yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
I'd like to draw on the Louie CK incident (referred to by Humbled) to present my reasoning in another way:
Dog 1: My owner punched me in the face, threw foul tasting liquid in my mouth and nose, and watched while I choked and threw up.
Dog 2: What a bast#$rd
Dog 1: I know. It PROVES that I cannot possibly have a loving owner.
Would Dog 1 be logically correct?
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
cofty, Christian theism has had other moments to wonder why their god has allowed death and destruction in the natural world kill people. The Lisbon earthquake and tsunami in the mid 1700's destroyed most the churches on All Saint's Day and yet let stand most of the red light district.So it is reported.
This is why I made the point that the numbers are irrelevant. Cofty makes much of the statistics of the Asian tsunami as if the 250K clinches the point of reason. What if it were 150K? What if it were 10? It makes no difference to the question, nor to the information available to us.
If 1 person suffers and dies due to what Cofty calls a "natural evil" then the question remains the same. Death by old age is surely a "natural evil" by this reasoning.
People die. Is this God's intent? The Bible says no. Can we fully comprehend why it occurs right now? Some people say yes, the Bible fully explains it. Personally I disagree with that. The Bible partially explains it, and I do not dismiss the information that is there, but like the pet that cannot fully comprehend the big picture I accept that there is some information that is outside of my range right now.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
What is Z in your argument, flamegrilled?
The evidence for a loving Christian God.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Adam
You have been very fair in noting the limitations of Cofty's so-called argument.
I would just like to comment on ...
The claim is actually an 'appeal to ignorance', following the general form of, "humans don't know X (which in some cases IS true), but THEREFORE we should do Y".
... since it was directed at my point of reason.
I don't think that is an accurate way of presenting the way most of us Theists are motivated.
We do Y because of Z (which is not part of this discussion), and at the same time acknowledge that we may not know X. Nevertheless the evidence of Z is so compelling (to us) that we are prepared to reserve judgement on X and not allow an absence of information in this area to lead us to conclusion Q in spite of Z.
Cofty's argument is that we must reach conclusion Q based upon his interpretation of X. No allowance can be made for Z, and an admission that we may not know X is to be scorned rather than acknowledged.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Flamegrilled, your arguments and refusal to admit the obvious is reaching Ludicrous Speed. It's like the young earth creationists that claim that light may have moved faster inthe past or decay rates may have been faster making the earth and universe just LOOK older.
Viviane - you're very big on making general statements about my arguments without ever quoting them. Perhaps that's because you are continuing to infer things that I never wrote.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Viviene
Possibly not all-powerful.
What is the point of an impotent god?
The point about this comment was that it wasn't a logical response.
If someone comments that God might not be all powerful, it doesn't mean that the alternative is that he is impotent.
Cofty keeps making these leaps and so do you. Just because X does not equal Y, it doesn't mean that X automatically equals Z.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Flamegrilled - are you seriously proposing that human activity may have caused the Asian tsunami?
Nope. I think I was clear that I wasn't proposing that human activity caused any tsunami, never mind about the Asian one specifically.
On the other hand neither do I think you have any special knowledge of exactly how much human activity effects any particular environmental variable.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Viviane
You probably need to read more carefully. Cofty WAS using impotent as an antoym for omnipotent. And then you subsequently supported him. And I quote from two pages ago:
Possibly not all-powerful.
What is the point of an impotent god?
Now perhaps you'd be kind enough to quote me when you say "You did say [he lacks the power]"
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Yes. You are assuming that all other variables that we observe are exactly what God (if he exists) intended. If God lacks te power to make happen what he wants to, then he is impotent. Viviane
I didn't say he lacks the power. You somehow inferred that, but I didn't say it.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Well Cofty scores high on the chart for making assertions and throwing insults. Not so much on logical debate though.
