Atheism Argument

1317 Words6 Pages
The existence of god has been relentlessly debated with many strong arguments. This essay will primarily discuss the most prevalent arguments for and against the existence of a higher being. Although there are many strong arguments for both atheism and theism, ultimately the theist point of view is greater justified morally and logically.
One of the most commonly debated matters for both theism and atheism is the logical problem of evil. Atheists dispute that the presence of evil in this world and the belief in an all knowing, good and powerful God is a contradiction and is logically inconsistent. If God were omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent he would be able to prevent or eliminate evil and suffering; and because he is rational he would eliminate and prevent evil. It is obvious that evil exists in this world. A world that has both evil and God is logically impossible therefore, God does not exist.
A rebuttal can come in a form of a theodicy or a defense. A theodicy provides a framework which claims to make God's existence probable. Whereas a defense demonstrates that God's existence is logically possible. The free will response is a theodicy presented by many theists including C.S. Lewis. Lewis explains it like this: God created humans to love; to love Him and one another. However, in order for love to be true and meaningful it must stem from freewill. According to a theist, forced love is a contradiction and logically impossible. Because God is omnipotent, he can do all that is logically possible. Forced love is logically impossible therefore; God cannot create humans without freewill. As a consequence evil exists. God could not have created a world in which we have no choice but to love. In order to have love we there...

... middle of paper ...

...by stating that objective moral values do not exist. In other words, all moral values and duties are relative. The time, location and culture a person grows up in determine their moral values. Theists such as Timothy Keller and I must disagree with this view. The holocaust, murder and rape are all objectively wrong-it is not circumstantial.
Other philosophical materialists suggest that objective moral values do exist, however, they are not founded by God. Objective moral values are the product of naturalistic evolution. We have evolved to have objective moral values in order to survive. Theists object by testifying that objective moral values never change. If they did change they would not be objective. And because objective moral values never change and are not circumstantial, the theory of naturalistic evolution does not disprove the moral argument for God.
Open Document