High Schoolers Offer a Challenge Response

Posted: May 5, 2011 by Brett Kunkle in God is Real

Back in February, I had the chance to hang out with some high school students from Lake Norman Baptist Church in North Carolina, who started an apologetics class at their church.  Not only that but they’ve also launched a website called “Simply Apologetics.”   These students decided to answer YouTube atheist NonStampCollector‘s video challenge to theists, with their own video.  I posted their video response a few months back but since we decided to take up NonStampCollector’s challenge too, I thought we’d post the student’s response again:

  1. Sam Harper says:

    The fact that only one God is necessary doesn’t mean there’s only one God, so I don’t think Ockham’s razor really answers the challenge.

    Imagine a similar scenario. Say I’ve got a tent that I set on the ground while I go use the bathroom. When I come back, I find that the tent has been set up. Ockham’s razor only allows me to postulate that one person set the tent up while I was gone because one person is all that’s necessary. But obviously, it doesn’t follow that therefore only one person was involved in setting my tent up. Ockham’s razor doesn’t even increase the probability that only one person set my tent up.

  2. tlogical says:

    I believe the subject of how we can prove there is only one God must be looked at it in this way….Could there haven been many gods in the creation of the universe? Yes. Could there have been only one God in the creation of the universe? Yes. Seeing as both these suggestions could be true, we must examine what proof there is that one or the other is true. I’m not going to take the time in proving why Christianity is true, but assuming all proof lends toward the case of Christianity can we not then come to a pretty certain conclusion that there is one God? The rebuttal would then be that although much proof may be in the case of Christianity that still does not prove multiple gods do not exist.
    Well, firstly the logical fallacy of proving the negative must be noted as we can only prove positively that either monotheism or polytheism is true, which in turn would show the alternative to be in the negative, in light of the positive proof of the other. Secondly, if multiple gods exist why then did they not provide sufficient proof of their existence? As it stands, there is only sufficient proof for the existence of one God and to believe otherwise would be to go beyond that which can be proven and to venture into that which can only be theorized or imagined.