independent qualities) or communicable (shared qualities with humankind)–involve the philosophical categories of time, space, and knowledge.

In describing philosophy as the handmaiden to theology, medieval scholars asserted that philosophy (or reason overall) serves to explain and help defend the truths of historic Christianity. Reason isn't supposed to function in a magisterial way (like a magistrate judging God's revealed truth). Rather it is to fulfill a critical ministerial function (like a minister serving God's written Word) in the overall study of theology. This close connection between philosophy and theology is evidenced in a subset of the formal study of theology known as "philosophical theology."

Through the ages, Christian theology has viewed reason as God's good gift to humanity–a result of being made in the image of God (imago Dei, Genesis 1:26-27). Christian truth can never be exhaustively comprehended by finite human beings, but through the imago Dei God ensures that his creatures can trace his intelligible truths. Thus, both mystery and knowledge accompany a creature's relationship with God Almighty.

However, the consensus of theology is also that truth and revelation never damage reason itself. The minds of sinners can be negatively impacted by humanity's fallenness, but the laws of logic and the principles of argumentation remain undefiled.

In history, philosophy has (at times) been used to critique and attack the truth of Christianity. However, it is also true that believers have appealed to philosophy to explain and defend the truth of the faith.

For more about philosophy and its benefits to the Christian, see A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test. For two excellent books on the subject of philosophical theology, see God and Reason by Ed L. Miller and Our Idea of God by Thomas V. Morris.

Why Christians Should Value Philosophy Part 1 of 3

(Reasons.org) Kenneth Samples

Someone in antiquity said, "Philosophy bakes no bread."

This famous assertion raises concerns about philosophy's practical relevance and value. I remember my father's quizzical look when I informed him that I was studying the subject in college.

My father grew up during the Great Depression, worked hard as a West Virginia coal miner, and served his country as combat soldier in the Second World War. These tough experiences shaped in him a very pragmatic view of life. At first he questioned my choice to study a discipline that seemed abstract and speculative (not to mention a field that doesn't pay all that well). However, being part of an American infantry division that had liberated a Nazi concentration camp, my dad knew that ideas (and especially ideologies) mattered and had inevitable consequences. He, therefore, came to approve of my academic studies.

What is Philosophy?

In his excellent primer, Questions That Matter, Ed Miller defines philosophy as "the attempt to think rationally and critically about the most important questions." Traditional philosophy has been interpreted as the pursuit of wisdom, knowledge, and truth. Philosophers are primarily interested in the following six areas:

• Metaphysics: The study of the ultimate nature, structure, and characteristics of reality.
• Epistemology: The study of the origin, nature, limits, and validity of knowledge.
• Ethics: The study of the origin, nature, meaning, and criteria of moral goodness.
• Value Theory: The study of what people generally value (other than moral values) and why.
• Aesthetics: The study of beauty and how people respond to it (taste).
• Logic: The study of the principles of correct reasoning and argumentation.

While few philosophers become financially wealthy (and the job market can be competitive), there are very good reasons to value the study of philosophy, especially for Christians.

The Importance of Philosophy for Believers

1. Philosophy Promotes Critical Thinking

Being made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27) means that human beings have unique intellectual abilities. And the Bible teaches that followers of Christ should use the gift of their mind in their love and service to God (Matthew 22:37). Furthermore, intellectual virtues such as discernment, reflection, testing, analysis, and renewal of the mind are biblical imperatives (Acts 17:11; Roman 12:2; 1 Corinthians 14:29; Colossians 2:8; 1Thessalonians 5:21).

The study of philosophy, like no other discipline, exposes a person to the important areas of critical thinking and the principles of argumentation. Thinking clearly, carefully, and reflectively are the benefits of studying logic–one of the critical fields of philosophy.

Pursuing the "life of the mind" to the glory of God is an important component in the Christian's overall devotion. And the study of philosophy can uniquely serve to prepare the believer for intellectual engagement.

Look for further discussion on the importance of philosophy next week.

For more about philosophy and its benefits to the Christian, see A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test.

Is Dogmatic Agnosticism Logically Self-Defeating?

(Reasons.org) Kenneth Samples

The word agnosticism literally means “no-knowledge-ism”. The skeptical position held by agnostics usually comes in two distinct forms: soft and hard. Soft or flexible agnosticism simply claims to have an absence of knowledge as to whether God exists (thus reserving judgment). Hard or dogmatic agnosticism makes a stronger claim asserting that “no one” can know whether God exists.

This hard type of agnosticism appears to suffer from the same problems that atheism does in terms of verifying its bold claim. To embrace a hard form of agnosticism would mean that a person would have to either (1) know that knowledge of God is logically impossible, or (2) be an expert on all the possible ways one could come to know about God. Yet neither of these positions seems logically justifiable in nature.

Plus, the dogmatic form of agnosticism is actually self-defeating (at the same time affirming and denying the identical claim) for the position simultaneously asserts that one doesn’t know if God exists and yet knows enough about God to assert that no one can know that God exists. Hard agnostics, in effect, claim to have knowledge about a topic that they claim is not possible to know anything about. In his book No Doubt About It, Christian philosopher Winfried Corduan notes the following: “Thus agnosticism pivots on a contradiction by having to maintain that at one and the same time it is both possible and impossible to know something about God.”

Hard agnosticism asserts the self-destructing claim that “one knows enough about God in order to affirm that nothing can be known about God.”¹ Thus, the extreme claims of skepticism first affirm what they ultimately deny.

1. For a critical evaluation of agnosticism, see Norman Geisler, Christian Apologetics (pages 13-27).