Gunning For God

[bohemian]

At the moment I am reading, on my Kindle, the book "Gunning For God" by Prof John Lennox. Subtitled "Why the New Atheists are Missing the Target: A Critique of the New Atheism", it is a very interesting look at the arguments made by the new atheists and expose of their false logic.

As Professor Lennox is a nominal Christian, it does have some references to his own faith (e.g. Jesus as God) but his logical arguments are impressive.

It includes a critique of Stephen Hawking and John Mlodinow's "The Grand Design" (a shortened version of his book "God and Stephen Hawking, Whose Design Is It Anyway?") as well as the arguments of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. He shows very clearly how the new atheists are really not atheists but anti-theists.

It has given me some interesting insights into their illogical statements, which taken at face value sound so plausible - and many people have just taken them at face value - swallowed them whole!

[rbrown1205]

I just checked the reviews for this book, and it seems like John C Lennox is right on the money, so to speak, in terms of exposing some of the fallacious reasoning of the "new atheists."

One point is about how the atheists point to the bad behavior of people who claim to believe in God, and Lennox contends that these ones were not obeying God, but breaking his laws in the name of God. He went on to say that atheists were not so anxious to point out the murderous antics of Stalin, Pol Pot, and Robespierre, atheists all.

And one quote that made me applaud (in my mind) to read it:

==============

Hawkings asserted: "Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going" (Stephen Hawking: The Grand Design).

Lennox contends: "Contrary to what Hawking claims, physical laws can never provide a complete explanation of the universe. Laws themselves do not create anything; they are merely a description of what happens under certain conditions. What Hawking appears to have done is to confuse law with agency. His call on us to choose between God and physics is a bit like someone demanding that we choose between aeronautical engineer Sir Frank Whittle and the laws of physics to explain the jet engine. That is a confusion of category. The laws of physics can explain how the jet engine works, but someone had to build the thing, put in the fuel and start it up. The jet could not have been created without the laws of physics on their own--but the task of development and creation needed the genius of Whittle as its agent. Similarly, the laws of physics could never have actually built the universe. Some agency must have been involved."

============

Sounds to me like Hebrews 3:4, does it to you?

Lennox also quoted from a similarly minded author named Alister McGrath, who wrote:

============

"Indeed, the New Atheists love to classify faith in God along with faith in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. But that is rather silly. Alister McGrath recalls: As a child I believed (for a very short while) in Santa Claus. However I soon sussed the real situation out, although I must confess I kept my doubts about Santa's existence to myself for some time because I also noticed that there was material advantage in so doing. I have never heard of an adult coming to believe in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. I have known many adult people come to believe in God. So clearly there is a great difference."

-------------------

Interesting reasoning!!