my philosophy homework:
The first argument that Michael Martin proposes, that of incoherence is a well thought out and believable argument. Personally, I am inclined to agree with him, because I have seen and thought of these fallacies on my own for quite some time. The Bible contradicts itself numerous times and it is said to be a text that was recorded by prophets straight from that god. Even if one were to point out the fact that humans are fallible and they made mistakes in their recordings this suggests that this god made mistakes when choosing who would record his teachings or, even worse, that there was a lack of communication. Also, to further point out that this god is given attributes that directly contradict popular beliefs of him is just Michael Martins way of arguing that even if you believe the Bible to be trash, there is still contradictions of this gods mythos, which cause people to be disinclined to believe his existence.
The first argument that Michael Martin proposes, that of incoherence is a well thought out and believable argument. Personally, I am inclined to agree with him, because I have seen and thought of these fallacies on my own for quite some time. The Bible contradicts itself numerous times and it is said to be a text that was recorded by prophets straight from that god. Even if one were to point out the fact that humans are fallible and they made mistakes in their recordings this suggests that this god made mistakes when choosing who would record his teachings or, even worse, that there was a lack of communication. Also, to further point out that this god is given attributes that directly contradict popular beliefs of him is just Michael Martins way of arguing that even if you believe the Bible to be trash, there is still contradictions of this gods mythos, which cause people to be disinclined to believe his existence.