Should You Believe Things You Can’t Fully Comprehend?

#STRask

Content provided by Stand to Reason. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Stand to Reason or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.

12d ago 24:27

MP3•Episode home

Questions about whether you should believe things you can’t fully comprehend, whether it’s just an arbitrary escape hatch to say God doesn’t require a cause, and how to respond to an atheist who grounds objective morality in an objective rule or criteria.

Should one believe things they can’t fully comprehend, and if not, at what level of comprehension of certain biblical truth statements ought they begin believing?
Why would God be immune to the infinite regress dilemma? It’s arbitrary to simply describe an object as needing no cause. It’s the escape hatch to a question you’ve been trapped by, but that doesn’t make it real or true.
How would you respond to an atheist who defends the existence of objective morality by grounding it in an objective rule or criteria like “Do to others as you would want them to do to you”?

816 episodes

#Bible #Society #Religion #Christianity #Greg Koukl #Stand To Reason