please just a one word answer first. S&R
Idon'tknowbecauseIdon'thavehisknowledge
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.
please just a one word answer first. S&R
Idon'tknowbecauseIdon'thavehisknowledge
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.
None of us chose to sign up for this experiment. Apo
That's a fair point, but if you did have a choice between not existing, or playing your part in this universe, what would you choose?
We would call this teacher an insecure jerk, wouldn't we?
I have to agree. I really dislike the illustration. The JW framework of theodicy doesn't work for me.
As for the Flood altering the way the world works, we can ignore what science has to say about this and simply ask the question, "Why did God need to bring a flood to kill the wicked? Why not strike each one down with an individual lightning bolt or something?
I guess the ark would then not have existed, and the figurative part of the event - salvation by baptism - would be lost.
But actually if I had to choose between a lightning bolt and drowning, I think I would go for the latter. But that's just me.
Why kill nearly all the world's animals as well as alter the environment massively?" I don't think the Society has ever attempted to explain why the Flood was a necessary form of execution.
According to the Genesis account something happened as a result of the badness that caused "all flesh" to be ruined. It's pretty sketchy on detail so who knows what that might mean?
Anyone who claims to have ALL the answers, whether in supporting the Bible account, or in writing it off completely, is not worthy of listening to IMO. Anyone who questions things and deals realistically with uncertainty and probability I can listen to. Hence why I jumped into this conversation to challenge Cofty's certainty. It's not that I begrudge anyone their personal certainty based upon the balance of probability, but just don't try to tell me it's a logical certainty if it isn't.
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.
During the gruelling job summarizing flamegrilled's argument, I found it took about ten pages for him to run out of steam along a particular argument line.
No one ran out of steam. At least not at my end. But once it's said, it's said. I'm familiar with the urge to have the last word on everything, but there comes a point that you've made your point and the reader can decide.
I think this will tip to 100 pages mostly on people like S&R commenting simply on the fact that it's close to 100 pages. But that was one of the more useful contributions he made to this thread :)
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.
The summary so far:
It's simple. Cofty and I actually agree that this whole discussion hinges on probability and not certainty. You only have to read the past few pages to verify that. For a more in depth discussion of why it matters you will have to read back quite a bit further.
Cofty and others do not like the uncertainty, even though they acknowledge that it exists, and therefore feel the need to not only reach a certain conclusion whilst lacking information, but to compel anyone taking part in the conversation to do so also.
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 - I refuse to talk about it and I don't like your tone
That is all you have done throughout this discussion. With each non-statement you make your god looks less credible.
With believers like you - who need enemies?
Now I'm being "quoted" from a dialogue made up by Cofty. Awesome job TG. Cofty paraphrases me from nothing that's ever been written, or even thought about, and then you quote it. That's a great example of what I'm talking about. Many people will jump in on this page and would otherwise fall for this kind of nonsense.
So many responses are just a waste of a comment. But if people didn't post stuff like this example then no wasted response would be required to put the record straight.
P.S. In case the reader didn't gather it by now, that is not a quote of anything I've ever written. But I do encourage the reader to read what I have actually written in order to understand why Cofty and his supporters feel the need to misrepresent my position.
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 have lost patience with you FG. Cofty
It's not a big concern to me Cofty. Your misrepresentations of my position have been numerous, but I have patiently continued the conversation. If you have lost patience I cannot help that.
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 is there anything inaccurate about this summary of your position?
Atheist - The enormity of natural evil argues powerfully against christian theism.
Flamegrilled - Natural evil does not make my loving god logically impossible.
Atheist - In what way?
Flamegrilled - There may be facts you are not aware of.
Atheist - What facts could reconcile a tsunami with a loving, knowing, omnipotent god?
Flamegrilled - That is a mystery, I am just saying it's not logically impossible.
Atheist - It is very compelling evidence against theism. What evidence to the contrary could possibly be so strong?
Flamegrilled - I refuse to talk about it and I don't like your tone
Yes
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 am concerned that lurkers may be begining to wonder if Flamegrilled is an atheist plant, trying to prove that theists have no answer to natural evil.
Nobody could have done a better job. Cofty
You probably don't need to be overly concerned. I know I'm not. Intelligent lurkers will decide for themselves despite your desparate need to masquerade some sort of contrived victory.
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 must have missed that. Cofty
Indeed. We are in agreement.
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's point was a deliberate distraction ... The thread is about the Asian tsunami. Cofty
You keep redefining the goalposts just as Adam said. I made a passing comment about the possibility of the human effect. You were the one that made an absolute AND GENERAL assertion to the contrary. Adam took no time in demonstrating that your assertion was groundless, and then you accuse him of creating a distraction.
Now you want to again narrow your point to a single specific natural disaster when it suits you to do so.
This thread is about the Asian tsunami? And that's it? Of course it isn't. You have happily entertained diversions of this thread to many other topics when the commenters shared your world view.