FREE WILL. U.S. Presidents on Islam. AP Weekend Seminars. REASON & REVELATION A Monthly Journal of Christian Evidences

Transcription

1 &ATHEISM FREE WILL & REASON & REVELATION A Monthly Journal of Christian Evidncs Octobr 2016Vol. 36No. 10 U.S. Prsidnts on Islam AP Wknd Sminars

2 Athism & Fr Will RENOWNED athist Carl Sagan bgan his immnsly popular book Cosmos with ths words: Th Cosmos is all that is or vr was or vr will b. 1 What do today s athists man whn thy us th trm Cosmos? Th modrn scintific ida is that th Cosmos is compltly, ntirly, and altogthr matrialistic, composd of mattr and nrgy, and contains nothing immatrial or not-mattr. Th Amrican Hritag Dictionary dfins matrialism as, Th thory that physical mattr is th only rality and that vrything, including thought, fling, mind, and will, can b xplaind in trms of mattr and physical phnomna. 2 As it now stands, th idas of th Cosmos or of natur hav bn rdfind to includ only physical mattr and nrgy. Evolutionists Hwltt and Ptrs dmand that to b scintific Kyl Butt, M.Div. Articl In Brif... Th concpt of athism fails to account for many things that xist in th world. According to athism, th matrial world is all thr is. If that is th cas, thn vrything must hav a matrialistic, naturalistic xplanation. Human fr will dfis a naturalistic xplanation. If humans rally do mak thir own dcisions, athism cannot b tru. in our ra is to sarch for solly natural xplanations. 3 Physicist Paul Davis corrctly statd, Th matrialist blivs that mntal stats and opration ar nothing but physical stats and oprations. 4 Evolutionary biologist Richard Lwontin admittd that volutionists hav a prior commitmnt, a commitmnt to naturalism. Morovr, that matrialism is absolut, for w cannot allow a Divin foot in th door. 5 What ar th logical implications of th ida that vrything in th Univrs consists solly of mattr and nrgy? At first glanc, th matrialistic ida may not sm vry profound or Earth shattring, but a dpr prob into th concpt rvals that som of th most fundamntal aspcts of humanity ar at stak. In this articl, w focus on on fatur of humanity that must b dnid if matrialism is accptd: human fr will. You s, if mattr and nrgy ar all that rally xists, thn th notion must b rjctd that thr is a human will that dircts th dcision-making procss. In short, if you, as a prson, hav vr mad a singl ral dcision; if you hav vr frly chosn to do or not do anything, thn athism cannot b tru. This is th cas bcaus your dcision would b th rsult of somthing mor than mattr. It could not b xplaind by a naturalistic caus and ffct chain of chmical vnts. If thr is a you insid your body that frly chooss this or rjcts that, thn th matrialist undrstanding of th Univrs is fals. Modrn ladrs in th athistic community admit as much. Sam Harris, rcognizd in skptical circls as on of th four lading voics of modrn athism, pnnd a book titld Fr Will. In that short volum, h wrot: Fr will is an illusion. Our wills ar simply not of our own making. W do not hav th frdom w think w hav. 6 H furthr statd, I cannot dtrmin my wants. My mntal lif is givn to m by th cosmos. 7 Again, Popl fl (or prsum) an authorship of thir thoughts and actions that is illusory. 8 And, What I will do nxt, and why, rmains, at bottom, a mystry on that is fully dtrmind by th prior stat of th univrs and th laws of natur (including th contributions of chanc). 9 As h bgins to summariz his viws toward th nd of th book, h says, You will do whatvr it is you do, and it is maninglss to assrt that you could hav don othrwis. 10 Why dos Harris dmand that fr will is non-xistnt? His commitmnt to matrialism paints him

3 into this cornr, which is obvious from his statmnt: In improving ourslvs and socity, w ar working dirctly with th forcs of natur, for thr is nothing but natur itslf to work with. 11 On th scond-to-last pag h writs, Am I fr to chang my mind? Of cours not. It can only chang m. 12 Thr ar striking ironis in th position that Harris and othrs tak as thy dny thir own fr will and thir radrs as wll. First, why in th world would ths mn writ books and articls in an attmpt to prsuad anyon to bliv thir no fr will position if th radr cannot dcid for himslf to chang his mind? What is th point of trying to convinc a prson who blivs in fr will, if that blif is nothing mor than th consqunc of th caus-and-ffct, natural procsss that ar banging around in his brain? If th radr dos not hav th ability to choos his or hr blif, what is th point of trying to show th supriority of th nofr-will position? According to Harris and crw, you bliv what you bliv bcaus of th physics of th Cosmos working in your brain, and how in th world words on a pag could chang thos physics would indd b a mystry worth uncovring. Th fact that modrn athists ar writing books to convinc popl that thr is no fr will blis th undniabl fact that humans hav fr will. Scond, Harris concluding statmnt brings to light anothr glaring difficulty in th no-fr-will position. H says, Am I fr to chang my mind? Of cours not. It can only chang m. 13 Wait just a minut. Who is th I or th m in th sntnc? If thr is no fr will, and humans ar simply th combind total of th physical procsss at work in thir brains, thn thr should b nothing mor than th mind in Harris sntnc. Th fact that h can diffrntiat btwn himslf and his mind shows that thr is somthing mor at work than dtrminism. A purly physical ntity such as a rock or atom dos not hav th ability to think in trms of I or m. In truth, that Harris is conscious of an I or of a slf contradicts his claim that fr will dos not xist. 14 In addition, it sms humorous and suprfluous for popl such as Harris to writ an Acknowldgmnts sction in thir books. Why thank popl and acknowldg thir contributions to your work if thy could not hav don othrwis? H writs, I would lik to thank my wif and ditor, Annaka Harris, for hr contributions to Fr Will. As is always th cas, hr insights and rcommndations gratly improvd th book. I don t know how sh manags to rais our daughtr, work on hr own projcts, and still hav tim Apologtics Prss is a non-profit, tax-xmpt work ddicatd to th dfns of Nw Tstamnt Christianity. Copyright All rights rsrvd. Editor: Ordrs: Dav Millr, M.A., M.Div., M.A.R., Ph.D. * (*Communication, Southrn Illinois Univrsity) Associat Editor: Jff Millr, M.S., Ph.D. * (*Biomchanical Enginring, Auburn Univrsity) Annual Subscription Rats: $12.00 Domstic $10.00 Domstic Bulk (5+ to sam addrss) $12.00 Canada & Ovrsas (plus shipping) Gnral inquiris, changs of addrss, or intrnational callrs: Phon: (334) Fax: (334) to dit my books but sh dos. I am xtrmly lucky and gratful to hav hr in my cornr. 15 That s all wll and good, but sinc sh has no fr will, sh didn t choos to hlp Sam. It was thrust upon hr by th natur of th Cosmos. Why thank a prson who stays with you and hlps you du to no choic or dcision of hr own, but du to an unaltrabl cours of caus-andffct actions in hr brain? Why not thank th computr that typd th words so faithfully as I hit th ky stroks, or th oxygn that so gnrously ntrd my lungs and allowd my clls to function, or th light that so gracfully bouncd from th scrn (or pag) to my y, allowing m to s? That Harris thanks his wif and not his computr gts to th point that thr is somthing vry diffrnt about th two ntitis. You thank a prson bcaus that prson hlpd you (but could hav chosn to do othrwis). On Fbruary 12, 1998, William Provin, a profssor in th Dpartmnt of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at th distinguishd Rason & Rvlation is publishd monthly by Apologtics Prss, Inc. Priodicals postag paid at Montgomry, AL. Postmastr: Snd addrss changs to Rason & Rvlation, 230 Landmark Dr., Montgomry, AL 36117; issn:[ ] usps# Phon: (800) Fax: (800) On-lin Wb stor/catalog, subscription ordr/rnwal form, currnt issus, archivs, and othr information (all ordrs procssd on a scur srvr): URL: URL: spanol.apologticsprss.org/spanol mail@apologticsprss.org Discovry Scriptur & Scinc for Kids is a sistr publication for childrn. For mor information, plas contact our offics or visit th Discovry Wb sit at: URL:

4 Cornll Univrsity, took to th podium on th campus of th Univrsity of Tnnss in Knoxvill. H was invitd to dlivr th kynot addrss at th scond annual Darwin Day, a day ddicatd to commmorating th lif and tachings of Charls Darwin. In an abstract of that spch on th Darwin Day Wb sit, Dr. Provin s introductory commnts ar rcordd in th following words: Naturalistic volution has clar consquncs that Charls Darwin undrstood prfctly. 1) No gods worth having xist; 2) no lif aftr dath xists; 3) no ultimat foundation for thics xists; 4) no ultimat maning in lif xists; and 5) human fr will is nonxistnt. 16 Provin s nsuing mssag cntrd on his fifth statmnt rgarding th lack of human fr will. Svral yars latr, Provin continud to hold to this position. H appard in th Bn Stin documntary Explld: No Intllignc Allowd in In his discussion about Darwinian volution, h said, It starts by giving up an activ dity, thn it givs up th hop that thr is any lif aftr dath. Whn you giv thos two up, th rst of it follows fairly asily. You giv up th hop that thr is an imminnt morality. And finally, thr s no human fr will. If you bliv in volution, you can t hop for thr bing any fr will. Thr s no hop whatsovr in thr bing any dp maning in lif. W liv, w di, and w r gon. 17 Th lat Nobl Priz winnr Francis Crick concurrd with Provin. H wrot in his book Th Astonishing Hypothsis: You, your joys and your sorrows, your mmoris and your ambitions, your sns of prsonal idntity and fr will, ar in fact no mor than th bhavior of a vast assmbly of nrv clls and thir associatd molculs. 18 In his million-copy intrnational bst-slling book Th Slfish Gn, rnownd athistic writr and spakr Richard Dawkins xplaind th volutionary idas that forc athism to dny human fr will. H assrtd that humans ar survival machins robot vhicls blindly programmd to prsrv slfish molculs known as gns. 19 Sinc Dawkins viws humans as a compilation of physical gns fighting for survival, h must insist that ths gns instinctivly striv to liv and pass on thir information. That bing th cas, vry human action must thn b a product of th physical gn forcs at work in th human body and brain. Human actions cannot b th rsult of som typ of prsonality or fr will according to this notion. In his attmpt to flsh out his viw mor thoroughly and giv answrs to bhaviors that hav traditionally bn attributd to human fr will, h xpounds on th slfish gn ida: This gn slfishnss will usually giv ris to slfishnss in individual bhaviour. 20 Whn xplaining th rlationships that survival machins (humans) hav with ach othr, h stoically quips: To a survival machin, anothr survival machin (which is not its own child or anothr clos rlativ) is part of its nvironmnt, lik a rock or a rivr or a lump of food. It is somthing that gts in th way, or somthing that can b xploitd. It diffrs from a rock or a rivr in on important rspct; it is inclind to hit back. This is bcaus it too is a machin that holds its immortal gns in trust for th futur, and it too will stop at nothing to prsrv thm. 21 Dawkins ultimat xplanation for human bhavior is that w do not choos th way w rlat to ach othr, but ar drivn by our gns to us or xploit othr humans to produc th gratst chanc to pass on gntic information. It is oftn th cas that many athists attmpt to distanc thmslvs from th viws of Dawkins, Harris, and othr fr-will-dnirs. Thy contnd that, vn though thy ar athists, thy still bliv that humans hav fr will and choos thir own bhavior. Thy do this bcaus thy know, dp down in thir hart of harts, that thy hav chosn thir bhaviors in th past. Th problm with thir mod of opration, howvr, is that athism ncssarily implis that fr will cannot xist. If humans actually mak thir own, prsonal dcisions, thn somthing must b at work that is mor than natur which is ovr and abov th natural, physical movmnt of atoms. Thr must b a human mind, or soul, or spirit that is suprnatural that controls th movmnt of th physical body. A prson can choos athism, or h can accpt human fr will, but not both and still b logically consistnt. Athist Dan Barkr, prolific dbatr and author, fls th tnsion btwn athism s dnial of fr-will and th fact that humans know that thy mak prsonal choics. His solution is simply to rdfin th trm fr will. In his dbat with Ptr Payn, Barkr statd: I happn to think that w hav th illusion of frwill. I m a strict dtrminist. W ar natural craturs. Th matrial world is all thr is. W actually don t hav what w would call librtarian frwill. 22 In his book, godlss, Barkr statd: I am a dtrminist, which

5 mans that I don t think complt librtarian fr will xists. Sinc w don t know th futur w hav th illusion of fr will, which to m is what fr will actually mans. Barkr rcognizs that humans crtainly fl lik thy mak dcisions, but his athism dmands that thy cannot do so. In ordr to hang on to his athism, and allow for fr will, h changs th dfinition of fr will to thinking that you ar actually making a fr will choic whn you ar not. 23 Barkr is not th only athist that is forcd to turn to this illusion of fr will ida. Anthony Cashmor, biologist at th Univrsity of Pnnsylvania, pnnd an articl allging that human fr will dos not xist. H wrot: It is my blif that, as mor attntion is givn to th mchanisms that govrn human bhavior, it will incrasingly b sn that th concpt of fr will is an illusion. 24 According to Cashmor, you ar rading this articl bcaus your gns and your nvironmnt hav forcd you to. You ar not rsponsibl for your dcision to rad this articl, and basd on your allgd volutionary history and your nvironmnt, you could not choos to b doing anything diffrnt than what you ar doing now. You ar litrally a slav to your gns and your nvironmnt. As Cashmor wrot: [A]n individual cannot b hld rsponsibl for ithr his gns or his nvironmnt. From this simpl analysis, surly it follows that individuals cannot logically b hld rsponsibl for thir bhavior. 25 On of th most damaging lins of rasoning against th illusion ida put forth by Barkr and Cashmor is th way in which ths mn attmpt to convinc thir radrs of its truth. Cashmor usd fiv-and-a-half pags to argu that our socity should disrgard th outdatd concpt that humans ar rsponsibl for thir bhavior. Barkr has bn in mor than 80 modratd dbats attmpting to bring popl ovr to his viw. But if Cashmor and Barkr ar right, thn thr is no way w can disrgard th concpt of fr will, du to th simpl fact that w did not choos it in th first plac. If humans ar not rsponsibl for thir blifs or bhaviors, thn th gnrally hld concpt of fr will is nothing mor than an volutionary, nvironmntal by-product. According to thir lin of thinking, if w bliv in fr will at th prsnt, and act on that blif, w ar not rsponsibl for it. If thy ar right, why in th world would thy attmpt to urg th scintific community to chang its mind about fr will, if th community dos not hav th powr to chang its mind? Why spnd tim and ffort arguing against fr will, if your audinc dos not hav th frdom to choos to accpt or rjct your rasoning anyway? Th fatal flaw of th no fr will argumnt is that it dmands that th prson making th argumnt has th fr will to do so, and it tacitly assums th partis valuating th argumnt hav th powr to accpt or rjct it. If humans ar survival machins that cannot mak any ral choics, thn all prsuasiv argumnts would b worthlss. Thos who bliv in God ar programmd and forcd by thir gns to do so. Thos who bliv thr is no God ar qually products of thir bodily physics. If humans don t chang thir minds, but, as Harris claims, thir minds chang thm, thn why attmpt to chang blivrs minds, sinc thy don t rally hav minds and thir brains ar going to bliv whatvr thir gns tll thm anyway? Athists actually hav to assum fr will in ordr vn to discuss th topic. It s as if thy ar saying, I want you to turn your ys to look at m so that I can show you that you rally can t s anything. Tlvision prsonality Bill Ny th Scinc Guy found himslf in a trribl quandary whn askd about human fr will. In a vido on th subjct titld, Hy Bill Ny, Do Humans Hav Fr Will? h statd: But clarly, I know I hav mad dcisions basd on things that happnd around m that I wouldn t hav mad without bing informd by history or what I noticd. I know I hav. Now if that turns out not to b tru, I d b vry surprisd. 26 Nar th nd of th vido, howvr, h thn backtracks and claims that our dcisions rally ar th rsult of th quantum physics at work in our brains. Thn h claims: At som lvl thr is randomnss in what w think, bcaus w ar mad of chmicals that hav randomnss. Thn h said, I man, I don t man to skirt your qustion. 27 Actually, skirting th qustion was xactly what h was doing. H has to admit that h maks choics, but his athistic naturalism forcs him to back pddl and attribut thos choics to chmistry and physics. His vido is th pitom of athism s failur to dal with th fact of human fr will. In Jun of 2015, volutionary biologist Jrry Coyn dlivrd a lctur at th Imagin No Rligion convntion in Vancouvr, Canada. His spch was titld, You Don t Hav Fr Will. It is on of th clarst xampls of th nw ag athistic position. Basd on his athistic blifs, h argus for a purly dtrministic world in (cont. on p. 116)

6 Christian Apologtics Involvs mor than what you might think Wknd Sminars s n o y L ic r E tt u B Kyl Cration vs. Evolution rsy Cration/Evolution Controv th s n mi Exa t tha r na mi S A lation in Light of Rason and Rv ignr Dsign Dmands a Ds osd Exp s s ax Sn Ho ks ry Ma n ona Cratio 1 & 2) Evoluti rts (Pa on luti Evo of n ldr Th Fruits of Athism Dinosaurs: Th Postr Chi Billion Yars? Six Cration: In Six Days, or Is th Bibl Rliabl? ation and Rliability of th Inspir A Sminar that Examins th Prdictiv Prophcy l Archaology and th Bib th Bibl of cy ura Acc ific Th Scint Answring Athism drn Athism s Attacks: A Sminar that Answrs Mo nt Is th God of th Old Tstam l? Immora Lov Hll, Etrnal Punishmnt, and ing Evil, Pain, and Suffr Th Bibl and Slavry My God and His Mony A Sminar on Giving AP Stwardship Purpos in Your Hart Bnfits of Giving Librally ous Mony: Powrful & Dangr Lov r You Proof of Sowing & Raping ct: To book a sminar, conta Apologtics Prss, Inc. 230 Landmark Dr. Montgomry, AL Phon: (800) ss.org mail@apologticspr Bibl ndrs? Is th Bibl a Book of Blu ttr? Ma l Bib l Why Dos a Rliab tury Cn t 21s th in Haring God mmon Sns: Scriptur, Scinc, and Co 3 Vots for God Explain... Athism Cannot Rationally Origin of Morality Th gin of th Univrs Th Ori Th Origin of Lif Th Origin of Dsign Th Origin of th Bibl...Thism Can A Closr Look at Christ Historicity A Sminar that Examins th t and Dity of Chris Did Jsus Evr Rally Liv? Fraud? rag Jsus: Uniqu Savior or Av ty Di us Js on s Answring Attack ist Chr of ion ct Th Rsurr Was Jsus Rally God? Th Rturn of Christ Do Not B Conformd Today s Tns to Embrac A Sminar that Challngs ss Holinss and Dny Ungodlin Intgrity Mattrs tian Ag Why ar You Hr? fusion Input in an ichris Confronting Cultural Con

7 Wknd Sminars lr il M ff J. r D r l il M v a Dr. D Evolution is Unscintific Th Silncing of God a Christian nation? Was Amrica foundd as ocat s adv Did th Founding Fathr and stat? rch chu of n atio par s prsrv our nation? to What can Christians do ncrn Amrica s Most Prssing Co of God Squl to Th Silncing th Rpublic iv bl Did th Foundrs nowldgmnt ack zn citi on dpnds of Jsus Christ? ty d Nw Tstamnt Christiani Islam an th attributs of inspiration? Dos th Quran possss m compatibl? Ar Christianity and Isla do? What should Christians ang? Must Churchs of Christ Ch s Includ Should Worship Assmbli Instrumntal Music? Fmal Worship Ladrs? Handclapping? Lifting Up Hands? Baby Ddications? Prais Tams? td? Has th Bibl Bn Corrup? l was transmittd accuratly How do w know th Bib Bibl as God intndd it? th Can w b sur w hav h th ntir Bibl to provid A captivating trip throug narrativ a condnsd, squntial ists? Can W Know That God ExDs ign Dmands Evolution s Evidnc nc for volution pass Dos th allgd vid th scinc tst? Why B an Athist?, why do so many rjct it? If th vidnc is so dcisiv Cration is Scintific iptur and Scinc Th Cration Modl: Scr n modl, and is thr vidnc for it? atio Cr What is th biblical ntifically Dfnsibl Today? Is th Cration Modl Sci Why B a Christian? sidring th things it, con Is th Christian lif worth it? liv to up giv st mu on Stag IV Cultur Cancr city s Attack on A Sminar that Examins So m Biblical Morality and th Ho Symptoms of th Disasabortion, and othr cultural signs that Adultry, homosxuality, a socity. prognosis for th survival of Scriptur says lad to a bad Causs of th Disas to infct socity with widsprad sin, what If, lik Satan, my goal was using. and widsprad ism s h s would I do? Svn dangrous What is th most ffctiv principls? Targt th hom. Biblical disas throughout socity. rols, and child raring on dating, marriag, gndr Disas into Rmission Tratmnt: Snding thb givn to snd cultur s spiritual cancr What tratmnt should into rmission? a Dsignr Th End Tims a Tribulation, Battl of Arm Will thr b a Raptur,? m niu lln gddon, Antichrist, and Mi Why Popl Suffr? Do th laws of scinc? modl or th Cration modl th Disas Mtastasis: Sprading way to caus th rapid sprad of th A Trip Through th Bibl Can W Bliv and Know? sts Dcisiv Proof that God Exi of Scinc Evolution vs. th Laws support th naturalistic volutionary accuonly th Bibl can giv us an. Why dos suffring occur? fr nc of pain and suf ing rat xplanation for th xist pris Lyons, and Dr. Jff Millr com Dr. Dav Millr, Kyl Butt, Eric staff at Apologtics Prss. Fullaking th full-tim writing and sp who writrs ar faithful Christians ific rs/ ak sp ry ilia aux and tim nt sci nt va rl in s t lvl dgr hold a combind 20+ gradua s mn svral doctoral dgrs. Th ing lud inc as, ar and rligious is ntr cou oss multipl stats and mor spak in dozns of citis, acr prss.org/aboutap.aspx for tics og ach yar. S ff. writing sta info on A.P. and th spaking/

8 which human fr will is nothing mor than physical procssing at work, molculs moving to th bat of th laws of physics. Addrssing his primarily athistic audinc, h says, Now many of you don t accpt that. You don t bliv that you ar robots mad out of mat, which is what I m going to try to convinc you of today. H taks this position, bcaus if athism is tru, and thr is nothing suprnatural, thn (as h says), Our bhavior is absolutly dtrmind by th laws of physics. 28 Coyn taks srious issu with his fllow athists who claim to b naturalists and dtrminists, but who attmpt to say that humans do hav som kind of fr will. H corrctly shows that athistic naturalism cannot prmit any typ of fr will. Thos athists who ar trying to accommodat both idas, according to Coyn, ar simply playing smantic tricks trying to convinc popl that w ar still okay vn though w ar mat robots. 29 Coyn wnt on to say, As Anthony Cashmor said, W hav no mor fr will than a bowl of sugar. Coyn thn addd his own words, W ar bowls of sugar, just vry complicatd ons. Coyn dos an xcllnt job of proving that athism dmands that human fr will cannot xist. What h fails to do, howvr, is prov that fr will dos not xist. H claims it. H assrts it. But h cannot prov his fals assrtion. Th rason for that is simply bcaus humans rally do hav fr will. At on point in his spch, h attmptd to dal with th biggst problm that th no-fr-will ida ncountrs. H trid to tackl th qustion of why h would try to prsuad anyon to bliv his viw, sinc, according to his viw, no on can choos any blifs. His argumnt was that, just lik kicking a dog tachs th dog to avoid harm, prsnting th matrial h was prsnting may tach a human to adopt his viwpoint, vn though humans would just b racting to his matrial, not choosing to bliv it. So, Coyn says, Why did I gt out of bd this morning? I thought, I hop to prsuad popl, and that was dtrmind by th laws of physics. H gos on to say, Evn our vry dsir to try to chang popl s minds. Th fact that I m up hr trying to do this is dtrmind by my own, you know, physical constitution and nvironmnt. That is th infinit rgrss and th sort of annoying thing about dtrminism. It s turtls all th way down. Lt s analyz Coyn s statmnt. Who is annoyd by this infinit rgrss of physics? Is it Coyn? Why, if h is just doing what his chmistry is forcing him to do, dos h gt annoyd at this? And who, xactly, is it that is gtting annoyd at th situation? Is it Coyn s physical, mat robot slf? Obviously, th fact that h is annoyd spaks to thr bing somthing mor to Coyn than molculs in motion. NO MORAL RESPONSIBILITY CONSIDER th chain of implications. First, if thr is no God, thn this matrial world must b all thr is. Thr can b nothing suprnatural. Scond, if th physical world is all that xists, thn all ntitis that ar mad of mattr must b drivn solly by physical laws. Third, sinc thr is nothing suprnatural (according to this viw), thn thr can b nothing mor-than-mattr insid of humans that can choos anything. Fr will cannot xist in an athistic world. But do not stop thr. If humans cannot mak dcisions, thn what is th ncssary implication of that blif? What would that man in rgard to morality, crim, punishmnt, tc.? Th ncssary implication is that humans ar not morally rsponsibl for any of thir bhavior, any mor than a rock, squirrl, or turtl is. In Coyn s spch, aftr making on of his points about most of his audinc bing dtrminists, h said, Almost all of you hr don t bliv in moral rsponsibility. Think about that. H wnt on to say that bcaus of his blif in dtrminism, I don t considr myslf morally rsponsibl, bcaus I don t hav a choic. Cashmor said th sam whn h statd, From this simpl analysis, surly it follows that individuals cannot logically b hld rsponsibl for thir bhavior. 30 Whil th athists who dny fr will attmpt to conjur up a world whr no moral rsponsibility brings about a modrn utopia, nothing could b furthr from th truth. Th rapist blams his gns. Th murdrr blams his chmistry. Th adultrr points th fingr at his nvironmnt. Th thif cannot hlp himslf. Th prjurr actd only in rspons to molcular motion in his brain. Th school shootr followd his urg to kill as many studnts as possibl. Th suicid bombr could not hav chosn othrwis. An nvironmnt saturatd with such thinking would hardly b dscribd as a utopia. Along ths lins, Coyn said, Whthr or not you ar th kind of prson who accpts othr popl s notions of morality is somthing that you hav no control ovr. And if you don t, that s somthing you don t hav any control ovr ithr. Lt that sink in. If you think it is

9 morally accptabl to fly a plan into a building in an attmpt to kill as many popl as possibl, you could not think othrwis and you ar not morally rsponsibl for doing anything wrong. Truly, th dnial of moral rsponsibility is on of th most fallacious and harmful implications of th fals ida of athism. If w ar to b scintific about ths mattrs, w must tak what w know to b th cas and find th xplanation that bst fits th facts. If w ar honst, ach of us knows that w hav frly chosn attituds and bhaviors. W know that w could hav chosn diffrntly. And w oftn fl th guilt of having chosn wrong, or th triumphant fling of having chosn right. In all honsty, you know that you could choos to quit rading this articl right now, or you could continu. Your frdom is not an illusion, but is an actuality: a statmnt of th way things rally ar, not th way thy only sm to b. Sinc that is th cas, w must tak th fact our fr will and find an xplanation that bst fits th fact. Athism cannot account for human fr will. Athists who ar consistnt with thir blif ar forcd to admit this is a logical implication of it. Thrfor, if humans hav fr will, and athism implis that thy do not, thn athism is fals. On th othr hand, th ida of a suprnatural God ndowing humans with a mind, consciousnss, and soul fits prfctly with th fact of human fr will. Thus, th prson who is trying to follow th vidnc whr it lads must conclud that human fr will provs a suprnatural Crator xists. WHY CHOOSE TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE NO CHOICE? AS I hav studid athistic books and writings and watchd svral vidos, I v trid to put my fingr on why athists do not want to bliv thy choos. Thy all admit that humans think w ar fr to choos, but thy insist that w ar not rally choosing anything. Thy maintain that thr is rally no Sam Harris upstairs, or Jrry Coyn in thr somwhr. Thy insist that Richard Dawkins is just anothr nam for th physical molculs that mak up a crtain body, and that thr is no ral soul or prsonality of a non-matrial natur in thr. If thr rally is such a thing as fr will (and thr is), why would a group of popl choos to dny it in spit of th vidnc that provs it xists? Why don t thy want to b viwd as fr moral agnts who dsrv prais for thir morally corrct actions and who dsrv blam for thir moral failurs? An xhaustiv list of possibl rasons why this is th caus is impossibl, but Coyn did giv us on vry tlling ida. Nar th nd of Coyn s spch, h attmptd to xplain th bnfits h ss in adopting th ida that fr will dos not xist (not to b tdious, but kp in mind that h dos not rally think you can adopt it; instad, you ar forcd to accpt whatvr your chmistry dtrmins). H said that a bnfit of dnying fr will is that you would hav a lack of rgrt for bad things that happn. It taks away a crtain amount of guilt flings from you. You don t hav to bat yourslf up ovr, I should hav don this instad of that. Thr you hav it. Humans, from th bginning of Cration, hav lookd for ways to plad not guilty in th fac of thir own sins. W hav attmptd to blam vryon ls xcpt ourslvs for our moral failurs. Humans hav trid to blam God, thir parnts, thir gns, thir socity, thir spouss, thir circumstancs, and vrything undr th Sun for th slfish, sinful choics thy hav mad. Th nxt stp with this approach is to say that, sinc w cannot choos our bhavior, thn punishmnt is not justifid for rtribution (popl gt or should gt what thy dsrv). 31 Notic th rasoning. If I can say that I cannot hlp myslf (I cannot choos diffrntly), thn I do not hav to fl guilty for th things I do wrong. Furthrmor, if I did not choos th immoral actions that I committd, thn nithr socity (nor God) can punish m for doing immoral things. Truly, th Provrbs writr accuratly statd many yars ago, Evil mn do not undrstand justic (Provrbs 28:5). Th athistic position not only rjcts th concpt of fr will, but thn jttisons th concpt of justic as wll. Yt how acutly awar w humans ar whn injustic has bn don to us. In rgard to th currnt situation, Romans 1 rads almost lik a prophcy, For th wrath of God is rvald from havn against all ungodlinss and unrightousnss of mn, who supprss th truth in unrightousnss, bcaus what may b known of God is vidnt in thm, for God has shown it to thm. For sinc th cration of th world His invisibl attributs ar clarly sn, bing undrstood by th things that ar mad, vn His trnal powr and Godhad so that thy ar without xcus, bcaus, although thy knw God, thy did not glorify Him as God, nor

10 wr thankful, but bcam futil in thir thoughts and thir foolish harts wr darknd. Profssing to b wis, thy bcam fools (1:18-22, mp. addd). I was just a mat robot. My slfish gns drov m to. Th physical proprtis in my brain forcd m to act that way. I could not hav chosn diffrntly so I m not morally rsponsibl. Ths and othr mpty xcuss will not b accptd by th Makr on th Day of Judgmnt. For w must all appar bfor th judgmnt sat of Christ, that ach on may rciv th things don in th body, according to what h has don, whthr good or bad (2 Corinthians 5:10). ENDNOTES 1 Carl Sagan (1980), Cosmos (Nw York: Random Hous), p Amrican Hritag Dictionary of th English Languag (2000), (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin), fourth dition. 3 Martinz Hwltt and Td Ptrs (2006), Thology, Rligion, and Intllignt Dsign, in Not in Our Classrooms, d. Eugni Scott and Glnn Branch (Boston, MA: Bacon Prss), p. 75, mp. addd. 4 Paul Davis (1983), God and th Nw Physics (Nw York: Simon & Schustr), p Richard Lwontin (1997), Billions and Billions of Dmons, in Th Nw York Rviw of Books, 44[1]:31, January 9. 6 Sam Harris (2012), Fr Will (Nw York: Fr Prss), p. 5, italics in orig. 7 Ibid., p Ibid., p Ibid., p Ibid., p Ibid., p Ibid., p. 65, italics in orig. 13 Ibid., italics in orig. 14 For an xtndd discussion of consciousnss and Cration, s Brt Thompson and Brad Harrub (2004), Th Origin of Consciousnss: Part 2, Rason & Rvlation, 24[2]:9-15, 15 Harris, p William Provin (1998), Evolution: Fr Will and Punishmnt and Maning in Lif, bio.utk.du/darwin/darwinday- ProvinAddrss.htm, mp. addd. 17 Bn Stin and Kvin Millr (2008), Explld: No Intllignc Allowd (Prmis Mdia), mp. addd. 18 Francis Crick (1994), Th Astonishing Hypothsis (London: Simon and Schustr), p Richard Dawkins (2006), Th Slfish Gn (Oxford, England: Oxford Univrsity Prss), 30 th Annivrsary dition, p. xxi. 20 Ibid., p Ibid., p Dan Barkr and Ptr Payn (2005), Dos Ethics Rquir God? bybarkr/thics_dbat.php. 23 Dan Barkr (2008), godlss (Brkly, CA: Ulysss Prss), p Anthony Cashmor (2010), Th Lucrtian Swrv: Th Biological Basis of Human Bhavior and th Criminal Justic Systm, PNAS, 107:10, arly/2010/02/04/ full.pdf+html. 25 Ibid. 26 Bill Ny (2016), Big Think, Hy Bill Ny, Do Humans Hav Fr Will? watch?v=itdma2bcavc. 27 Ibid. 28 Jrry Coyn (2015), You Don t Hav Fr Will, Imagin No Rligion Convntion, Vancouvr, watch?v=ca7i-d4ddaw. 29 Ibid. All othr quots from Coyn s spch hav th sam bibliographic information unlss othrwis notd. 30 Cashmor. 31 Coyn. Unitd Stats Postal Srvic STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT, and CIRCULATION Rquird by 39 USC REASON AND REVELATION /29/ Monthly $ Landmark Dr., Montgomry, AL, Landmark Dr., Montgomry, AL Publishr, Apologtics Prss, 230 Landmark Dr., Montgomry, AL 36117; Editor, Dav Millr, 230 Landmark Dr., Montgomry, AL 36117; Managing Editor, Dav Millr, 230 Landmark Dr., Montgomry, AL Non-profit Apologtics Prss, Inc., 230 Landmark Dr., Montgomry, AL Non. 12. No Chang. 13: REASON AND REVELATION. 14. Oct 15 Spt Rligion/Apologtics (s chart blow). 16. Elctronic Copy Circulation (s chart blow) 17. Oct. 18. Thomas Hatfild, Gnral Managr, 8/29/ Avrag Currnt Actual Copis a b b b3 0 0 b c d1 0 0 d2 0 0 d d f g h i 87% 87% 16. Avrag Currnt Actual Copis a 0 0 b C D 87% 87% Kyl Butt Octobr Spncr, WI (715) Octobr Flornc, AL (256) Octobr 30 Cntrvill, TN (931) Eric Lyons Octobr 3-6 Martinsburg, WV (304) Octobr 19 Northport, AL (205) Dav Millr Octobr 7-9 Jacksonvill, FL (904) Octobr Fairbanks, AK (907) Octobr Mridianvill, AL (256) Octobr 26 Huntsvill, AL (256) Octobr 30 Flornc, AL (256) Jff Millr Octobr 9 Montgomry, AL (334) Octobr 30 Montgomry, AL (334)

11 U.S. Prsidnts on Islam dclard undistinguishing and xtrminating war, as a part of his rligion, against all th rst of mankind. Th prcpt of th koran is, prptual war against all who dny, that Mahomt is th propht of God. 4 GEORGE WASHINGTON You do wll to wish to larn our arts and ways of lif, and abov all, th rligion of Jsus Christ. Ths will mak you a gratr and happir popl than you ar. Congrss will do vrything thy can to assist you in this wis intntion. 1 Whil w ar zalously prforming th dutis of good Citizns and soldirs w crtainly ought not to b inattntiv to th highr dutis of Rligion. To th distinguishd Charactr of Patriot, it should b our highst Glory to add th mor distinguishd Charactr of Christian. 2 THOMAS JEFFERSON AND JOHN ADAMS Dav Millr, Ph.D. W took th librty to mak som inquiris concrning th grounds of thir prtntions to mak war upon nations who had don thm no injury, and obsrvd that w considrd all mankind as our Frinds who had don us no wrong, nor had givn us any provocation. Th Ambassador answrd us that it was foundd on th laws of thir Propht, that it was writtn in thir Koran that all nations who should not hav acknowldgd thir authority wr sinnrs, that it was thir right and duty to mak war upon thm whrvr thy could b found, and to mak slavs of all thy could tak as prisonrs; and that vry Musslman who should b slain in battl was sur to go to Paradis. 3 JOHN QUINCY ADAMS In th svnth cntury of th Christian ra, a wandring Arab of th linag of Hagar, th Egyptian, combining th powrs of transcndnt gnius, with th prtrnatural nrgy of a fanatic, and th fraudulnt spirit of an impostor, proclaimd himslf as a mssngr from Havn, and sprad dsolation and dlusion ovr an xtnsiv portion of th arth. Adopting from th sublim concption of th Mosaic law, th doctrin of on omnipotnt God; h connctd indissolubly with it, th audacious falshood, that h was himslf his propht and apostl. [H] BARACK OBAMA Islam is not part of th problm in combating violnt xtrmism it is an important part of promoting pac. 5 ENDNOTES 1 Gorg Washington (1779), Spch to th Dlawar Chifs, in Th Writings of Gorg Washington from th Original Manuscript Sourcs , d. John C. Fitzpatrick, 15:55, mp. addd, com/washington-g Th author assums that Washington s blif in th priority of th Christian rligion would apply to th Muslim as wll as th Nativ Amrican. 2 Gorg Washington (1778), Gnral Ordrs, May 2, 1778, Gorg Washington Paprs at th Library of Congrss, mp. addd, mmory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampag?c ollid=mgw3&filnam=mgw3g/ gwpag003.db&rcnum=181. Again, it is assumd that, if Washington considrd bing a Christian a prson s highst glory, bing a Muslim would not b so considrd. 3 Amrican Pac Commissionrs to John Jay (1786), Th Thomas Jffrson Paprs Sris 1. Gnral Corrspondnc , Library of Congrss, March 28, mtj.mtjbib Josph Blunt (1830), Th Amrican Annual Rgistr for th Yars (Nw York: E. & G.W. Blunt), 29:269, mp. addd, p1amricanannual29blunuoft. 5 Barack Obama (2009), Rmarks by th Prsidnt on a Nw Bginning, Th Whit Hous, Offic of th Prss Scrtary, Cairo Univrsity, Cairo, Egypt, Jun 4,

12 APOLOGETICS PRESS 230 LANDMARK DRIVE MONTGOMERY, AL Priodicals Postag PAID Th Editor Hav You Considrd Hosting an AP Sminar? In addition to publishing a host of books, articls, tracts, DVDs, CDs, and curricula, Apologtics Prss also offrs liv sminars to churchs and civic organizations around th country. Ths wknd sminars addrss th lading spiritual and moral issus of our day, including: ¾ Th Bibl Account of Cration ¾ Is Evolution Scintific? ¾ Dinosaurs ¾ Inspiration/Rliability of th Bibl ¾ Historicity/Dity of Christ ¾ Athism ¾ Th Existnc of God ¾ Th End Tims ¾ Transmission of th Bibl ¾ Why Popl Suffr ¾ Christian Ethics ¾ Th Hom ¾ Islam ¾ Christian Worship ¾ Th Spiritual Origins of Amrica AP spakrs crisscross th country throughout th yar prsnting lcturs to audincs of all ags. Th bnfits to thos who attnd ar normous not th last of which is that faith in God is strngthnd, confidnc in th truth is incrasd, and dtrmination to liv th Christian lif in viw of trnity is nhancd. In a day whn th avrag Christian is constantly bombardd with information from a varity of morally and spiritually corrupt sourcs, th nd has nvr bn gratr for popl to har th truth of God s viws boldly articulatd in a public vnu. Plas considr sparhading th planning and implmntation of an AP sminar in your community. Th rsult will b sd sown for trnity. Dav Millr S Cntr Sprad for Mor Dtails