When people commit themselves to a certain vision of reality, it becomes their ultimate explainer. It serves to interpret the universe for them, to guide their moral decisions, to give meaning and purpose to life, and all the other functions normally associated with a religion.

But don't you see that as an inconsistency in your views?" the young man asked. Dawkins replied, "I sort of do, yes. But it is an inconsistency that we sort of have to live with, otherwise life would be intolerable.

if you cannot identify the divine in any positive way, how do you even know it is real?

People are not relativistic when it comes to matters of science, engineering, and technology; rather, they are relativistic and pluralistic in matters of religion and ethics." 37 In short, they apply their postmodern skepticism selectively

The reason we are justified in trusting our minds is that God designed them to "fit" the world he created.

You can be utterly confident that any non-biblical worldview will be too "small" to account for all of reality.

a hermeneutics of suspicion is radically reductionistic. It simply abandons the question of truth, reducing it to questions of power and desire.

Randall concludes, "When science seemed to take God out of the universe, men had to deify some natural force, like 'evolution.

The biblical worldview fulfills both the requirements of human reason and the yearnings of the human spirit.

Anything we must assume in order to function in the world is part of general revelation. The undeniable facts of experience reflect the created structure of physical nature or human nature, or both.

A mind capable of forming an argument against God's existence constitutes evidence for his existence.

why should we acquiesce in letting philosophical naturalists prescribe the definition of science itself? The only reason for restricting science to methodological naturalism is if we assume from the outset that philosophical naturalism is true—that nature is a closed system of cause and effect. But if it is not true, then restricting science to naturalistic theories is not a good strategy for getting at the truth.47