The next three chapters, Chapters Seven, Eight, and Nine, cover the atheist and what manners of atheist there are and how Christians should interact with them. Chapter Seven apprises the reader on the different flavors of atheists. There are three different kinds of atheist people will come across. There are those who are angry at a God they don’t believe exist, so they tend to be more hostile towards religion. There are atheists who are not necessarily neutral, but don’t have an aggressive insolence towards religion. The last group are those who identify as an atheist because they are simply unaware of the evidence of God. Chapter Eight is about how science is not actually against theology, but instead it actually needs theology and is against atheism. It also shows the historical evidence of Jesus, a little bit on the gnostic gospels and what they really are, and miracles and the circular logic of atheist trying to shoot miracles down. The author in Chapter Nine informs the reader on how to interact with our atheist friends. Like in the earlier chapters, Cawley gives micro practices and meso practices. The micro practice in this chapter is question flipping. This is basically the practice of turning fractious questions into delightful answers, and instead of answering straight forward, its beating around the bush. …show more content…
The meso practice is a list on how make a meaningful interaction and time with atheists, The list is start with a group of people with whom you are already in a relationship with, plan the evening ahead of time, serve excellent food, allow your friends to help shape the agenda for discussion, maintain a focus on jesus, and close your time together with a
Malala Yousafzai, 18 year old Nobel Prize winner and women’s rights activist, once exclaimed: “I raise up my voice- not so I can shout, but so that those without a voice can be heard...we cannot succeed when half of us are held back”. The idea of speaking for those who cannot speak for themselves is extremely important when it comes to striving for change, so being able to express the needs of marginalized people is a great and awesome power. Yousafzai’s quote specifically connects to women’s rights, therefore it can be used to support the feminist movement seeing as she is advocating for the equality, in treatment and opportunity, of men and women. Feminist beliefs do not only apply to society, but to theology as well, seeing as the teachings of the bible are extremely influential in the day to day lives and values of religious people. The text that I chose to highlight this idea comes from Elizabeth A. Johnson’s book Quest for the Living God, chapter 5 ‘God Acting Womanish’ because it directly connects spirituality and feminism.
In 1968, H.J. McCloskey, an Australian Philosopher wrote an article titled “On Being an Atheist” which is an attempt for his personal reasons to reject the belief in God. In the article McCloskey criticizes against the theistic proofs, which are cosmological argument and the teleological argument. Majority of the article is focused on the evil issues and catastrophic events to innocent people in a world that is supposedly designed by an omnipotent and loving God, which McCloskey believes is a valid case in his arguments against cosmological and teleological arguments as well as his assertions that evil is proof against God’s existence. But, it still remains that the most reasonable explanation for the creator of the universe
Book 3 of Mere Christianity contains 12 separate chapters, which has far too great a scope to address properly here, so a glimpse will have to suffice. In the first, Lewis examines three components of morality; the relations between men, the interior moral mechanics of a man, and the relationship between a man and the God who made him. Lewis makes the case that, since we are destined to live forever in one state or another, it is desperately important that we pay attention to the sort of Being we are becoming. Lewis points out that most of humanity can agree that keeping relations between men running smoothly are important, but varying world views and religions-or lack of religion, have produced some disagreements on the necessity of keeping one’s own ship in order, as it were, and it completely breaks down when the relationship between a man and his Maker are addressed, as there is virtually no agreement there.
We have now come to the fourth and final book of Mere Christianity. In this book, the author takes us to the place in our Christian growth where we begin to rely more heavily on the power of God and less on ourselves to become the being that God originally intended for us to be — a son of God. He begins with an explanation of the difference between “making” and “begetting.”
In some ways, it is refreshing to read H.J. McCloskey's article, "On Being an Atheist". Most people assume atheists are simple nihilists who do not subscribe to any sort of convictions or beliefs. The author's text, however, refutes this conventional viewpoint by producing several reasons for embracing atheism, many of which are studied and labored counterarguments to typical claims of theists. The most important part of this essay is found in its opening paragraphs, in which the author makes a very prudent point in explaining the fact that most theists do not require elaborate proofs or empirical evidence to substantiate their beliefs in a divinity. Those who do have not completely subscribed to faith, but to testaments of man's deductive prowess, which should not be confused with faith. However, the author makes a number of points that he believes alludes to fallacies in theism that those well versed in theism can handily refute.
In William L. Rowe 's paper "The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism" he sets out to accomplish two main goals. The first goal is directed toward theists, while the second attempts to reach the very wellspring of an atheist 's heart. Foremost, Rowe sets out to show that there is "an argument for atheism based on the existence of evil that may rationally justify someone in being an atheist" (335). After he has effectively addressed this first issue he moves on to try and convince the atheist that in light of all the evidence that theists are rationally justified (just as much as the atheist) and therefore that atheists should subscribe to what Rowe calls "friendly atheism."
Having completed the unit of philosophy of religion, you are now ready to respond to an article written by an actual atheist. This article, titled “On Being an Atheist,” was written by H. J. McCloskey in 1968 for the journal Question. McCloskey is an Australian philosopher who wrote a number of atheistic works in the 1960s and 70s including the book God and Evil (Nijhoff, 1974). In this article, McCloskey is both critical of the classical arguments for God’s existence and offers the problem of evil as a reason why one should not believe in God.
In the article “ On Being an Atheist,” H.J. McCloskey attempts to inform his readers that the belief in atheism is a “much more comfortable belief” by effectively using a disdainful rhetoric towards theists and their faith. McCloskey delves into both the Cosmological and Teleological arguments, which within he criticizes the arguments and to further his argument against theism, he also presents the Problem of Evil and why evil cannot possibly exist with a perfect God being the creator of universe. What will be displayed in this essay are the counter-arguments to McCloskey’s criticisms and the attempt to discredit his claims that regard the “comfortable” position that lies within atheism and its arguments.
Having completed the unit of philosophy of religion, you are now ready to respond to an article written by an actual atheist. This article titled “On Being an Atheist,” was written by H. J. McCloskey in 1968 for the journal Question. McCloskey is an Australian philosopher who wrote a number of atheistic works in the 1960s and 70s including the book God and Evil (Nijhoff, 1974). In this article, McCloskey is both critical of the classical arguments for God’s existence and offers the problem of evil as a reason why one should not believe in God. Please note the following parameters for this paper:
Mere Christianity by C.S Lewis was a series of radio talks, speaking about The Law of Human Nature. This isn't a scientific law this is simply a part of humans that some would call our moral code or ethics, but it is more then that. C.s uses logic to state that it’s not just a opinion, or something just in todays world, but that its all the way through history with the romans, theegyptions, every culture, in every part of the world, even there morals are diffrent at the basis levels of human nature are the same. For me an avid student of random things it makes sense, No matter what time or place you can compare the conducts and levels. This comes with the understanding of basic human psychollgy, though reality may be diffrent we hold are seveals to a standers, of conduct and we know this to be true because people break them all the time
We have now come to the fourth and final book of Mere Christianity. In this book, the author takes us to the place in our Christian growth where we begin to rely more heavily on the power of God and less on ourselves to become the being that God originally intended for us to be — a son of God. He begins with an explanation of the difference between “making” and “begetting”.
In Atheism: The Case Against God, George H. Smith refutes arguments that many Theists use to try and prove God’s existence. One example of this is what he describes as “The Argument from Life.” This argument is often referred to as the fine-tuning argument as it argues that the Universe that humanity is a part of is so unlikely, it is as if it has been fine-tuned by a supernatural force. Although Smith argues against this claim using a variety of arguments, he is ultimately unsuccessful in refuting it because an intelligent designer is a better explanation for life than chance.
The belief in Gods has always existed throughout human’s recored history. Whether it be the Greek Gods: Apollo, and Zeus, or the Judeo-Christian God, believed by Christians in modern day society. The belief of God has always existed among humans, however, assuming God does not exist, what explains the cultural evolution of such a false belief, namely religion? I shall argue that the reason this false belief is successful is because it manipulates human nature better than any other belief by these three points: an avoidance of death (the soul), a sense of worth (knowledge), and a sense, or need of belief (faith).
In the article, “On Being an Atheist”, H.J. McCloskey discusses the reasons of why he believes being an atheist is a more acceptable than Christianity. McCloskey believes that atheism is a more rational belief versus having a God who allows people to suffer so he can have the glory. He believes to live in this world, you must be comfortable. The introduction of his article, he implements an overview of arguments given by the theist, which he introduces as proofs. He claims that the proofs do not create a rationalization to believe that God exists. He provides 3 theist proofs, which are Cosmological argument, teleological argument, and the argument of design. He also mentions the presence of evil in the world. He focuses on the existence
People in our society today who have the atheist point of view on religion, which is the belief that there is no god, are going against the so-called norms of society, and therefor are seen as deviant. Deviance is just an idea. Society determines what is deviant by the ideas they hold of what should be the norm. Atheism is seen as a negative deviance, or below the norm. They have a status that is placed on them in society. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they believe in evil, although that is how it is sometimes viewed from people in society who have a specific religion or faith. Atheism, which is not a new idea, has been evolving in our society, and is the reason for problems leading to debate and court cases, and for