Dr Paul Allen

Is the Christian faith intellectual nonsense? Are Christians deluded? “If God exists and takes an interest in the affairs of human beings, his will is not inscrutable,” writes Sam Harris about the 2004 tsunami in Letter to a Christian Nation . “The only thing inscrutable here is that so many otherwise rational men and women can deny the unmitigated horror of these events and think this is the height of moral wisdom” (p. 48). In his article “God’s Dupes,” Harris argues, “Everything of value that people get from religion can be had more honestly, without presuming anything on insufficient evidence. The rest is self-deception, set to music” ( The Los Angeles Times , March 15, 2007). Ironically, Harris’ first book is entitled The End of Faith, but it should really be called “The End of Reason,” as it demonstrates again that the mind that is alienated from God in the name of reason can become totally irrational. Oxford zoologist Richard Dawkins suggests that the idea of God is a viru

English: Alvin Plantinga after telling a joke at the beginning of a lecture on science and religion delivered at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) The twentieth century has seen philosophers of religion, such as Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne , reaffirm the rationality of faith and reinvigorate traditional debates about reasons for belief in God—catalysed in part by new scientific understandings of the origins of the universe. There’s a growing consensus that belief in God is perfectly rational—unless, of course, you define rationality in terms that deliberately exclude such a belief.5 Rationality is less concerned with adopting a particular starting point or conclusion than with the rules that regulate reflective discussion leading to a conclusion. New Atheist writers often define the term beyond its fundamental sense, holding that it demands we interpret the world in a specific way that excludes belief in God. Yet this interpretation c

English: Signature of Stephen Jay Gould (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) From what’s been said it seems that God lies outside the scope of the scientific method. In one sense science has nothing legitimate to say about God. As the great Harvard evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002) rightly remarked,  ‘science simply cannot (by its legitimate methods) adjudicate the issue of God’s possible superintendence of nature. We neither affirm nor deny it; we simply can’t comment on it as scientists.’ In fact Dawkins and other New Atheists comment rather a lot on this matter, but perhaps that’s because they speak here primarily as militant atheists rather than scientists. While scholarship has shown that the origins of ‘scientific atheism’ as a faith tradition can be traced back to the eighteenth century, the New Atheism has given it a new importance and profile through its appeal to the natural sciences in defence of its atheist outlook. In the New Atheist world-view, scie

Peter Medawar (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) The natural sciences are empirical in their approach—in other words they rely on the application of observation and experiment in investigating the world. Yet empiricism refuses, as a matter of principle, to speculate about any realities beyond the observable world. Bas van Fraassen , a leading philosopher of science , makes this point clearly. To be an empiricist is to withhold belief in anything that goes beyond the actual, observable phenomena, and to recognize no objective modality in nature. To develop an empiricist account of science is to depict it as involving a search for truth only about the empirical world, about what is actual and observable … it must invoke throughout a resolute rejection of the demand for an explanation of the regularities in the observable course of nature by means of truths concerning a reality beyond what is actual and observable. This emphasis on what’s ‘actual and observable’ gives the sciences their d

Stained glass at St John the Baptist's Anglican Church http://www.stjohnsashfield.org.au, Ashfield, New South Wales. Illustrates Jesus' description of himself "I am the Good Shepherd" (from the Gospel of John, chapter 10, verse 11). This version of the image shows the detail of his face. The memorial window is also captioned: "To the Glory of God and in Loving Memory of William Wright. Died 6th November, 1932. Aged 70 Yrs." (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) There is an undercurrent of irrationalism in modern scientific writing. Despite scientific advances, "chance" is put forth as the cosmic power behind creation. As such, it's tempting to believe science is the enemy of faith. I've met University students who, raised in the church , believe that the church is hostile to science. Countless students abandon the faith when they face "scientific" challenges to Christianity for which they aren't prepared. How should we respond t

Richard Dawkins at the 34th American Atheists Conference in Minneapolis. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Many of the New Atheists — Richard Dawkins , Sam Harris , Daniel Dennett , and Christopher Hitchens . These authors have been causing quite a stir in recent years, both inspiring fellow atheists and shaking up the faith of believers.  Unlike more substantive atheists in the academy, this new wave of atheism typically engages in emotional argumentation and rhetorical bluster—often with little substance and plenty of distortion.  God is “not good” and is “a moral monster.” Religion is the chief source of humanity’s problems—“the root of all evil.” One particular point of attack is Old Testament ethical issues, including claims like these: “the Bible promotes owning other human beings,” “the Old Testament demeans women,” or “God commands genocide.”  Q. Some people claim that the Old Testament allows polygamy. What do you say? A.   For one thing, the Old Testament makes c