William Lane Craig Utterly Pwned

[devogue]

Take the time to read this:

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/New ... le&id=5767

and then this scorching analysis...

http://www.alternet.org/belief/150742/o ... age=entire

[Geoff]

Thanks for that , Dev - two contrasting but excellent reads (for different reasons!)

[klr]

According to WLC:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

2. Objective moral values do exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

WTF? I mean, seriously ...

[egbert]

As long as God gives the thumbs-up, it's okay to slaughter babies and children. Craig said -- not essentially, not as a paraphrase, but literally, in quotable words -- "the death of these children was actually their salvation."

http://www.alternet.org/belief/150742/o ... age=entire

Then why are many (most?) Christians so opposed to abortion? The (unborn) child is spared the suffering of childhood diseases, teething, diaper rash, and, having never had a chance to sin, is guaranteed entry to heaven! What greater gift could a mother give her child?

[Tero]

Wow there is proof of God everywhere! The beautiful flowers!

[Hermit]

Apologia along the lines produced by Craig are as common as muck. When, Arnaud, the Cistercian abbot-commander took the city of Béziers during the crusade against the heretical Cathars in 1209, and ordered the killing of everyone within it, he was asked if the catholics within the city should be massacred as well, he replied: "Kill them all, the Lord will recognise His own." The job done, he reported to Pope Innocent III (ironic name, given the issue, huh?) "Today your Holiness, twenty thousand heretics were put to the sword, regardless of rank, age, or sex."

That was a long time ago, but the sentiment is still very much alive today. Every time a disaster - natural or human - occurs, people ask why god allowed it, and every time other people reply that god is punishing us for our sins. The follow-up question regarding the death of thousands of innocents (of any age, and including babies) invariably gets a shrug: "Who are we to question god's wisdom? Anyway, the innocent go straight to heaven, so their deaths don't matter in the grand scheme of things."

[Sisifo]

2.720 words... Do you really need 2.720 words to address the imbecility of the original article? Do you need 7 pages to make a point?

If anybody working for me would give me a 7 pages file to highlight a point, I would throw them back with the demand of rolling them and shoving the bulk up their asses.

These mania of self appointed internet pundits of expressing opinions like if they were masters of oratory addressing the Roman Senate is becoming unsupportably boring.

I miss professional writers in atheism. Too many children on their toes playing the enlightener guru.

[Hermit]

Mine went for 186 words. Pass?

[Sisifo]

Mine went for 186 words. Pass?

It is a good example of my point. Your answer was a fast and sharp slap much better than the verbal onanism of the other guy.

[charlou]

Some people just like to bloviate.



















Yes, I learned a new word today

[Rob]

Some people just like to bloviate.



















Yes, I learned a new word today

Learned or created? If you didn't create it then I also have just learned a new word.

[charlou]

Take your pick, Rob: bloviate




Someone used it elsewhere and I, too, wondered to myself if they'd made it up ... It's almost onomatopoeiaic, isn't it?

[Sisifo]

Some people just like to bloviate.

Yes, I learned a new word today

beautiful word. I want Ratz to issue the "Bloviator of the month" prize.

[Feck]

Now, progressive and moderate believers usually go the cherry-picking route. But that requires its own contortions. Once you acknowledge that your holy books really aren't that holy, once you admit that they have moral as well as factual errors, then you have to start asking why any of it is special, why any of it should be treated any differently from any other flawed books of history or philosophy. You have to start asking why -- since your religion's holy books are just as screwed-up as every other religion's -- your religion is still somehow the right one, and all other religions are mistaken. You have to start asking how you know which parts of your holy book are right and which parts are wrong -- and how you know that people who disagree with you, who've picked the exact opposite cherries from the ones you've picked, who feel their faith in their hearts exactly as much as you do, have somehow gotten it terribly wrong. You have to start asking how you know the things you know. And to do that, and still maintain religious faith, requires its own contorted thinking, its own denial of reality, its own sticking of one's fingers in one's ears and chanting, "I can't hear you! I can't hear you!"