Stephen Charnock: “…The question was not whether there was a First Cause, but what it was. It is much the same thing, as the disputes about the nature and matter of the heavens, the sun and planets, though there be great diversity of judgments, yet all agree that there are heavens, sun, planets; so all the contentions among men about the nature of God, weaken not, but rather confirm, that there is a God, since there was never a public formal debate about his existence. Those that have been ready to pull out one another’s eyes for their dissent from their judgments, sharply censured one another’s sentiments, envied the births of one another’s wits, always shook hands with an unanimous consent in this; never censured one another for being of this persuasion, never called it into question; as what was never controverted among men professing Christianity, but acknowledged by all, though contending about other things, has reason to be judged a certain truth belonging to the christian religion; so what was never subjected to any controversy, but acknowledged by the whole world, hath reason to be embraced as a truth without any doubt.”
Clay Miller: I love the First Cause thought. There had to be one at some point. Either and intelligent, self-existent Being created and started all other existence, or, unlike anything we have ever rationalized or experienced, existence created itself. I won’t go too much into the absurdity of “self-creation”. Nothing cannot create itself. Nothing is not even an it. When we say there was nothing, too many people try to imagine some sort of empty space or vacuum. But there was no space either. If there was space, where did that space come from…and so on and so on. “Nothing” cannot even be described because it is nothing. It is the absence of something or anything. There was nothing, they say, and then something (oops) moved on the nothing causing nothing to create itself. This is why I don’t flinch when I am called “unsophisticated” for believing in the “absurdity” of a Creator.
Even Richard Dawkins would prefer “aliens” having created our universe to the utter nonsense that it just happened. Well, I should say, he would prefer it over “God”. But where did the aliens come from? Or better, why not just believe that the “aliens” are God? Here is why…Dawkins and other atheists do not want to be held accountable to a God who is superior to them and demands what they cannot do. So they hate God. They hate people who remind them of God. And they try everything to convince themselves that they are righteous in suppressing the idea of God.
Within Christianity there is much difference and debate. There is corruption of the Christian faith. There are essential issues that truly disqualify groups from being authentic and there are issues that are not essential that true Christians may differ on, be wrong, and yet still worship the one true God. But the fact that there is so much arguing about Christianity, confirms that Christianity exists. That is no argument for the truth of Christianity, but for the existence of it as a religion. Just as the many ideas of God is not an argument for the truth of all religions, but it is an argument for the existence of God. What God we are to believe in is another issue.
I not only believe Christianity is the only truth…it is the only truth. It is self authenticating, It is consistent. It matters not if I accept it or it reject it. It stands on its own objective reality. It does not say anything about the truth or God when man rejects it. It says volumes about the man. It does not change the truth when rejected. It affects the rejecter. More later…
