#871 Handling Dumb Objections

Dr. craig’s response

C’mon, Justin! This one is so easy that I’m sure you can respond to it if you just take a moment to reflect on it. It is typical of the sort of objections that collapse the minute you present a positive argument in support of Christian theism.

What shows that Christianity is not “simply a socially (or culturally) constructed narrative designed to give meaning and purpose to reality”? Well, the kalām cosmological argument, the Leibnizian cosmological argument, the argument from the applicability of mathematics to physical phenomena, the teleological argument from the fine-tuning of the universe, the moral argument, the ontological argument, the array of historical evidences in support of Jesus of Nazareth’s radical personal claims and resurrection from the dead. If these arguments and evidences are any good, then Christianity is not simply a socially or culturally constructed narrative.

In other words, if you’ve done your homework and have an apologetic case in hand ready to share with those who ask you the reason for the hope that is in you (I Peter 3.15), then you are automatically equipped to answer such questions.

That suffices as “an effective counter argument to the proposition.” But it’s worth mentioning as well that this objection is a blatant example of the genetic fallacy, that is, trying to invalidate a point of view by showing how a person came to hold it. It may well be true that belief in Christianity is motivated for many people by a desire to find meaning and purpose in life. But that does not show that Christian belief is SIMPLY a socially (or culturally) constructed narrative. The motivations that prompt a person to believe are irrelevant to the truth or falsity of that belief. Thus the word “simply” in the proposition places an enormous, and I should say, unbearable burden of proof upon the objector. In order to avoid the genetic fallacy, he has to do more than prove that people adopt Christian beliefs to find meaning and purpose in life; he also has to prove that the Christian narrative is false. Otherwise, it could well be true, regardless of people’s motivations for belief. So what arguments and evidence does the objector have to show that Christianity is not true?