Recognizing God’s existence has never been an easy task. From century to century, people continue to search for ways to find proof God does exist. In consulting with Foreman’s (2016) presentation, “Approaching the Question of God’s Existence” the use of proof to illustrate that God does exist is not a virtuous practice and the word “proof” should be avoided when wanting to claim God is real. He makes an effective point that there are some things in the world that have no complete explanation for their existence. Perhaps a better word to choose when declaring God’s being is witnessing. A word used by believers to express to others what they have experienced and seen about God. In other words, what they have seen or experienced of God’s truth.
…show more content…
One can reject the argument from design by rejecting its premise, that there is evidence of design and purpose” (p.64). He believes there is no possible way to verify God exist or that he is the creator of the universe. Plus, he irradiates that because God’s realism lacks factual proof or evidence of “genuine indisputable examples of design or purpose are needed” then God is non-existence (McCloskey, n.d., p.64). McCloskey’s tangible argument appears to be about evolution and his conclusion “…that there was a powerful, malevolent, or imperfect planner or designer” is highly unreasonable (McCloskey, n.d., p. 64). It is imperative to understand that the truth of God’s existence can be shared objectively. Certainly, God’s existence can be shared tangibly by “witnessing” or sharing appropriately what is seen or historically experienced. And as described by Evans and Manis, “The teleological argument begins from the fact that the natural world appears to exhibit purposive order or design, and infers that its cause must therefore be an intelligent designer” (Evans & Manis, p.77). McCloskey accepts as true that evolution places the need for a designer, inasmuch, suggesting that it is acquainted to an …show more content…
Evolution becomes a problem when it leads to atheistic conclusions, as the example above. The real problem atheism is confronted with is not evolution, but understanding the truth of Christ Himself. No matter how much an atheist attempts to negate God’s existence, the truth is, if he or her is going to be intellectually honest—he or she must come to accept Him. Rendering Craig’s (2008) argument, biblical historical data supersedes and atheism because in accordance with, “…the Christians worldview, God does exist, and man’s life does not end at the grave” (p. 86). This is expressed as a person’s faith, which is having a total commitment to everything God represents, and his trustworthiness. Unfortunately, for the atheist faith is only a word and not an operative part of his or her life. Another good point Craig (2008) provides is that “Biblical Christianity therefore provides the two conditions necessary for a meaningful, valuable, and purposeful life for man: God and immortality. Because of this we can live consistently and happily. Thus, biblical Christianity succeeds precisely where atheism breaks down” (p. 86). Believers and non-believers continue to look for ways to substantiate that the truth about God--possibly never ceasing. Furthermore, God’s existence can be easily understood and evidence found within history and its information. Information is preserved to the
One can reject the argument from design by rejecting its premise, that there is evidence of design and purpose” (p.64). He believes there is no possible way to verify God exist or that he is the creator of the universe. Plus, he irradiates that because God’s realism lacks factual proof or evidence of “genuine indisputable examples of design or purpose are needed” then God is non-existence (McCloskey, n.d., p.64). McCloskey’s tangible argument appears to be about evolution and his conclusion “…that there was a powerful, malevolent, or imperfect planner or designer” is highly unreasonable (McCloskey, n.d., p. 64). It is imperative to understand that the truth of God’s existence can be shared objectively. Certainly, God’s existence can be shared tangibly by “witnessing” or sharing appropriately what is seen or historically experienced. And as described by Evans and Manis, “The teleological argument begins from the fact that the natural world appears to exhibit purposive order or design, and infers that its cause must therefore be an intelligent designer” (Evans & Manis, p.77). McCloskey accepts as true that evolution places the need for a designer, inasmuch, suggesting that it is acquainted to an …show more content…
Evolution becomes a problem when it leads to atheistic conclusions, as the example above. The real problem atheism is confronted with is not evolution, but understanding the truth of Christ Himself. No matter how much an atheist attempts to negate God’s existence, the truth is, if he or her is going to be intellectually honest—he or she must come to accept Him. Rendering Craig’s (2008) argument, biblical historical data supersedes and atheism because in accordance with, “…the Christians worldview, God does exist, and man’s life does not end at the grave” (p. 86). This is expressed as a person’s faith, which is having a total commitment to everything God represents, and his trustworthiness. Unfortunately, for the atheist faith is only a word and not an operative part of his or her life. Another good point Craig (2008) provides is that “Biblical Christianity therefore provides the two conditions necessary for a meaningful, valuable, and purposeful life for man: God and immortality. Because of this we can live consistently and happily. Thus, biblical Christianity succeeds precisely where atheism breaks down” (p. 86). Believers and non-believers continue to look for ways to substantiate that the truth about God--possibly never ceasing. Furthermore, God’s existence can be easily understood and evidence found within history and its information. Information is preserved to the