I reminded my atheist correspondent that the Christian God is unique. That in and of itself does not make it true, but it should cause us to pause, especially when we think about the other major religions.
Islam and Judaism have a big God (theologians like to call this transcendence), but their God does not come near (what theologians call immanence).
Hinduism and Buddhism have a god(s) who may be very near, especially with the latter’s pantheism, but transcendence gets lost.
Christianity has both: a transcendent God who comes near.
Again, unique, but that is not quite an argument for its truthfulness.
The final post on Tuesday about the trinity does make a case that is compelling from the standpoint of truth, so stay tuned.
Your comment in the entry reminds me of something I learned at a L’Abri conference (held in Austin back in the late 80’s). When pursuing a discussion about God, determine the person’s view of God because, as you say, the person usually either has a view of a ‘far-away god’ or a ‘near-by god.’ It is a viable approach when an opportunity arises to get the conversation going in a meaningful direction.
I have a big problem with the graphic you chose here. I admit I didn’t read the article, but this graphic is inaccurate on so many levels I had to respond to it’s use. Atheism is NOT the belief that nothing came from nothing and blah blah blah. Regarding Atheism and creation, Atheists believe that something happened, we just don’t know what. The part about ‘everything magically rearranged itself for no reason” is light-years off as well. Gravity happened. Everything was attracted to everything else and the closer the things are together the higher the attraction. The larger a mass is created the larger it’s attraction to more matter. This process is THOROUGHLY explained at this point. Ignorant graphics like this and thoughts like it are exactly why people become Atheist. If you use nonsense and comments that were obviously not researched for their factual backing your argument looks weak.
Thanks for stopping by. Graphics are never perfect as they reduce a whole bunch of data to the proverbial sound bite. However, I have talked to many atheists at places like Stanford, Cal Berkeley, and elsewhere. Many have candidly admitted that the “something” which caused everything to come into being is tough to explain. Science, in the modern sense of doing things, begs off the question by saying it is religious and philosophical in nature. But every scientist, materialist or otherwise, has a philosophy of science. You can’t escape wrestling with the issue.