Today, I saw this interesting article online entitled, "The problem of good almost insoluble for the atheist." In that article reads the following quote,
"I am offering a counter-question to the atheists. You show me a world without a Creator; then, you also need to provide grounds for the existence of goodness in this world. How do you intend to answer the problem of good in a world without God?"
I think it's a great question. The article was written by Greg Cootsona, an associate pastor of discipleship at Bidwell Presbyterian Church.To add, last week, my Sophomore son brought home a magazine entitled, "Skeptical Inquirer March/April 2007" from his public high school chemistry class. He said, "Dad, look what your tax dollars are buying." Which I found surprisingly funny. So, the next day, I read through most of the articles. However, one caught my eye more than the others. It's was an article written by Daniel C. Dennent entitled, "Thank Goodness!" Briefly, his whole article was about how he had to undergo harrowing emergency heart surgery and how he rejoiced at his successful surgery by "Thanking Goodness" instead of thanking God. Then I said to myself, "Thank Goodness?" Could a naturalists, a materialist be thanking something unnatural? Something immaterial? To help me answer these questions, I turned to my favorite online radio show, Unchained Radio on Saturday (3/02/08). I called into the show and asked Pastor Gene, the same question posed above by the Presbyterian pastor, "How does an atheist account for the problem of good in this world according to their worldview?"
To hear the show and Pastor Gene's brilliant refutation of Dr. Dennet's problem of "Thanking Goodness", click here. My question is approx. 29 min into the show.
Oh, and to add, Skeptical Inquirer, at least that edition my son brought home to read, really does confirm what the Apostle Paul says in Romans 1:18-25 . Not only that, Skeptical Inquirer is as captivating as a public school bathroom.
7 comments:
Why can't someone just thank goodness? I don't see a problem with that. It covers everything that the professor is thankful for.
Dan
Good exists in a world without gods because "being good" is by definition beneficial to human survival. There's certainly nothing "unnatural" about it, as you claim.
But by who's "definition"? Wasn't it Darwin who said, "Survival of the fittest?"
What "good" is there in that?
Atheism is a prescriber not a describer. In other words, "Let and let live." Why tell others how, what to believe?
This question is really quite easy to answer.
Good can be defined as whatever is consistent and amenable to the natural order of things.
Evil results whenever the natural order is thwarted or hindered.
Are there people who actually have problems with this?
>Wasn't it Darwin who said, "Survival of the fittest?"
>What "good" is there in that?"
Uh, survival is by definition good. If they could vote on the issue, living things would vote that being alive is better than being dead. Thus being alive is GOOD. Observe how living things struggle every day to survive, and you'll see this is true.
As most living things don't have the mental capacity to "vote" (i.e. to consciously choose life, their genes vote for them.
"Uh, survival is by definition good."
Says who? Living things? And how? By voting?
So you are you saying that if society votes something in by majority, it is true?
http://markonzo.edu Excellent site. It was pleasant to me. ashley furniture price [url=http://jguru.com/guru/viewbio.jsp?EID=1536072]ashley furniture price[/url], 4545, allegiant air verdict [url=http://jguru.com/guru/viewbio.jsp?EID=1536075]allegiant air verdict[/url], dsrkyu, pressure washers info [url=http://jguru.com/guru/viewbio.jsp?EID=1536078]pressure washers info[/url], fmnvwja, dishnetwork blog [url=http://jguru.com/guru/viewbio.jsp?EID=1536080]dishnetwork blog[/url], jldgk, adt security preview [url=http://jguru.com/guru/viewbio.jsp?EID=1536076]adt security preview[/url], nfmhy,
Post a Comment