Happypizza: I’m closing this post to comments. This is “for informational purposes” only and not a forum for debate between people who believe and don’t believe in God. I’m also not qualified to moderate and debate a topic like that. The reality is: my belief is based purely on faith in God’s word. For those who also believe in a Designer and Creator– you will find these articles interesting and thought provoking.So please enjoy and find other forums to debate. Best wishes!
The Problem of Information for the Theory of Evolution
Has Dawkins really solved it?–Dr. Royal Truman
-
Evidence for the Existence of God
–Dr. Hugh Ross
-
How to Do Your Own Darwinian Evolution Experiments with the Random Mutation Generator
Perry S. Marshall
-
The Atheist’s Riddle:
Perry S. Marshall
-
Information Theory and the Origin of DNA: Frequently Asked Questions
Perry S. Marshall
-
What atheists Kant refute
By Dinesh D’Souza, The Christian Science Monitor
A recent string of bestselling books has put believers on the defensive. Religion, say the authors, is an unreasonable form of blind faith, often leading to fanaticism and violence. Reason and science, they contend, are the only proper foundations for forming opinions and understanding the universe.
This atheist attack is based on a fallacy, as was pointed out by the great philosopher Immanuel Kant. Kant erected a sturdy intellectual bulwark against atheism that hasn’t been breached since. His defense doesn’t draw on sacred texts or any other sources of authority to which people of faith might naturally and rightfully turn when confronted with atheist arguments. Instead, it relies on the only framework that today’s atheist proselytizers say is valid: reason. The fallacy is the glib assumption that there is only one limit to what human beings can know—reality itself. This view says we can find out more and more until eventually there is nothing more to discover. It holds that human reason and science can, in principle, unmask the whole of reality.
In his 1781 “Critique of Pure Reason,” Kant showed that this premise is false. Kant showed that human knowledge is constrained not merely by the unlimited magnitude of reality but also by a limited sensory apparatus of perception.
Consider a tape recorder. It captures only one mode of reality, namely sound. Thus all aspects of reality that cannot be captured in sound are beyond its reach. The same is true of human beings. The only way we grasp reality is through our five senses. But why should we believe that this is sufficient? What makes us think that there is no reality that lies beyond sensory perception?
Moreover, the reality we perceive is not reality in itself. It is merely our experience or “take” on it. When we equate experience and reality, we are making an unjustified leap.
Kant isn’t diminishing the importance of experience. We can use science and reason to discover the operating principles of the world of experience. This world, however, is not the only one there is. Kant contended that while science and reason apply to the world of sensory phenomena, of things as they are experienced by us, science and reason cannot penetrate further.
Ours is a world of appearances only, in which we see things in a limited and distorted way—”through a glass, darkly,” as the apostle Paul writes in I Corinthians. The spiritual reality constitutes the only permanent reality there is. Christianity teaches that while reason can point to the existence of this higher domain, it cannot fully comprehend that domain.
Thus, when atheists dismiss religious claims on the grounds that “what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence,” they are making what philosophers like to call a category mistake. Reason is useful, but it isn’t unreasonable to believe things on faith that simply cannot be proven by reason.
When atheists summarily dismiss such common ideas as the immortality of the soul or the afterlife on the grounds that they have never found any empirical proofs for either, they are asking for evidence in a domain that is entirely beyond the reach of the senses. In this domain, the absence of such evidence cannot be used as the evidence for their absence.
Kant exposes the ignorant boast of atheists that atheism operates on a higher intellectual plane than religion. He shows that reason must know its limits in order to be truly reasonable. Atheism foolishly presumes that reason is capable of figuring out all that there is, while religion at least knows that there is a reality greater than, and beyond, that which our senses and our minds can ever understand.
Copyright Christian Science Monitor……posted without permission 
