The chapter gives teleological arguments as possible reasons to believe in God. The problem for me with teleological arguments is that they leave more questions, mainly about where God began. Teleological arguments attempt to give evidence for something that is almost impossible to prove, they seem to all be begging the example question stated in the reason chapter, "I believe God exists because He created us." Teleological arguments overlook the possibility that there could be other reasons for the existence of the Golden Ratio or the intelligent design of our world. Who could honestly say William Paley's The Watch and the Watchmaker is absolutely incorrect? No one, the universe does exhibit marvelous design, but this does not necessarily point to a designer. As humans, we are (currently) unable to determine where we even came from to the zero point. According to the Theory of Evolution, to my understanding, all life on Earth originated from single cell organisms, but we don't know how those single cell organisms cam to be. If something created those single cell organisms, where did the thing that created them come from? Some would say God, because he always was and always will be. If this is true, then He would have to be outside of our universe because, as is said in Ecclesiastes 3:1-15 There is an appointed time for everything. Ecclesiastes is an Old Testament book though, so, because I have once heard someone say, "Jesus came to change to law because the Old Testament had it wrong" (I paraphrased, I don't know exactly what was said, but I remember enough to get the idea), if he was correct, then Jesus came to tell us that God doesn't have a beginning or an end, which would confirm my statement that God would need to be outside our universe to have created it, which is confirmed by the site I have posted at the bottom. Anyways, the chapter then talks about the knowledge of God we can discover as humans. The book clams that man's need for meaning, the mystery of death, man's thirst for happiness, and the pain of loneliness are pieces of evidence pointing toward God's existence from religious experiences, summing it up with the conclusion that "the existence of God would unquestionably satisfy our desires for meaning, love, security, and peace. But if God does not exist ... we suffer an intrinsic lack of wholeness which only an imaginary God can fill." The book continues with the argument that God exists through conscience. Conscience comes from knowledge (what you know), intuition (what you feel), and personal experience (what has happened). An example that might work to show all three is a guy in a trench coat decides to offer you cocaine. First off, I know cocaine is bad for my body, as learned in school (knowledge), the trench coat makes me feel uncomfortable because he's hiding something (intuition) and I've watched enough television, particularly Cops to know I could go to jail for taking the guy's offer (personal experience). The third argument for God's existence is from natural law. The main part of the argument is the five basic inclinations of human nature.
The conclusion the book finds is that sin is against human nature because the actions of sinning are not a natural expression of humanity.
1. One of the most important ideas I want to remember is the idea of a teleological argument, mainly because I have a feeling that they will come up often on tests. A teleological argument is an argument for the existence of God by attempting to show, logically, that the universe was created purposefully.
2. The second thing from this chapter that I would like to remember is the idea that to sin is to be inhuman. What is interesting about the statement is that it seems to allow for moral relativity because what is natural to one person could be unnatural to another, such as a basketball player who has practiced compared to someone who hasn’t. The basketball player is probably a lot better than the person who hasn't practiced, but then the argument could be made that the basketball player learned a skill unnatural to his human nature because he wasn't naturally born with his skills, but then again, basketball isn't one of the five basic inclinations of human nature, so, assuming they are correct, basketball was a bad example, and by going by the basic inclinations, morality would not be relative because they clearly define human nature.
3. The third thing I would like to remember is the idea that religion is a crutch. Just as a crutch helps a cripple walk, religion helps people get closer to God. Does this mean, like a cripple will never walk properly without his/her legs healing, assuming the person's leg was broken or something, a process that takes time, we can not reach God until we have gone through our lives?
I say Jesus was an influential figure in the histories of the human race, morality, and religion. It is hard for me to honestly believe Jesus walked on water and changed water to wine, but teachings are more important than any miracle he performed before his death. His teachings of love your enemy as yourself and turn the other cheek were, and still are, counter culture. What happens when someone attacks another person, they go to court, not that I’m saying they shouldn't, but Jesus basically said that the victim should let the attacker have another punch at him. Although they conflicted with the society of the community they lived in, people followed Jesus' teachings and eventually started Christianity. I personally see some truth in the teaching of turning the other cheek, if someone starts to try to attack you, maybe to get a reaction or something, not doing anything could calm the person down, but then again, the result depends on the reason for the attack, so it doesn't really make sense. Jesus had some interesting teachings, but I'm not sure if I know the meaning of them or what his point was and they don't really make sense, but it is hard for me to believe he is God, especially sense he was human. I guess I don't know for sure who Jesus is/was, except that he was complicated.
Interesting site I found while working on this Atheists have Proven God Does Not Exist. Right?
back to faith07