Batman, 'The Daily Show', and the Fall of Western Civilization - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Behind the Scenes at 'The Daily Show': My Day at the Fake News Headquarter
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Batman, 'The Daily Show', and the Fall of Western Civilization - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Batman, 'The Daily Show', and the Fall of Western Civilization - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Behind the Scenes at 'The Daily Show': My Day at the Fake News Headquarter
FacePalm of the Day #62 - Debunking Christianity: A New and Better Pascal's Wager: If God Asked You to Wager Before Being Born What Would You Choose?
Why didn't we get a choice in whether or not we would be born on earth? Wouldn't the reasonably good thing to do is to create us and then ask us if we would want to be born knowing the risks involved? God could have presented us with an informed choice to either be born or to be put out of existence forever, with heaven up for grabs if we wanted to take the risk. God would accurately inform us what the probabilities are to gain heaven should we be sent to earth as a babies somewhere. And we would know the probabilities that we might not be raised in the right Christian family and might therefore be sent to hell because of it. We would be fully informed persons about the risks involved. After all, this would be our lives! We're sentient conscious moral beings. Why wouldn't God give us a choice in the matter? It's unethical for him not to do so. It would be a Pascal's Wager in heaven before being created on earth. If I were given that choice I would simply say "No, count me out! Put me out of existence now." That would be the reasonable thing to do if I became informed about the odds. Only a fool would choose otherwise. And yet here I am without my choice who apparently will be condemned to hell.
John Loftus is forgetting the scripture he claims to know. He seems to think that God capriciously puts people in situations where they could possibly end up in hell. This is exactly opposite from what the Bible says.
22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. 23 For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.
24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’[b] As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’[c]
29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.” - Acts 17:22-31
God tells us that he has placed us all in the circumstances where we can best find him, but does not promise that we will all find him. This explains how people who are not raised in Christian families can still find Jesus. I also always amazed by the attitude that says that we have opinions and rights that God should respect. Why? He made us. He is control. We don't know nearly as much as he does. Why should he listen to anything we have to say? We don't even know what we need or even how to pray. Compared to him we are not equals but more like unconscious clay. And he is the potter.
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[f]
16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? - Romans 9:14-24
Debunking Christianity: A New and Better Pascal's Wager: If God Asked You to Wager Before Being Born What Would You Choose?
The Philosophy of Ayn Rand Refuted - apologetics - blip.tv
The Philosophy of Ayn Rand Refuted - apologetics - blip.tv
Dealing with Bible Contradictions MP3 - Apologetics 315
Dealing With Contradictions
Dealing with Bible Contradictions MP3 - Apologetics 315
Debunking Christianity: Were the "Dark Ages" Really Dark?
I'm being taken to task for publishing a graph depicting the Medieval Ages as the "Dark Ages" leaving a huge gaping hole in Western history, which can be seen here. What some people failed to realize is the title to the post in which Augustinian Platonism shares a large part of the blame (no, it is not totally to blame). Augustine like Plato before him placed a much greater value on the heavenly world (the realm of the eternal "forms" or ideas) over the empirical earthly world.
Sure, that makes just as much sense as assuming that the material reality that we experience is all there is.
Christians in earlier centuries therefore destroyed many ancient manuscripts--science manuscripts--which were preserved by the Muslims. Who needs earthly wisdom? Paul basically said it was worthless. When people like Aquinas re-discovered these ancient texts it brought on a new awareness of what the ancients taught and helped bring in the Enlightenment.
Paul was not saying that earthly wisdom that was worthless is the same as science. He was talking about the kind of wisdom that says there is no God and that we are the standard or reality. Or you know the "wisdom" that says that we don't need God to explain the world? Yup, that kind of "wisdom". I'd like to know where does Paul say that science is worthless? Easy Answer: He didn't.
I remember visiting The Art Institute of Chicago and seeing a dramatic change in the art of the 1500's. Artists were now painting pictures of real people, and even ("aghast*) a bowl of fruit on a table! This came after they had thrown off the shackles of Augustinianism. This is undeniable.
Since when should Augustine (even great as he was) be considered a higher authority than the Bible. He didn't have things completely right. Who does? No one is perfect but Jesus and that is why we should follow him and no one else.
And yes, it was mainly the French philosophes who labeled these centuries the "Dark Ages." That was probably due to several reasons. Of Sir Isaac Newton it was said by Alexander Pope:
Nature and nature's laws lay hid in Night;Prior to Newton the previous centuries were considered the "Dark Ages" by comparison, and that too is undeniable.
God said, 'Let Newton be!' and all was light.
Do you know what else is undeniable. Newton was a Bible-believing Christian who loved Jesus and served him. Hmmmmmm. Curious. It was the fact that he believed there was a creator who made an understandable universe that lead him to his discoveries in Mathematics and Physics. Same thing with Galileo and Copernicus.
The French philosophes also thought the atrocities committed by the church in the previous centuries, like the Crusades, Inquisitions, and witch-hunts, were a very dark period in Western history, and I agree. Superstition like that reigned. If I was being brought into the light with a new awareness of the writings of the ancients, which helped Newton to write his Principia, I would describe it that way too, for all the same legitimate reasons.
The Bible can't be blamed for the atrocities and evil perpetrated by the Church. Those thing happened because people didn't follow the Bible.
I do understand that the church made many strides during that period of history in science, literature, and so forth. And so the huge drop-off represented by the graph is not indicative of that period of time. But I have been persuaded that it was a dark period of history, even if not completely dark.
And here we have Loftus backing away from slightly from the unfounded assumption he and the image makes. That during the Middle Ages in Europe they would have been further along had they not been Christian. According to this logic, why not embrace Islam if you think the Muslims made more scientific discoveries and were more advanced? Very flawed. Loftus wouldn't want to make such an equivocation. It's silly but we must ask why would you not if you think Christianity was the problem with Europe in the Middle Ages? It had way more to do with politics than what the Bible says. That was the problem.
Of course, anyone who thinks otherwise can volunteer to go back in time to that period and see what you think. Good luck with that! I'll stay in my own century thank you. ;-)
For further reading on the origins of science there is no better place to look than Richard Carrier's chapter in The Christian Delusion
.I'm not sure why anyone would think that to believe the Bible means turning your back on science. I agree that people do that, but it's not by necessity. If that is what you think that is what being a Christian is, you are doing it wrong and you have nothing in the Bible to stand on in doing it.
Debunking Christianity: Were the "Dark Ages" Really Dark?
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
History of Rosewood, Florida
Founding of Rosewood
Rosewood was established around 1870 in Levy County, Florida on a road leading to Cedar Key and the Gulf of Mexico. It took its name from the abundant red cedar that grew in the area. It prospered as the Florida Railroad established a small depot to handle the transport of cedar wood to the pencil factory in Cedar Key and the transportation of timber, turpentine rosin, citrus, vegetables, and cotton. In 1890 the cedar depleted and many of the white families moved to Sumner, three (3) miles west of Rosewood and worked at the newfound saw mill established by Cummer and Sons. By 1900 Rosewood had a black majority of citizens.
Rosewood Massacre
On the morning of January 1, 1923 Fannie Coleman Taylor of Sumner Florida, claimed she was assaulted by a black man. Although she was not seriously injured and was able to describe what happened she allegedly remained unconscious for several hours due to the shock of the incident. No one disputed her account and no questions were asked. It was assumed she was reporting the incident accurately.
Sarah Carrier a black woman from Rosewood, who did the laundry for Fannie Taylor and was present on the morning of the incident, claimed the man that assaulted Fannie Taylor was her white lover. It was believed the two lovers quarreled and he abused Fannie and left. However, in 1923 no one questioned Fannie Taylor's account and no one asked Sarah Carrier about the incident. The black community claimed Fannie Taylor was only protecting herself from scandal.
A posse was summoned and tracking dogs were ordered by James Taylor, Fannie Taylor’s husband and the foreman at Cummer and Sons saw mill. The local white community became aroused at the alleged abuse of a white woman by a black man, which was an unpardonable sin against black men back then to look at a white woman. James Taylor summoned help from Levy County and neighboring Alachua County, who was ending a staged Klu Klux Klan rally leading up to January 1, 1923, on the court house square in downtown Gainesville, where a large number of KKK members had been rallying and marching in opposition of justice for black people.
A telegraph sent to Gainesville in regards to Fannie Taylor’s allegations provoked four to five hundred Klansmen that headed to Sumner at the appeal of James Taylor. With reaping tension displayed they willingly accepted the invitation and came to Sumner with a vengeance to participate at any cost necessary. They arrived enraged and combed the woods behind the Taylor’s home looking for a suspect. Suspicion soon fell on Jesse Hunter an allegedly black man who had allegedly had recently escaped from a convict road gang. No proof of the escape was ever provided.
The posse confronted Sam Carter at his home and Carter allegedly admitted to helping Hunter escape. Allegedly the posse forced Carter to take them to the place where he last saw Hunter. Carter allegedly took the posse to where he parted ways with Hunter. When no trace of Hunter could be found the posse turned into an out of control lynch mob and tortured Carter, riddled him with bullets and hung him from a tree.
The posse continued their hunt in Rosewood. They found Aaron Carrier, cousin and friend, to Sam Carter, in bed at his Sarah Carrier’s house, yanked him out of bed, tied a rope around his neck and dragged him behind a Model “T” from Rosewood to Sumner. They tortured him, beat him with gun butts and kicked him until he lost consciousness before shooting him.
Levy County Sherriff Bob Walker aborted the shooting when he yelled, “Don’t, I’ll finish the “N” off. The magic “N” word saved Carrier’s life. The posse returned to Rosewood to hunt for Sylvester Carrier. Sheriff Walker threw Aaron Carrier in his Model “T” taking him to Gainesville, Alachua County jail and begged Sheriff James Ramsey to hide Carrier from the public and his family until tempers settled down and suggested he get medical help for him. Sheriff Ramsey brought in two local black doctors, Dr. Parker and Dr. Ayers to treat Carrier for six months unknowingly to the public and his family.
Fuming with anger because they had not found the attacker James Taylor sent Sylvester Carrier a message “We are coming to get you” the night of January 2nd, all hell broke loose in Rosewood when the mob returned with guns for a showdown, “to kill or be killed” because they were dissatisfied with the lack of success they anticipated. The mob formed a "party of citizens" to discuss how to investigate and accomplish their mission to find and silence Sylvester Carrier, who had become a lightning rod for their anger. Unbeknownst to the posse Sylvester Carrier took heed to the threats and made contact with his Levy County friends who bravely traveled to Rosewood to help avert the planned ambush of its citizens.
After dark the posse traveled to Rosewood prepared to kill or be killed. It had come down to Sylvester Carrier’s recruited men or the mob. The posse, intoxicated with moonshine and ignorance was met head-on with resistance and several were killed or injured, however, not accurately reported in the “all white” 1923 newspapers. When the gun battle ended the posse that was able to return to Sumner, did return, leaving behind their guns. Others lay dead and wounded in Sarah Carrier’s yard.
When the massacre ended that morning before dawn Sylvester Carrier’s friends returned to their homes as they came, quietly “the back way” and went to work at Sumner saw mill and other places of employment the next day as if nothing happened. They never spoke openly about the Rosewood Massacre.
The posse started firing upon arrival. Henry Andrews, an Otter Creek resident and C. Poly Wilkerson, a Sumner merchant were killed by Sylvester Carrier when they kicked in the door of his mother’s home, who they shot and killed through a window as she was walking through the house to quiet the children. Someone stationed in the house screamed, “Oh my God, Aunt Sarah’s been shot and Sylvester yelled, “SHOOT EVERYBODY, SHOOT!”
The posse realized too late they were encircled by resisting black men hiding in the dark pumping hails of lead to protect the Rosewood citizens, women and children, barricaded in the Carrier’s home. Hails of gun fire came from under the house, from behind the house and behind the barn. Hours later, the fight ended in a blood bath that surprised the surviving posse as they mosey back to Sumner in disbelief, pain, and shame.
The broken posse returned to Sumner to regroup and wait for Sheriff Walker, who they refused to listen to earlier, bring them an update. However, gun shots being fired in the air at Rosewood kept the posse at bay until the Sheriff was able to finalize the escape route for the Rosewood citizens. For sure guns belonging to the posse, dead and injured, were left in Rosewood and unaccounted for in Sumner. The sound of shots being fired in Rosewood signified that there was still life in Rosewood and the posse was not in a hurry to return risking more lives in defense of Fannie Taylor's horrific lies.
James Taylor sent the posse to Rosewood to participate in the attack on Rosewood citizens although he never left Sumner surviving all physical harm. The posse now sought Sheriff Bob Walker to inquire about Rosewood’s state of affairs but the Sheriff was too busy negotiating with the Cedar Key train conductors, the Bryce Brothers, on how to move the citizens out of Rosewood safely.
January 3rd, when the shotgun firing ceased some Rosewood citizens escaped into the swamp land under the cover of fear, hiding out and waiting for the train to come and bring them to safety. Other citizens hiding in Sarah Carrier’s house knew they had to leave their Rosewood homes before the posse returned, therefore, they fled to store merchant John Wright’s home unannounced as instructed by Sheriff Bob Walker. John Wright was in total shock to see his store customers arrived at his home seeking refuge. They were instructed to wait there in hiding until they heard back from the Sheriff who was traveling back and forth to Cedar Key, Sumner, and Rosewood in an effort to move them safely out of Rosewood on the 4 AM early morning train conducted by the Bryce Brothers from Bryceville, Fla.
Lexie Gordon sent her children to John Wright’s home for safekeeping although she was left in her home too ill to flee. When the posse returned to Rosewood days later to make an assessment of the damages they revengefully shot and killed her. Gordon’s home and other Rosewood homes were burglarized before burning them down.
James Carrier, an animal trapper, who had suffered a stroke a few years earlier was the husband to Amma Carrier, the father of Aaron Carrier, and brother-in-law to Sarah Carrier, was ordered to dig his own grave and was shot and killed because he knew nothing about what was happening in Rosewood when he returned from his animal traps deep down in the woods.
On Sunday morning the posse returned and one by one angrily burned the last remaking structures belonging to the black community. The homes were burned because they did not want the public to know the real truth, “more than two whites were killed.” Therefore, they burned the evidence, bodies and all. “Until the Lion tells his own story, the tale of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.”
Rosewood Aftermath
On February 12th, 1923 a special grand jury was empanelled to investigate the massacre. After twenty-five white and allegedly eight black witnesses testified the jurors reported that they could find no evidence on which to base any indictments.
The Black community of Rosewood never returned. Many left for other cities and counties losing touch with each other never sharing the Rosewood story with family members. And a number changed their names including Aaron and Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier, Rosewood’s historians and school teacher. She was born Mahulda Gussie Brown May 5, 1894, in Archer, Alachua County, Florida. She married Aaron Carrier December 19, 1917. After the Rosewood tragedy they moved more than fifteen times escaping accumulated fear. They changed their name to Aaron and Mahulda G. Carroll. They even changed their birth dates.
Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier/Carroll lived in fear until death April 25, 1948, Tampa, Florida at the Clara Frye hospital. Her name is listed “Mahulda G. Carroll” on her headstone.
The Real Rosewood Website owner, Lizzie Polly Robinson Brown Jenkins’, mother strongly encouraged her to preserve Rosewood history never forgetting her Rosewood sister, Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier/Carroll’s suffrage. At present, Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier-Carroll is remembered and featured in the 2000 Great Floridians Magazine. Her name is included in the script on the Rosewood Historic Marker. Her name and a photo of the historic marker is listed in the third edition of the Florida Black Heritage Trail. Carrier is also featured in a book, Alachua County Florida, marketed online by Florida Magazine. Jenkins’ Rosewood reconstructive research is dedicated to the Rosewood survivors and descendants in memory of Rosewood culture.
January 1, 2000, a plaque bearing Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier’s name hangs on the porch of the Archer Train Depot, the same depot Carrier exited January 4, 1923, driven by the Bryce Brothers.
Rosewood, a small majority black town in Levy County was destroyed by a vigilante posse in 1923. May 4, 1994. The Florida Legislature agreed to compensate the massacre’s survivors and descendants. Compensation disbursed to Aaron Carrier proven in-laws and Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier sister, Theresa Brown Robinson and brother, Richard Brown, sister-in-laws Queenie Jones Brown Monroe and Marie Brown Randle each received $3,333.33. Carrier niece Arbeaulah “Helen” Brown Porter Warmack and nephew Addison P. Brown, Jr., each received $1,616.16. Carrier nieces Elizabeth Crawford Mulligan and Bernice Crawford, niece-in-law Mabel Thomas Crawford and nephew Charlie Crawford each received $833.33, for a collective total of $19,900.96 paid to Aaron and Mahulda Gussie Brown Carrier family from the state of Florida compensation fund.
Ten years from the date of the signing of the Rosewood bill by Governor Lawton Chiles, Governor Jeb Bush dedicated a Historic Marker in Rosewood May 4, 2004, in memory of the Rosewood citizens. This is a historic compilation of Jenkins at work preserving Rosewood history, a promise she has lived up to in honor of her mother’s principles and recorded family history. This summary of Rosewood’s history is not research, it’s resource.
Their land was confiscated under tax sales and not until 1994 did the state or any public entity offer an apology or make any compensation.
Is there a Connection Between Jesus and Perseus?
According to the critic here, Perseus:
1) Had a god for a father.
Yes, his father was Zeus
2) Had a human virgin for a mother.
In some versions, this is true, though the details hardly match those of Mary. According to the legend, his mother was Danae, son of Acrisius. An oracle told Acrisius that his grandson would kill him, so he shut Danae in a bronze room or tower. Zeus came through the roof and sent a shower of gold into Danae's lap, which grew into Perseus.
5) Had his birth announced by a heavenly display.
I'm finding no reference to this for Perseus
Neither could I.
6) Had his birth announced by celestial music.
I'm finding no reference to this for Perseus (or for Jesus, for that matter).
Neither could I.
7) Was born about DEC-25
I can't find any sources giving any birth date for Perseus. And once again, Jesus wasn't born on Dec 25
8) Had an attempt on his life by a tyrant when he was still an infant.
Again, true. Again, not really comparable to Jesus. When Perseus' grandfather, Acrisius, found out that he existed, he locked Perseus and his mother in a trunk and set it adrift in the sea.
However it does sound like Moses. They must have stolen it, Moses came first.
9) Met with a violent death.
Depends on which version you read. In many versions, Perseus battles Dionysus. In some version, Dionysus slays Perseus. In others, Perseus slays Dionysus. In others, they slay each other. In others, neither is slain. Even in those in which he dies, the story doesn't match Jesus at all.
Although I would say Dionysus was demonic like the Devil, the Greeks did not see it that way. None of the Gospels don't match such convolution at all.
10) rose again from the dead.
Not in any version.
This is one of the main points. Jesus died but he didn't stay dead. Perseus did. I picked the images on this post because it was on the cross that Jesus won his greatest victory and juxtapose it with Perseus' greatest moment. Ask yourself what good is it to you if Perseus' story is true. What does it matter to you if Medusa was killed. But what about Jesus? Because of his victory, those who put their faith in Jesus we can have victory over sin and death. Jesus wins this one just like He always does.
UPDATE
Ryan Anderson wrote a comment prompting an update to this post. He claims that there is a reference to Perseus being resurrected and that it is likely that the Gospel writers were inspired by the Perseus myth.
Only one writer of the Gospels was a Gentile. There is no reason at all to think that Perseus inspired the Gospels in any way. Sure would like to see you prove otherwise, Ryan. In what ways are the Gospel accounts of Jesus similar to Perseus?
I looked up the reference you mentioned in "Proitos and Danae". I did find a reference in a book on page 300 entitled "Python: a study of Delphic myth and its origins" By Joseph Eddy Fontenrose. It's actually in Google Books at this link Fontenrose wrote that Persus came back from the darkness with the help of Hermes and Athena. He equates this resurrection. How is this Resurrection? Perseus did not die and return to life. Instead, he was on his quest so long that people thought he died. The writers of the Gospels said Jesus actually physically died and then rose again. This isn't the same thing.
I found another reference to Resurrection and Perseus. It is found at this link. The author makes a reference to Perseus' name meaning "breaker". The author ties this to Perseus freeing Andromeda from the chains she was bound to and calling them the chains of death - thus deriving resurrection as being freed from death. Of course to get this some serious gymnastics were used through Hebrew and Greek that can't be substantiated. For example Romans 16:3 is given as a reference where the Greek form Perses, or Perseus can be found and its alleged that it's related to the Hebrew word "peretz". When one looks at what Romans 16:3 says:
Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too. - Romans 16:3
I see nothing in the verse that says what the author says it does. I think that more and destroys the author's argument that Perseus' experience has anything to do with resurrection.
There is another link I have seen at the link at Hero's Journey. However, it does not help make the case of proving that Perseus was resurrected.
If Ryan Anderson,or anyone, is willing to make an argument proving that the Gospel account comes from Perseus life, I'd like to see it. Any takers?
Links:
Pre-Christian Sources:
Apollodorus on Perseus (2nd century B.C.)
Ovid, "Perseus And Atlas" (Late 1st century B.C. or early 1st century A.D.)
Sources
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blgrk_heroes05.htm
http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/JesusPerseus.html
http://www.gods-heros-myth.com/godpages/perseus.html
The Dunamis Word: Calling The Community From Death To Life
The Dunamis Word: Calling The Community From Death To Life
Ten Presuppositions of Science - Apologetics 315
Here is a list of some of the presuppositions of science:The one presupposition that I can't fully agree with is number 6 because sin greatly diminishes our cognitive abilities to understand truth. And given that our sensory faculties are woefully inadequate because all of our senses can be fooled or give false information - relying on them 100% to determine truth is extremely problematic.
(1) the existence of a theory-independent, external world;
(2) the orderly nature of the external world;
(3) the knowability of the external world;
(4) the existence of truth;
(5) the laws of logic;
(6) the reliability of our cognitive and sensory faculties to serve as truth gatherers and as a source of justified true beliefs in our intellectual environment;
(7) the adequacy of language to describe the world;
(8) the existence of values used in science (e.g., "test theories fairly and report test results honestly");
(9) the uniformity of nature and induction;
(10) the existence of numbers.1
Ten Presuppositions of Science - Apologetics 315
Reasons To Believe - Were Hominids Human?
Were hominids human? (3:03)
Video Question and Answers | Reasons To Believe
Monday, February 28, 2011
FacePalm of the Day #61 - Debunking Christianity: William Lane Craig on Middle Knowledge and Hell
When it comes to foreknowing our future, Craig argues that God has Middle Knowledge such that he knows “what every possible creature would do under any possible circumstances,” “prior to any determination of the divine will.”[1] So despite his protestations to the contrary isn’t it obvious that if Craig’s God has this kind of foreknowledge he could simply foreknow who would not accept his offered salvation before they were even created, and then never create them in the first place? If he did that “hotel hell” would never have even one occupant. Why not?
This is one of the problems I have with Craig's understanding of God's foreknowledge. It presupposes that God's only purpose in creating humanity is filling heaven with the most number of people possible without violating anyone's free will. I don't see that in the Bible at all. By our own will, we all deserve hell and its in God turning our hearts and freeing our minds from being enslaved to sin that we are saved. The human will is not all powerful - God is. He alone deserves all glory and I see nothing in scripture that leads me down the road to thinking that God is more concerned with what I want or think than He is in fulfilling His purposes. All of this considered - God creates everyone because He has a purpose in that although knowing that some people are going to end up in Hell. I agree with the definition of Middle Knowledge Loftus gives and that is why I reject it.
In question #202 at Reasonable Faith Dr. Craig tries to answer this type of problem:
Question 202:
Dr. Craig,
"How can God be considered Wholly Good, when he knowingly created the angels, the universe, and humanity, knowing that hell would be a requirement for such a world, and also knowing that a majority of people would be condemned to it for all eternity?" I believe this objection is valid because even if someone is condemned to hell as a result of their own free will, the fact is that God using his middle knowledge already knew that person would freely choose to go against God, and thus would be condemned to hell but created the person/world/hell anyway. The fate is so terrible, and the number of people who would be condemned is so high, that in my view, the only moral choice would be to either not create the universe/humanity, or not to create humanity with Free Will. --John
Dr. Craig responds:What Bill is doing here is simply saying that in order to keep one's faith in the midst of an "overwhelming defeater" then all that believers have to do is reinvent what they believe. Just jettison this or that doctrine and the cognitive dissonance will be gone. But by all means keep believing. This is exactly why Christianity has survived down through the centuries. Believers just reinvent it in every generation. Then the reinvented faith becomes the new orthodoxy. So Bill is giving this guy named John permission to do so. Forget truth at that point. Just do a little dance. Gerrymander away the problem. Do it as often as you need to in order to believe.
Yours is a thoughtful and difficult question, John….But let’s press harder. Suppose the worst case scenario. What would the objection, if fully successful, require you to give up? The existence of God? The resurrection of Jesus? Hardly! It would seem to require you to give up biblical inerrancy, at least with respect to the reality of hell. That would be jarring, but it’s no reason to commit apostasy!
But maybe it wouldn’t even require that much. As you say, you could always adopt annihilationism, as some evangelical Christians have done. That would seem to solve your problem.
But suppose you think annihilationism is not the correct interpretation of the New Testament with respect to hell. What then? Well, notice that the objection presupposes the doctrine of middle knowledge. For it assumes that logically prior to God’s creative decree, He knew what any person would freely do in response to His grace. If He lacks such knowledge, then the objection can’t even get off the ground. And it hardly needs to be said that middle knowledge is a hotly debated doctrine that is not incumbent upon the biblically faithful Christian. So you can completely avoid the objection just by denying middle knowledge. I hope you’re beginning to breathe easier.I've
How do we know for sure that more people will end up in hell than in heaven? People are saved by putting their faith in how much of the salvation plan they have had revealed to them. Today we have more of the pieces than Abraham or anyone in the Old Testament had. And Isaiah had more of the larger picture than Abraham did. We are accountable for accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior because we know. They will be with us in Heaven because they believed that God would make atonement for them. They didn't know the name of the Messiah, only the One was to come. What will the Canaanite who lived while Israel was enslaved in Egypt be responsible for believing and accepting (or anyone for that matter)? Whatever God holds them accountable for. The Bible is clear. And as for the people who didn't have the Bible they have creation and their consciousness. God would be in his rights if he only held some people accountable for those. That is not you or me today because we do have the Bible and we have had Jesus revealed to us. We must keep in mind that God would have been within his rights to save no one. He was within his rights to have chosen to annihilate everyone or send everyone who ever exists to hell. It was up to Him. He owes us nothing. We owe Him.
I've never heard William Lane Craig endorse annihilationism but I have never heard him condemn the idea as unbiblical. And it is grossly unbiblical. Loftus is indeed correct that some people are willing to water-down scripture and "re-invent" doctrine every generation. I'm not. It truly does come down to living a holy life or going to hell. Your soul/mind will survive your death and you will either find yourself with God forever or forever separated from God. There is no middle ground. It doesn't take changing the message to believe. You can believe what the Bible says. It hasn't changed.
That being said he does attempt to answer John's question:
But suppose you think, as I do, that God has middle knowledge. Here my response, as you note, is that those who would freely reject God’s love and forgiveness and His every effort to save them and so damn themselves forever, against His will, should not be allowed to have a veto power over God’s creating a world in which multitudes of other people freely accept His grace and are saved. Why should the blessedness and joy of those who would be saved be prevented by what evil and intransigent people would freely do? Why should they be allowed to prevent an incommensurable good?There's more to his answer of course, it's just that I cannot chase all of his claims down the apologist's rabbit hole right now. Let it suffice to say that he's has a very selfish perspective here. Christians are themselves quite selfish when it comes to heaven. All they care about is that they get in. It doesn't matter much if others don't. While they might try evangelizing a few times in their lives the only thing that matters is that they get into heaven regardless of whether or not their family, friends and co-workers do.
Your response is that unbelievers “did not ask to be created, and had they been presented with the stark choice of Non-Existence and Eternal Conscious Torture they would undoubtedly choose Non-Existence.” This response seems to miss the thrust of my answer. Of course, the damned would prefer not to have been created! Obviously! But my question is why such persons’ freely rejecting God should be allowed to prevent the blessedness and joy of those who would freely accept God’s salvation? These people shouldn’t be privileged over those who would love and want God.
John Loftus still seems to think that God should care what we think. It's true that many people would rather choose non-existence rather than eternal torture or serving and loving God. So What? We didn't get a vote. He is the potter. We are his clay. Don't like it? Tough. People who love God want what God wants. We want more than to just for us to make it in. We know we don't deserve it and want as many people as possible to turn from their sin and be with God because it only then that a human being is truly free. That is why we must tell everyone and leave it to God as to how and when they respond.
It's not whether non-believers would prefer non-existence to an eternal suffering in hell. It's that agape loving Christians should prefer non-existence rather than knowing their family, friends and co-workers will end up in an eternal hell.
John Loftus does not really know what Agape means. It is the kind of Love that gives what is needed even if it's not wanted or deserved. It does not mean that you get everything you want on your own terms. God wants what is best for us, yes. It's stupid to think that you know what that is better than He does. It's also stupid to think that you can get away with ignoring Him when atoms obeys His Commands. We deserve hell and if you go to Heaven its because of Grace and Mercy through faith that God gives you/
Caring Christians themselves should all rise up as one and demand an answer for why God created this world at all knowing so many people would end up in hell. If I were a Christian I would protest God for creating this world even if I ended up in heaven. I would rather that God never created anything at all than for him to create this world, if my family, friends and co-workers were to wind up in hell along with billions of other people. If I were a selfless agape loving Christian I would gladly have preferred non-existence than an existence in heaven for me knowing the eternal sufferings of so many others in hell. That's selfless agape love. Christians do not have it and neither does their God if he created this world on the backs of the screams of billions of people in an eternal hell.
Christians should know that clay doesn't talk back to the potter. I'm grateful that God would allow me to go to Heaven. It's not like those who end up in hell wanted to be saved and God said "No." Loves requires responsibility. You can't just live any kind of way on your own terms and then cry foul when God punishes you for doing what you wanted to do. People like Loftus have reality backward. We are supposed to serve God. God does not serve us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] William Lane Craig, “Middle Knowledge, A Calvinist-Arminian Rapprochement,” in The Grace of God, The Will of Man, ed. Clark H. Pinnock (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1989), pp:141-164.
Debunking Christianity: William Lane Craig on Middle Knowledge and Hell
My Common Sense is Tingling - Debunking Christianity: Quote of the Day, One More Time
In my world miracles like virgin births and resurrections do not happen. What world do you live in? If they do not happen now then they did not happen in the ancient past either. And that's how historians must view the evidence. Yesterday's evidence has lost all of its power to convince. We do not believe in miracle claims in today's world and we live in this world. So how much more so is it the case that we cannot believe they took place in the ancient past! We can interview people in today's world and we still don't believe they happened. How much more so is this the case in the ancient past where we cannot interview the people involved! The overwhelming numbers of Jews in the days of Jesus did not believe he resurrected even though they believed in a miracle working God named Yahweh and the Old Testament. How much more so then is it the case in our world that we cannot believe when miracles are supposed to establish that Yahweh did a particular miracle in the past! Again, if they do not happen in our day then they did not happen in the past either. What world are YOU living in?
When people say something like this, I wonder if they ever look past their own nose. I think that classifying everything you don't understand as a miracle is overkill and not realistic but it is just as stupid as saying miracles never happen. I know people who have been healed of cancer. I know people who have miraculously spared death and seen the hand of God intervene in my life and the lives of others. Just because John Loftus has not consciously experienced the hand of God intervening is his life and has been blind to God's intervention in the world around him - partly because he thinks God should behave and act in particular ways - does not mean that God does not exist or worse is indifferent to the sufferings and needs of people today. That simply isn't true. It's offensive to suggest that if you think that God still intervenes today (or ever) that one is not living in reality. This isn't true either. Loftus talks as if he can prove that God does not act today and therefore assume that he never has and then prove that he does not exist at all. This is totally silly and rests on presupposition he can't prove in the slightest.
Debunking Christianity: Quote of the Day, One More Time
A.J. Ayer, a prominent skeptic's beliefs challenged by NDE
I saw a Divine Being. I'm afraid I'm going to have to revise all my various books and opinions.I suggest reading the following list of links to learn more about the man and his NDE
A.J. Ayer, a prominent skeptic's beliefs challenged by NDE
“Did atheist philosopher see God when he ‘died’?” by William Cash
Wikiquote - Alfred Jules Ayer
And here is the article written by Ayer himself about what he experienced when he died.
Apologist Interview: Craig Blomberg - Apologetics 315
Apologist Interview: Craig Blomberg - Apologetics 315
Reasons To Believe - Did Humans and Dinosaurs Live Simultaneously
Did dinosaurs and humans live at the same time? (10:18)
Video Question and Answers | Reasons To Believe
Sunday, February 27, 2011
This Week's MCTS Video...I Think There is Only One More to Come!
This Week's MCTS Video...I Think There is Only One More to Come!
Sunday Quote: Allan Sandage on Design - Apologetics 315
Brian Auten posted the following on his blog at Apologetics 315. I totally agree with Dr. Sandage.
"The world is too complicated in all its parts and interconnections to be due to chance alone. I am convinced that the existence of life with all its order in each of its organisms is simply too well put together. Each part of a living thing depends on all its other parts to function. How does each part know? How is each part specified at conception? The more one learns of biochemistry the more unbelievable it becomes unless there is some type of organizing principle - an architect for believers."
- Allan Sandage, "A Scientist Reflects on Religious Belief"
Sunday Quote: Allan Sandage on Design - Apologetics 315
- Allan Sandage, "A Scientist Reflects on Religious Belief"
Sunday Quote: Allan Sandage on Design - Apologetics 315
Answering Muslims: Trinity or Tawheed?
Answering Muslims: Trinity or Tawheed?
Reasons To Believe - Does human genetic evidence support Noah's flood?
Image via WikipediaDr Fazale Rana gives an answer as to if there is any human genetic evidence for the Flood. It's an interesting answer.
Does human genetic evidence support Noah's flood? (4:08)
Video Question and Answers | Reasons To Believe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)