God kills through random chance.

@Krumple,

If he wasn't Christian he probably would've died in the elevator shaft. God just spared the Christian so He could get a few extra minutes of 'servitude' out of him before correcting fate. And if that's 'God's plan' at work, then God is as crazy as the best of em. Then again, I'm sure no unearthly force caused the incident. He probably knocked it on himself, being all scared and happy at the same time.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Part of the problem with the question of evil in the world is the question of what is meant by the term 'omnipotence'. The evidence indicates that God does not interfere directly with physical reality. If he were to bend one of the laws of physics just once for the benefit of one particular person, the whole thing would collapse, i.e. EVERYBODY would be demanding exemptions the next day...

Alright. I won't argue but at the same time this would also mean prayer is pointless. Because prayer would have the same impact. It would require that god intervene in some way that effected the world.

2 Replies

@Krumple,

Don't pray for violations of physical laws; pray for the strength and wisdom to deal with whatever you need to deal with.

0 Replies

Theism vs Naturalism best debate so far :

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Theism vs Naturalism best debate so far :

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07QUPuZg05I[/youtube]

I have seen my fill of william lane craig videos. As far as I am concerned he is a used car salesman for christianity.

Here is one inconsistent logical error on his part.

He will use the kalam cosmological argument to get to the point of saying a god exists. Then he makes a huge leap from there and suggests this god is the same christian god. You can't honestly go from point A being supported by the KCA to Yahweh. It is dishonest and insulting to anyone who understands the tools of logical and deductive reasoning.

Also WLC has been noted to saying to the effect of.

(This is a broken quote)

"If I had a time machine and went back to witness the resurrection of Jesus and yet when I was there and saw nothing happen, I would still believe that the resurrection took place."

This shows that WLC doesn't care about reality. Doesn't care about truth. He wants to believe it is true. So all these debates are nothing but a way for him to make money spreading his delusional ideas. In other words he is a con-artist.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

I don't like him either, and yes I agree with you that he is dishonest. But at the same time one has to admit the man is brilliant. In here he doesn't need to make a case for the Christian God n he doesn't make it, rather he argues about a transcendental cause which to some extent he does very well. When he argues for the Christian God he shifts for the historicity of Jesus Christ, which is the natural smart move...in any case he has had the merit of constantly beating up most atheist spokesman I saw, formally speaking that is. This is actually the only case I remember on which I didn't think he clearly won the debate. I am glad someone has prepared well this time around.

PS - If you consider his starting position and all the nonsense he has to defend you have to grant him credit. WLC is also a perfect good example on the power of well trained philosophers and to an extent a good lesson for some people in Science.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

I don't like him either, and yes I agree with you that he is dishonest. But at the same time one has to admit the man is brilliant. In here he doesn't need to make a case for the Christian God n he doesn't make it, rather he argues about a transcendental cause which to some extent he does very well. When he argues for the Christian God he shifts for the historicity of Jesus Christ, which is the natural smart move...in any case he has had the merit of constantly beating up most atheist spokesman I saw, formally speaking that is. This is actually the only case I remember on which I didn't think he clearly won the debate. I am glad someone has prepared well this time around.

PS - If you consider his starting position and all the nonsense he has to defend you have to grant him credit. WLC is also a perfect good example on the power of well trained philosophers and to an extent a good lesson for some people in Science.

He might be good at public speaking but that is about all I give him credit for. As for being a philosopher or utilizing logical reasoning he fails at completely. He is almost ALWAYS dishonest in the logical conclusions or claims and his premises NEVER support those conclusions. You don't get credit for being good at public speaking, you want to know who else is great at talking? Used car salesmen, lawyers and insurance salesmen. Pretty much all three of them are trying to scam you in some way. I see apologists just like them, dishonest and their underline motivation for what they do is to sell books and make money on public speeches.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Well Krumple I could agree with you up to the extent that what you saying speaks even more about his adversaries then it speaks about him in so far...but such is the state of our world nowadays...salesman beating up formal leaders of knowledge n science is a sad sight.
(...to me a wise reason to run of Universities like hell if you are seeking anything more then status quo...)

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Well Krumple I could agree with you up to the extent that what you saying speaks even more about his adversaries then it speaks about him in so far...but such is the state of our world nowadays...salesman beating up formal leaders of knowledge n science is a sad sight.
(...to me a wise reason to run of Universities like hell if you are seeking anything more then status quo...)

I think it comes down to a few aspects. One is, I am willing for theists to convince me or to get me to see a piece of information that would change my mind. I am open to the possibility that I am wrong. Yet many apologists, WLC included claim that they would not change their minds.

This to me essentially says then why should I listen to what you have to say if no matter what I say in return you will completely ignore it? I know there are many theists who exercise the proverbial fingers in the ears attitude when having a discussion. They just want to dictate their beliefs but any counter arguments go ignored.

To me it has to be a two way street or I have no respect for a person trying to have a philosophical discussion. If WLC had said the opposite to his hypothetical story, that he would have to reconsider his beliefs, that would have launched him into more respect from me.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Too bad you scorn the Eastern view on these things. You erroneously argue that you know what is good and bad and that God is implicated when either one happens. Simply false and everyday life shows it to be wrong.

This farmer had only one horse, and one day the horse ran away. The neighbors came to condole over his terrible loss. The farmer said, "What makes you think it is so terrible?"

A month later, the horse came home--this time bringing with her two beautiful wild horses. The neighbors became excited at the farmer's good fortune. Such lovely strong horses! The farmer said, "What makes you think this is good fortune?"

The farmer's son was thrown from one of the wild horses and broke his leg. All the neighbors were very distressed. Such bad luck! The farmer said, "What makes you think it is bad?"

A war came, and every able-bodied man was conscripted and sent into battle. Only the farmer's son, because he had a broken leg, remained. The neighbors congratulated the farmer. "What makes you think this is good?" said the farmer.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Don't you see how insincere you appear and are. You are willing to be convinced but you think believers are not willing to be convinced WHICH MUST MEAN that if they convinced you you would have to be open to being wrong or else be al liar and a hypocrite.

But long years dealing with people like you gives me the answer. You don't believe reason is worth anything and you never will commit to anything your mind leads you to if you don't WANT to.;

Which is all to say: You despise reason and those who follow it.

0 Replies

@Insty,

SUPERB ANSWER

0 Replies

@prothero,

If I thought like you I'd be headed for the poison.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

Only Shakespeare himself did not think that.

Not only that, he drew the most of his profoundest thoughts from the Bible

See if I made this up :
Biblical References in Shakespeare’s Plays

by Naseeb Shaheen

"Hamlet and Othello each have more than fifty biblical references."

Hardcover: 879 pages <==============================
Publisher: University of Delaware Press

0 Replies

@prothero,

Whly do people use Cocktail Party Talk like 'not necessarily' ?? Are you saying that sometimes God and Nature are the same? And what's with 'concept' God is not a concept as 'nature' is.

Gives me the shivers, reminds me of those dreadful grad school parties where Nerdo says things about Adorno so the pretty girl will go out with him.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

My philosophy; never blame something that can't be killed for killing, it would be ridiculous to throw off your aim. Blame every living thing, those odds are much more realistic. And I'm not lifting up the name of a diety because I serve only myself. Just saying how is anyone supposed to succeed in this life with so few people that care?

0 Replies

Lets see. Aesop's Fables

A ship sunk and a survivor reached dry land.

When he was standing on land, he put his eyes looking at the sky and started to claim that the gods were not fair with the incident.

He claimed that yes, some bad people were in the ship, but that also lots of innocent people were there and have paid with their lives the wrong doings of the bad people.

In the middle of his complaint, an ant bit him hard in the foot. and the man turned down his face and saw lots of ants around his feet. Immediately he started to kill all of them.

When he almost finished killing the ants, he found out himself killing innocent ants just because one of them bit his foot.

Is this random? Collateral damage?

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

gungasnake wrote:

Quote:
Part of the problem with the question of evil in the world is the question of what is meant by the term 'omnipotence'. The evidence indicates that God does not interfere directly with physical reality. If he were to bend one of the laws of physics just once for the benefit of one particular person, the whole thing would collapse, i.e. EVERYBODY would be demanding exemptions the next day...

Alright. I won't argue but at the same time this would also mean prayer is pointless. Because prayer would have the same impact. It would require that god intervene in some way that effected the world.

I think the idea is to pray for wisdom and strength and not for God to fix all of your problems for you. Praying for God to fix all of your problems is basically praying to a demoKKKrat god (which you might could represent as a statue of Lyndon Johnson...)

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/83/d6/60/83d66072adf680a13c1e281f46a6292e--lyndon-b-johnson-american-presidents.jpg

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

Quote:

I think the idea is to pray for wisdom and strength and not for God to fix all of your problems for you.

If all you need is wisdom and strength you don't need a god. If you think you do need a god in order to manifest these qualities then you're relying on a god to fix all your problems for you since you can't summon up wisdom and strength on your own.

Quote:

a demoKKKrat god

???

Which side are you on, anyway — how does the KKK relate to the Democratic Party of LBJ? I thought you liked the KKK, or at least supported much of its agenda.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

A man is trapped in an elevator. Eventually he is rescued and in his relief he decides to rush off to his church to thank god personally. He is so relieved to be alive that he embraces a stone pillar of the alter which abruptly falls onto him, killing him.

The man assumed he should be thankful to god for saving him from being trapped.

In the middle of thanking god for his help, he is killed by a falling pillar.

Besides the fact that the guy probably just had terrible luck, how can you make sense of this in a religious or philosophical way? Is god paying attention or is it all just random chance? Did god help save the man from the elevator only to kill him later? Or was the rescue from the elevator intended by god but the pillar falling an unintentional result? Did the man make a deal with god to get him out of the elevator but after the man was out, did he break his deal with god, so god killed him with the pillar? Was it god's intention the whole time to kill the man but the first attempt failed because he was rescued? Or was the plan all along to kill the man but god just needed a way for him to show up to the pillar? The only way to get the guy in front of the pillar was to trap him in an elevator shaft? Knowing he would be relieved at being rescued he would show up to be crushed as planned?

By the way this is a true story.

And who says that God killed him?

Why you have such a conclusion?

Have you thought in your questioning that God might has nothing to do with the death of that man?

Do you think that God will waste his time perpetuating such plan to kill that man?

Are you out of your mind?

0 Replies

God kills through random chance.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know