God’s Not Dead
The title for the movie, God’s Not Dead, is a little misleading because for someone to be dead they had to initially exist. The argument in the movie deals with the existence of God or lack thereof. In the movie Professor Radisson appears to be an atheist and while teaching his
Introduction to Philosophical Thoughts class he uses his intimidating authority to persuade the class that God is dead. The reason this author uses the term, “appears to be an atheist,” is because
Radisson truly believes in the existence of God but is profusely mad at Him for the loss of his mother which occurred when he was only twelve. The other main character involves Freshman
Josh Wheaton, who refuses to succumb to the Professor’s insistence that God is
…show more content…
Professor Radisson would seem to be an empiricist, because he believes that science should be able to identify everything that is in existence without the benefit from a Creator God.
He also appears to believe that occurrences happen only by natural law with no set task to give them life. He gives the example of David Hume, (who was himself and empiricist), as one of the atheist scientist he respects. What is so strange is that David Hume’s empiricist thoughts according to our textbook would mean and end, not only to philosophy, but to all rational inquiry and all claims that we can know anything (even that the sun will rise tomorrow, or that there is a textbook now in front of you) (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 248). Freshman Joshua Wheaton actually points this out when referring to another one of Professor’s Radisson’s scientific idols,
Carter 2
Stephen Hawkings who Wheaton says stated in his writings, “Philosophy is dead” (God is Not
Dead). This really is a crush to the Professor’s arguments since it is a philosophy class he is teaching. Joshua Wheaton’s defense uses many philosophical and scientific reasoning. He uses