In the introduction, the author sets the following for Chapter 1:
How well did Chapter 1 achieve this goal?J. Hudson Mitchell wrote:Chapter 1 in this book endeavors to persuade unbelievers that there is a God who created the world and all living things in six literal twenty-four-hour days.
Regardless of whether you personally are an atheist or not, do you think reading Chapter 1 of this book would convince a rational and open-minded atheist to convert into believing in God? Why pr why not?
Please note, I'm not asking if there are other arguments that have been or could be made elsewhere to convince an open-minded atheist. I'm asking only if there was a convincing argument in Chapter 1 of this book.
Please also note, I'm not asking if a god exists or not or whether you believe one exists or not. I'm merely asking about the content of Chapter 1 of this book.
Personally, I didn't really notice any arguments or evidence at all in Chapter 1 that argued or provided evidence that a god exists. Instead, it seems like the content in Chapter 1 was written using the premise and assumption that god exists already.
For the most part, the contest in Chapter 1 seemed like ipse dixit to me. In other words, it was just different ways of saying god exists. But merely asserting or saying that something is true is not an argument or evidence that it is actually true, and thus isn't convincing.
Depending on how one looks at it or what the author actually meant, it could be that the scriptures quoted from the Bible were meant to be evidence god exists. In other words, the would-be argument in Chapter 1 could be claimed to be of the form 'The Christian bible says a god exists, therefore a god exists.' That wouldn't convince an open-minded atheist, though, because an atheist would no more believe that the bible is true than that god exists. The reasoning is kind of circular at best if that is meant to be the argument in Chapter 1.
What do you think?
Did you notice an argument or evidence presented in Chapter 1 that god exists? If so, what was the evidence or argument from Chapter 1?
Important Note: I'm not at all trying to put down the author or book. Convincing people to change their beliefs one way or the other about the existence of god(s) is an incredible feat. There should be no shame in not having a 100% success rate in converting others. I think there is an honor even in attempting it in a thoughtful, structured, and civil way.