I believe that God did create the universe.” (Letters to Creationist, 2010). Billy stands up for what he believes in when others ask him about the nature of God and he does not think that the bible is a scientific story. In our world today, a lot of people try to connect the Bible with science, trying to prove evolution and take away significance of creationism. The only science I care to know about it when it comes to how humans are created is how and what God used to create us. God invented science, science did not invent humans.
Who believed Christianity was fanatical & unreasonable, wrote the Encyclopedia and promoted religious toleration, but not superstition? Who discovered natural economic laws? “The state should not interrupt the free play of natural economic forces.” No regulation of govt, just “leave it alone” or “laissez-Faire”-let the people do as they choose. He wrote the book-“The Wealth of Nations.” Who believed women needed to be better educated (not stuck in the kitchen), equality of sexes? Who was for women’s rights coined the term “feminism”?
At the time, discovery was looked at with skepticism as people had become accustomed to the bible being the only source of information about the world. For example, Newton’s discovery of the laws of gravity demonstrated that there were natural, unchangeable and yet predictable laws that governed the universe (Newton 2). In turn, Enlightenment thinkers believed that if natural laws did exist, and humans could discover these laws, then they could design the ideal society to live in. Rousseau is a great example of a philosopher who looked at the social issues that were brought about by the new mindset of the Scientific Revolution. He was obsessed with making social reforms as people had begun to view themselves differently since they were no longer deigned to be the center of the universe.
However, in the New Testament God heals and individual who is blind and lets others die. A strength of Maurice Wiles argument is that it appeals to educated believers of God and scientific laws. This I because Wiles says that the concept of miracles can exist as it is "logically impossible" to prove miracle wrong scientifically. By saying this, Wiles is allowing religious people to also uphold their beliefs in scientific laws. A second strength of Maurice Wile's argument against miracles is that it allows a re-interpretation of miracle.
Swinburne would argue that St. Theresa’s character would not lie about a supposed religious experience due to her deep faith in God and morals suggesting that her visions must have been from an external agent. On the other hand, it could be heavily argued that scientific advances could prove otherwise and expose the visions of Christ as an act of the mind ‘playing tricks’. Science has shown that the temporal lobe when stimulated through seizures can produce an altered perception such as religious experiences of this variety. St. Theresa had these visions in the 1500’s when science was in its earliest stages and religion was an answer for everything; these factors appear to support Richard Swinburne’s defence of certain types of characters not lying in support of
“Expressions of secular humanism reject both the minimal Christian elements of its precursors and essential biblical truths, such as the fact that human beings bear the image of their Creator.” (Text Book The popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics) Meaning/ Purpose: Secular humanists never think about God don’t pray, never worry about what God thinks. So they may devote much more time and attention, and their energy to improving themselves, their relationships, and their environment. Morality: “Secular humanists base their morality and ideas about justice on critical intellect unassisted by Scripture, which Christians rely on for knowledge concerning right and wrong, good and evil.” (secularhumanism.org) Destiny: Secular humanists know that the truth of human experience is that certain virtues, practices, and habits of mind and character make for a better life. “It aims to heal this world and glorify man as the author of his own, progressive salvation.”(secularhumanism.org) Contrast: I was not sure if I would like to do this paper since I do not agree with the beliefs of secular humanism. Before I could consider my Christian response to secular humanism, I had to do my research.
The research and testing is done to either prove or disprove the hypothesis. This research is used to make a prediction and a theory as to why something happened is developed. Dr. E. Stanley Jones states “Prior to the age of science, truth was determined philosophically, by debate. But the scientific method has brought the search for truth out of the lecture hall and into the laboratory.” (Christianity.com 2013). However, the scientific method is only a way of seeking the truth.
Simply put, the fine-tuning argument contends that the universe was designed to ultimately create human beings. Fine-tuning is an argument which is able to contest one of the atheist’s own theories to disprove God. This will be explained in more detail later in this paper. In response to this, McCloskey says the cosmological argument “does not entitle us to postulate an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause.” As mentioned before, the cosmological argument is but one part of a concurrence for the existence of God. It does not prove God’s existence; it argues that there must be a necessary being which created the universe.
However, creationism says that the world and living things was created by God. Creationism refuses the idea of evolution and it causes some arguments about whether evolution should be taught in schools or not. Evolution should be taught in schools so that students can gain different points of view about human nature. Creationists believe that creationism explains the existence of God. They do not believe that species change into totally different and separate animals through evolution, as sacred books mention about existence of God and they contains strict rules.
This backs up his answer by him giving evidence to back up his claim. Albert Einstein’s final use of emotion in his answer is shown when he puts his own opinion in his answer by saying that scientist do have a sense of faith because they have to believe in something with the laws of nature which gives a feel of religion but he also states how different it is from the “religiosity of someone more naïve” he uses claims based on how he feels rather than rationale behind his claim, And it appeals to emotion. Albert Einstein not only just answers her question, but he uses ethos, logos, and pathos to make it more effective and understandable for Phyllis. He gives a reason to believe him and shows both sides of the claim. So in the end she can form her own opinion or argument about the whole thing.