j*******7
发帖数: 6300 | 1 Does the “Unreasonable” Nature of the Virgin Conception Invalidate the
Story of Jesus?
For some, the miraculous claim of the virgin conception of Jesus
disqualifies the Gospel accounts as reliable history. The famous writer,
atheist and debater, Christopher Hitchens regularly referred to the virgin
conception as a clear example of the unreasonable nature of the Gospels.
Hitchens would occasionally attempt to demonstrate the illogical,
unreasonable nature of his debate opponent by asking the simple question: “
Do you believe Jesus was conceived miraculously and born of a virgin?” when
his Christian opponent replied, “Yes,” Hitchens would typically say, “I
rest my case.” For many atheists, the virgin conception is so obviously
irrational it disqualifies the story of Jesus before it even begins.
Skeptics and critics of Christianity reject the mere possibility of the
virgin conception because their philosophical naturalism (their belief that
the natural world is all that exists) precludes the possibility of the
miraculous intervention of a supernatural Being. As it turns out, this
presupposition of naturalism lies at the heart of the dilemma:
Naturalism Is the Worldview Under Examination
When we begin to examine the possible existence of God (the aforementioned
supernatural Being), we are actually examining the viability of
philosophical naturalism. We are, in essence, asking the questions, “Is the
natural world all that exists?” “Is there anything beyond the physical,
material world we measure with our five senses?” “Is there any way to
actually know immaterial, spiritual entities (or truths) exist?” In asking
these questions, we are putting naturalism to the test.
Naturalism Shouldn’t, Therefore, Be Our Presupposition
It would be unfair, therefore, to begin by presupposing nothing supernatural
could ever exist or occur. If we are attempting to be fair about assessing
the existence of God (or assessing the reasonable nature of the virgin
conception), we cannot exclude the very possibility of the supernatural in
the first place. Our presupposition against the supernatural would unfairly
taint our examination of the claim. Instead, we ought to remain open to the
the miraculous to fairly examine any claim of supernatural activity.
Naturalism Accepts At Least One “Extra-Natural” Event
Most of us already accept the reasonable reality of at least one “extra-
natural” (aka “miraculous”) event. The Standard Cosmological Model of
naturalism is still the “Big Bang Theory”, a hypothesis that proposes that
all space, time and matter (all the elements of the natural universe) had a
beginning (a “cosmological singularity”). Whatever the cause was, it
could not have been something from the natural realm, as this realm was what
resulted from the “singularity”.
Naturalism May Not, Therefore, Be An Accurate View of the World
It appears that the beginning of the Universe can be attributed to an all-
powerful “extra-natural” source. If this source was the supernatural God
of the Bible, it would appear that He has the ability to intervene in the
natural realm with creative force. The virgin conception, in light of this
kind of power, is a reasonable prospect.
The virgin conception defies naturalistic explanation, but that shouldn’t
surprise us. Christianity has always argued that the supernatural (the
miraculous) is reasonable; Christianity has always challenged naturalism. We
cannot reject the virgin conception on naturalistic grounds without first
examining the larger claims of the Christian Worldview. If there is
sufficient reason to believe God exists (and created everything from nothing
), then the virgin conception is certainly within His power and equally
reasonable.
http://coldcasechristianity.com/2013/does-the-unreasonable-natu |
|
