Saturday, October 29, 2011

FacePalm of the Day #142 - Epic Fail: Tisk Tisk, Johnny P Response #13

Well, I believe the problem is that Johnny P refuses to not be the last one to speak on this subject on my blog. Apparently, he will continue to leave comments until I allow him to have the last word. I don't mind. I can do this every single day if I have to because maybe just maybe God might get through to Johhny P and he will know just how bad some of his arguments and his conclusions are. God may yet have mercy. My annotations are in red.

This is poor.

Which part? And how are you going to prove that?

You have admitted to agreeing to my argument without admitting it.

Nope, I've said exactly where I agree with you and where I disagree with you. Maybe you need to re-read it....slowly.

You still equivocate on world. You cannot understand that you judge a world by outcome, and still build up straw men of what you wanted me to have said rather than what I said.

World is not a triviality here - if you are actually trying to make an argument and a meaningful point. I agree and have said that you have not said anything worth responding to outside of your fallacious premises and conclusions.

And you still don;t understand that the ingredients are necessary to achieve the outcome, which is the whole basis of the argument.

I've asked you to explain what outcome you are talking about. I agreed that all the evil and suffering in this world our necessary for the plan and goals God has determined with God's self, for God's self, and by God's self.

You still don't understand how God chose this world and that choice is perfect, and since it could have been any other world in conception, and God chooses perfectly, then this must be the most perfect world (out of all the choices).

Here again is where I disagree. Just because this world is as it is now, does not mean that it's the perfect world that God will bring about despite of and through the pain and suffering you seem to obviously have a problem with.

And you still don't understand that by saying perfect world I do not mean exclusively when I said it then, but not now, and not before, that this equivocation is stupid, that it is judged on outcome (as mentioned many times now).

What outcome are your referring to: the pain and suffering experienced now or the "the glory that will be revealed in us" (Romans 8:18)?

You seem to want to choose your time for perfect world - before humans. Well, fine, who cares? The fact is, God designed tsunamis, decided perfectly to allow them to kill humans in a world which he has perfectly chosen over and above any other world. Thus they, and all other natural evil, are ingredients in his perfectly chosen world, which must be perfect by outcome / ensemble.

And to top it off, you say this UTTER STRAW MAN:

"In all his ramblings, Johnny P has not shown why this answer is wrong."


Perfectly chosen? Yes. Look you wrote an "essay" that you described that "critiques" the Christian worldview that was posted on a blog called Debunking Christianity. If your goal was not to show that the answer given by the Christian worldview is incorrect and does not make sense, then why did you write it? Why waste an entire month arguing about it? Why are you even an atheist if you don't think that the Christian Worldview is wrong? What point are you trying to make? Is it that you don't always understand how an all-good God can allow evil, pain, and suffering? Join the club. We got T-shirts. The Bible is full of that question being asked and answered. It doesn't matter if you don't like the answer for it to be true. This should be a slam dunk and you should be running to a church and falling down on your knees in abject surrender to God who made you. Looks like you are the one who needs a grip. His name is Jesus Christ. Reach for Him.

My conclusions are these:

IF you are a Christian
THEN you must accept that all natural evils are necessary ingredients in a perfect world.

Not in the world as we see it now. And not just all natural evils, but everything that ever happened will go into what God is building and making. No where in the Bible does it say that this world is prefect. By all means, consider the ensemble. You say you are but by your conclusions in rejecting God, you show you are not looking at the ensemble, just the little piece you think you understand. But we will see how it all comes together and we will know it's perfect when Jesus returns for His people. The question you need to be asking yourself is, are you one of his people?

You can equivocate like a child all you want that I meant perfect world now. But I didn't, I never said that, and it would make no sense whatsoever anyway. Words in my mouth.

You mean you didn't write the following quote?

If this is where logic takes a Christian, then they can keep their God in all his maximal perfection. And while they’re at it, they can package up all the pain and suffering and send it return post to the pearly gates. Not needed here, thanks.

And now you are saying that you didn't intend to prove that the logic employed by Christians is wrong. Then are you trying to say that you reject it out of a purely emotional fit? Yep. Like a whining, kicking, and screaming baby who doesn't get what he wants and so lashes out? Yup. How mature is that? It's not. You have no argument, if you are not weighing in on whether or not Christianity is true and why you reject it. Remember the name of the blog which you love that the post originally appeared in, right? What point were you trying to make then? If it was an exercise in pontification, you succeeded awesomely.

What had happen' was.....: FacePalm of the Day #141 - Epic Fail: Tisk Tisk, Johnny P Response #12
Enhanced by Zemanta


  1. blah blah blah fallacy blah fallacy blah blah fallacy.

    The only reason I keep posting is because you keep misrepresenting me. Ant that is, to me, a personal insult. It is hard not to respond to someone who is lying about you and what you say.

    However, I couldn't even care about that anymore. Your points are tedious, as well as being wrong. You put words in my mouth like giant straw men, and I have lost the appetite to reason with someone so irrational.

    I never claimed of this argument what you think or want me to have claimed. Where you take this argument is another issue. For example, I would look at this in probabilities. Is this situation of natural evil better explained by your version of God, or by atheism. Using standards for assessing explanatory power and scope, and Ockham's Razor, the answer is that this evidence is clearly far more probable and explicable under atheism (not that I'm strictly an atheist anyway, but logically an agnostic).

    When you take this in combination with all the other logical issues of God (unable to explain the compossibles of subsets of humans who would freely love him and only creating them, thus avoiding the necessity of hell and such evil and suffering at all, a point Craig was unable to refute, failure of theodicies to explain evil effectively such as the natural death of 3/4 of all human foetuses before birth, issues of divine personhood, exegesis and historicity of the bible, physics of time, the fact we have no free will, the special pleading of Christianity over any other religion, comparative religions better explaining events like the flood, the impossibility of biblical accounts such as the flood, the failure and incoherence of arguments such as the KCA and Moral Argument, imperfect revelation such that some 32,000 denominations of Christianity exist etc etc I could go on ad infinitum).

    You think you are all that, you really do. Your self-delusion matches the delusion of your belief. Good luck in life being a more critical thinker. I would advise doing some sort of philosophy qualification, unless your cognitive dissonance forces you only to do things which will cohere with your presupposed belief.

  2. I'm still waiting for a good response. 96 fallacies and counting...

    Persistence 10/10
    Ability to follow a simple argument 0/10
    Ability to represent someone else's argument accurately, maturely and responsibly 0/10
    Ability 0/10

  3. Nice tally for your work? Got help counting, didn't you?

  4. Are you serious? That is a 5 year old's taunt of "I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?"

    Does your mum know what you're doing on the computer. Watch it, she might come and tell you off!

  5. My mother would tell you to get better arguments. And by "better" she'd mean "meaningful".

  6. And by the way, your arguments and attempts at "rebuttal" are only worth "I know you are but what am I?" responses, but I've chosen to be gracious.