651. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171737 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 6:29 pm

I love Monty Python's International Philosophy!

652. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171735 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 6:28 pm

Yes, I did - thought I'd link to it again (for those who haven't seen it)

I also linked to the "Brain in a vat at the wheel of a runway trolley":
http://www.mindspring.com/~mfpatton/Tissues.htm


But did I link to the Philosophical Light-Bulb jokes?
http://consc.net/misc/lightbulb.html

653. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171732 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 6:25 pm

I hate the discrimination against asian motorcycles... Harley's used to be motorcycles that were loved because they were such crap that you HAD to tend to them so much.

The Aquila is wonderful. Much better than all their earlier stuff. It could be better - but where is this not true? I love it.

654. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171728 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 6:20 pm

Indeed, classic stuff!

More classic stuff (a bit more "in-joke"y though):

Proofs that P

More Proofs that P

Still More Proofs that P

Causes of Death of Philosophers

(including such classics as "Quine: Became the value of a free variable" and "Kant: Found the means to his own end")

A Non-Philosopher's Guide to Philosophical Terms
(absolutely brilliant!)

655. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171719 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Quine,

here's your action figure:

http://www.geocities.com/krinklyman2/quine.html

656. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171715 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 6:00 pm

Guys, have a look at this. Wonderfully hilarious!

Philosophical Action-Figures

657. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171712 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:54 pm

Kim's supervenience-theory is interesting... it's almost strict materialism, but not quite.. or rather I don't know how to categorize it.

658. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171709 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:53 pm

Great, you beat an 8-year old! Huzzah!

Karda,

Hyosung GV 650 Aquila ... known in the US as "Avitar" . Middle-class, as I said. Digital display, 90 ° V-2 with 72 Horsepower, 1,7 metre wheelbase (5.58 feet), 61.6 NM Torque at 7500 RPM, toothed drive belt, 218 kg weight (empty tank), 69 cm saddle-height (27,16 inch), total length 2.35 m (7.71 feet).

659. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171707 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:46 pm

That's why I like talking to Kardashovel. :)

Oh I don't know. His hypotheses make for interesting sci-fi, but not philosophy - I find Heidegger's views challenging and philosophically interesting... Karda? Nice Sci-Fi, as I said :)

660. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171701 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:40 pm

Geoff,

about 7.000 Euros new (in Germany). Significantly more than 5.000 USD at the current rate of exchange - but still only about half to 2/3 of the price of anything comparable.

661. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171697 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:31 pm

Someone closed it.
_____________________

And more people reading it wouldn't be enough...more people being educated in enlightenment, taught the value and necessity of enlightenment and given the freedom and ability to make use of it - that's what has to happen.

662. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171693 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:28 pm

Has anybody seen Mel Brooks' 'History of the World. Part I'?

Of course I have... some parts are truly wonderful. I laughed so hard at this I nearly cried.

Also, "The inquisition... what a show... the inquisition, here we go... we know you're wishin'... that we go awaaaa-aa-aa-aay... but the inquisition's here and it's here to - Hey, Torquemada, whaddaya say? - I've just come back from an autodafe! -"Autodafe"? What's an autodafe? - It's what you ought not to do but you do anyway..."

:)

And of course moses parting the red sea... brilliant... and then "I bring you these 15 comm.. *CRACK* Ten, I bring you these 10 commandments!"

663. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171691 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:25 pm

I think the thing with Hume is, he was more of a genial, outgoing guy. Kant seems to have been austere and only concerned with philosophy.
Hume traveled far and wide whereas I believe that Kant never left Koeningsberg[sic]....Probably another reason I like Hume more. Bit of an adventurer.....

You're absolutely right. But I don't mind that he didn't leave Königsberg and was solely concerned with philosophy.

We read and discussed the beginning of Kants "What is enlightenment" in 10th grade - it was an epiphany for me I have to say. A pamphlet for the best cause there is more than a philosophical treatise, but I subscribe to it entirely.

There is no German-teacher or Philosophy-teacher at German schools who cannot quote the beginning from heart:

Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's understanding without guidance from another. Immaturity is self-imposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude! [dare to know] "Have courage to use your own understanding!"--that is the motto of enlightenment.

And whoosh... there go religion and superstition in general :)

Here is the entire text:

http://www.english.upenn.edu/~mgamer/Etexts/kant.html

664. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171687 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:20 pm

How does a philosopher earn his money? Depends on the work he does. As a teacher in philosophy at university by being a good teacher and by making philosophical investigations of his own that hold up to scrutiny and peer-review - just like a scientist.

But many companies do seek graduates of the humanities, because they tend to be more apt at thinking outside of the box than economists. Also, there are companies who face up to their ethical duty, and hire people who deal with business ethics for example.

Or as speech writers, or as PR people - since they tend to be good with words and are usually very good at constructing and analyzing arguments etc.

665. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171684 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:15 pm

This and my desktop PC are the two things I just had to have. I'm not rich, not at all... actually, this bike is rather inexpensive. Far less expensive than anything in the ballpark.

Heidegger? Interesting, but I can't seem to find a lot of logical arguments. A lot of assumptions and meta-ontological speculation though - intersting for sure. But as I said, my field is analytic philosophy.

Kant or Hume? I'd say Kant was far more brilliant in terms of intellect, (and he could spot a flawed argument from miles away as well) but Hume had more verve and got more things right in my opinion. Although Kant had vastly more depth, Hume conforms more to my position of materialism :)

666. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171675 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:05 pm

Or as Douglas Adams said:

"I love deadlines. Especially the whooshing-sound they make as they fly by."

And I love motorcycles... this is a picture of the model I own:



Okay, not quite - mine has a sissybar.

72 Horsepower
1,7 metres wheelbase
A flagship among the middle-class ccm

667. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171672 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 5:01 pm

Steve, - try Kant or Hegel. The patterns and modes of thought are so unfamiliar (at least to most people) that it's very hard to wrap your head around it. If you can just let Kant's thinking "flow" without having to work hard to understand it - you are unique :)

While I think Hegel got it mostly wrong, Kant was absolutely brilliant, although I do not agree with many of his hypotheses... but his thoughts on the "copernican revolution" in epistemology, his ethical thinking and his destruction of the proofs for God's existence were absolutely brilliant.

668. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171665 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:56 pm

I always do all my revision in the week or so before exams. I always start out with good intentions to study each week. But then I get a hangover, or work, or an interesting book comes along, or bugger me I have a short attention span and can't apply myself, but weekends are about relaxing aren't they?.....

...Don't remind me. I'm almost the same. I don't have a short attention span, but I have this problem that I almost never work without some pressure.

As the saying goes

I have a motivational problem until I have a deadline-problem... no, scratch that. I have a motivational problem even when I have a deadline-problem.

669. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171661 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:52 pm

Nah, Brian - not really. Most philosophy isn't something where you need 1-3 minutes to read, understand and judge a page. Of course it depends on preferences, experience experience in the field and clarity of writing- but when I'm unfamiliar with the topic a philosopher is going on about, a page might take me up to 20 minutes. Kant of Hegel for example... Philosophers have spent decades with the Critique of Pure Reason alone - or with Phenomenology of Spirit. Mackie was fairly easy to read for me because his writing is very clear and because I had thought about the topic he addresses in "Ethics" and "The Miracle of Theism" for some time. The first time I read some of the essays in the Knowledge-compendium by Bernecker and Dretske - it took me very long. But it was a most rewarding experience.

Not having read anything in philosophical epistemology (except for Popper's "Objective Knowledge" at 19) it was amazing. I read the first paper and thought "Wow, that sounds like a very good theory, I think I can subscribe to that"... then I read the second paper, criticizing the first and offering a different theory and I thought "Yes, of course, why didn't I see that. The first theory is inadequate - this one will do nicely"... you can imagine where this is going :)

It was, frankly, one of the most enlightening philosophical experiences I've had.

You're not alone... but Steve really is fast :)

670. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171643 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:37 pm

Thanks for the Torchwood spoiler, Steve... grrr :)

Lately I haven come to like Dr. Who and Torchwood to some extent... but I was a little taken aback by the immense kitsch and all the bad sci-fi clichés. The elements of self-irony are great - but all in all the monsters, the plots and the topics covered are, in my opinion, somewhat "immature"... I guess I'm just used to the serious ethical and political dilemmata, the almost philosophical discussions etc of Star Trek (most of it in TNG).

Still, I have come to like it for what it is - entertainment. But since the old episodes aren't aired here, and only the 2005-2008 series were aired for a while (and I hate watching any British/US series dubbed).
I have to dig up the episodes on the net... tedious to say the least.

671. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171631 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:26 pm

Good idea Steve, looking forward to it.

672. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171630 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:25 pm

Karda,

not what I define as "sufficiently similar to the Christian, Jewish and Muslim conception of God".
To the concepts I was referring to, "impossible" does apply.
:)

Still, concerning your conception,

Impossible: Cannot judge that. Not logically as far as I can see, but that is a provisional judgment. And factually impossible? Cannot judge that - I'll leave that to physicists.

Improbable: Numerous other explanations for the phenomena are more parsimonious and more probable in general, with far greater epistemic justification.

... but you already knew that I would say this :)

673. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171622 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:17 pm

Pray do so... or rather don't pray... feel free to do so. However, I have to say that while I am familiar with his position and have read some of his papers, I haven't read that particular book... If you still think I could be of service, I would be glad to do so...


How's the procrastination on the Tennant-debate coming along? :P Just kidding.

674. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171617 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:12 pm

And concerning that article - I am one third laughing, one third sad and one third afraid.

675. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171615 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:07 pm

Decius,

I didn't say all of them. I live in Germany, where Christianity (while still nominally encompassing about 66-70% of the population) is very moderate. Most theists I have met were entirely amicable - their tacit beliefs and some of their explicit beliefs aren't... but they usually do their best to ignore or attempt to explain away the dogma that is disgusting. Except for childhood indoctrination...

Anyway, I am perfectly aware that there are some with which I could not be friends, or have respect for as social agents (but still as human beings).

Steve,
indeed - but you forgot three attributes: "personal, transcendent (non-physical), interventionist" :)

676. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171612 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 4:02 pm

Karda,

yes I did, although I must confess that I wasn't paying much attention.

Splitters? Who? The Popular Front? Definitely! The Judean People's Front? Certainly! The People's Front of Judea? Absolutely!.... wait...

677. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171605 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 3:50 pm

My my, I'm away for a few hours... and so much happened.

the way Dawkins and many others treat is that religion is evil, god CANNOT exist and all theists are deluded and less intelligent than atheists.

I'm sure you know the saying "hate the sin, love the sinner"... well, I am a strong atheist and an anti-theist. I do think religion and superstition in general are probably the greatest scourges of mankind. I am certain that any concept of god sufficiently similar to that of Judaism, Islam and Christianity cannot have a real referent, ie that such a god cannot exist. Theism is logically incoherent. Many arguments for the impossibility of god exist, and many do for the improbability of god, even if such an entity were possible.

That doesn't mean that I despise any theist just because he's a theist, or think that he's evil. Not at all. Belief without sufficient epistemic justification is irrational, dangerous and should be discouraged. Dogma is always a discouragement of individual thought and dissent, the claim to absolute, irrevocable knowledge - yet without any evidence. It suppresses freedom of thought, liberty of conscience and a real search for the truth. Index Librorum Prohibitorum ring a bell?

I also find religious indoctrination of children unable to give their informed consent evil, because it limits the child's ability to fully recognize and make use of their freedom of thought, liberty of conscience and in extension freedom of religion - that's what the doctrine of hell is all about. But it's not just that - I could go on and on about this.
Not to mention practices such as refusing medical treatment for one's children for religious reasons and so on and so forth.

Yes, religion is a scourge and god is impossible as well as improbable even if he wasn't impossible. But that doesn't mean I cannot be friends with theists, respect them or have rational, amicable discussions with them. I have done so all my life.

678. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171189 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 10:58 am

Off to catch my train to Munich guys - be on again in about 5 hours I guess... that is if I'm not firmly asleep by then.

Bye.

679. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171170 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 10:48 am

work for the federal government

Now I'm feeling slightly sick.

680. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171161 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 10:43 am

What do liberals know about war? Well, many of us know that it's a terrible thing best to be avoided - and that uncritically joining a military - out of nationalism - whose leaders might send you into an unjust war is not exactly moral behaviour.

I will hope one day one will not be able to use it for homoerotic reasons.

Will you? You called us Nazis? Pot - Kettle!

681. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171137 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 10:29 am

Oh boy - and we thought remnant was an idiot?

This guy doesn't even get that atheists don't believe in the actuality of any fictional characters, including satan... and that satanists are those who believe in and worship that particular fictional character.

Let's see - an idiot, probably a worshipper of a genocidal, megalomaniacal, infanticidal, filicidal, torturing, homophobic celestial dictator, a homophobe, a nationalist... and did I say idiot?

Please stay - you're a prime example of why we're right.

682. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171123 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 10:22 am

Oh if a man voices his opinion he's a troll?

If a man comes on here insulting people, showing a hatred of homosexuals, calling people Nazis, not advancing arguments, instead only interested in provocation... yep, that qualifies as a troll.

You are given a chance to correct yourself, apologise and engage in debate. Please do so. If you cannot or do not want to, you will have to live with the label of "troll". And people on here will ignore you. Capable of rational debate? Show it. Otherwise, I'm sure irate has a word just for you.

683. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171109 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 10:14 am

I don't pray for satanists! And our proud forefathers didn't die so a fag like star spangled eagle could drape the flag like a fagrobe.

My goodness, ignorant of Stephen Colbert to boot...
The troll button is there, and I think I'm going to use it... together with the offensive button.

Morally challanged did I say? I have to correct myself - you show a disgusting character.

684. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171106 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 10:12 am

So phatbat, do you think your grandma is wormfood or in hell?

Speaking for myself - everything we know and can rationally assume is that my grandmother is no more. What remains is the impact she made on the lives of many people, the love and warmth she gave. It is not she that is wormfood - because her brain has completely ceased to work.

As for "or in hell"... you are seriously morally challanged (aside from being grammatically, orthographically and in general intellectually challanged).

685. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171082 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 9:54 am

Karda,

When this compound of beliefs is tacitly affirmed withou being given much thought, I agree. But when it is explicitly affirmed as just in a society whose moral standards are in obvious contrast with this, I stand by my comment above.

686. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171063 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 9:33 am

A deluded person actually worshipping (the idea of) a god that tortures people for all eternity who don't obey him, and proclaiming themselves to be moral... that is disgusting, and deserves contempt.

Doesn't mean that one should not try to get them to abandom this belief, ie to correct them... but compound of believs (god sends people to hell, god is loving and just, the believer is a moral person) is itself despicable and entirely immoral.

... this is only slightly different from the compound of beliefs (Hitler sends people to extermination camps, Hitler is a just and honorable leader doing the right thing, the believer in this is a moral person). The difference is that what Hitler did doesn't measure up against the crimes of this (idea of) God.

So it does deserve contempt and correction.

687. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #171020 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 8:41 am

Thanks to all of you!

I'd much rather trust a native German than you....

Really? Then I'm glad to be of service - here you are:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2488,Open-Letter-to-a-victim-of-Ben-Steins-lying-propaganda,Richard-Dawkins,page5#165318

688. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #170981 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 8:02 am

Thanks, Karda and Philip.

I am okay - it hurts now and then, but at least her suffering has finally had an end... I just hope my father will be okay. When my grandfather died in 2006, and he went up to his bed to say goodbye before the hearse came was the first time I saw him cry in my entire life. Taking into account that he was much closer to his mother thant to his father, I'm somewhat worried. But then, he too sees it like I do... finally no more suffering.

Anyway, thanks.

689. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #170964 by MPhil on April 28, 2008 at 7:29 am

While this is now already ancient past (more than a page back), I just wanted to say this:

How is it that rates of depression, violent crimes, teenage pregnancies, and STI/STD's have risen dramatically since prayer was taken out of school? Richard Dawkins, you will bow to your Creator someday; that is a fact. I hope you face it before you die.
"that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father"

Four fallacies in a single insane rant: Post hoc ergo propter hoc, ad baculo, unstated major premise, bare assertion fallacy.

Exactly. And showing an utterly indecent, immoral character to boot.

Example:
I've just come from my grandmother's funeral. I have loved her dearly, she was a very kind and loving woman who has done nothing but good in her life. She had to suffer a lot. Her family was driven away from their home for many generations by the french after WWII, her father lost his buiseness and they were re-settled here in this town. She lost her third son shortly after his birth, but raised my father and his brother in a very loving and caring manner. I have practically spent more time with her than with my parents when I was small, and she was one of the most wonderful people I've ever met - the perfect grandmother.

Her last few years were filled with pain, as she suffered several strokes over the last years. First she lost the ability to walk, but regained it to a degree. Then, in January 2006 her husband died. One night she fell out of bed, hit her head and had another stroke - and lay on the floor of her bedroom in her house all alone calling for her sons until she was found in the early morning.
That stroke destroyed some of her cognitive ability and most of her ability to walk. She had to move in to a home for the aged, since neither my parents nor my uncle had the means to take care of her. There, her condition deteriorated constantly... at the beginning she could speak, walk a few steps and was always happy to see us. At the end she barely said a word, and we didn't know if she recognized us. She had to be moved to the hospital - just stared at the ceiling for most of the time.

Saturday last week I went to see her in the hospital. We were told that it could be any day now. I talked to her, tended to her and then said goodbye.
Monday she died - and now, a week later, was her funeral.

She wasn't religious, left the church in the 60s. When she died, we open her last will - she wrote that she wanted an anonymous funeral, with only family members and her closest friends attending. She didn't want to cause any trouble - even after death. She always thought of the well-being of her family more than of her own.

There's a wonderful sentence in German, "Es war die Mutter, was brauchts der Worte mehr".

"It was the mother, what more is there to say"

Am I sad - yes, very. But I am also very glad that her suffering finally has come to an end. And I know she will be remembered as the wonderful person she was.

The ceremony was non-religious. The speaker spoke of life being given its meaning only by death, by our awareness that it will all end one day for everyone, and that this is what makes us capable of filling our lives with meaning. It was very touching.

When I imagine what it would be like if the Christian God, or the Muslim God existed - I am disgusted. She, as an unbeliever, would have to suffer in hell for all eternity, tortured beyond imagination. She, the loving mother and grandmother, she that gave so much and filled the lives of her family members with joy.

What an absolutely despicable thought. How immensely immoral.

I am truly glad to know that there is no celestial dictator, no afterlife, no hell. Only thus is is life meaningful, only thus can a person, after a morning of youth, a midday of having a family and raising kids, of seeing them grow and an evening of seeing them have kids as well, and taking care of them with love finally go to sleep, knowing that everything has its time, and that all in all, it was good.

How can people honestly worship a supposed deity of this kind as just and loving? I cannot understand this. "you will bow to your Creator someday" - what an utterly despicable thought.

P.S.: Sorry for being so off-topic. I did not mean to bore you with a story, or fish for compassion or something like that. Just thought I'd say how this makes me feel, and how clear it became to me today that Christianity is so utterly immoral.

690. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170617 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 9:08 pm

Well, let's not forget that there were societies where murder was accepted... the maya, who played games for the honor of being sacrificed for example, or the head-hunter tribes.

...meaning it's not that simple.

691. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170614 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 9:05 pm

Counting out the clinical cases of sociopathy - we do share certain moral standards. We don't think killing is generally a good thing, we don't think raping is generally a good thing etc.

We want a stable society, and from that, a lot follows. Morality is both to a certain degree evolved (as evolutionary stable strategies), and can be gotten rationally, for example from John Rawls' thought experiment of the original position. Or take utilitarianism.

Of course the fact that those moral values that can be gotten rationally will not necessarily conform to the finer details of the moral code of a specific person or group (political for example), isn't a counterargument against this. It just means that certain "moral values" are arbitrary, political/religious/social inventions and not necessary.

692. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170553 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 8:30 pm

TheTruthID,

there is one major point which seems to be at the root of many of your problems with evolution:

It's not a theory of chance. The mutations are random, yes - but natural selection is not. Fequency of mutation and interval between generations are factors here. Given enough generations, enough time - natural selection will do the job.

The eye didn't evolve "by chance", not even once. Light-sensitivity of cells can provide a benefit for the individual... if that is the case, natural selection will favour that, and given enough time, eyes can evolve. Hugely different eyes at that. Compare the eye of a hawk with that of a fly - the differences are immense.

693. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170524 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 8:05 pm

I feel our society is gradually deteriorating when it comes to our universal moral standards.

I don't think it's that bad... but even if so, religion is not necessarily the answer. Take a look at the societies under theocratic rule - take a look at medieval Europe for example. The situation in the US is nowehere near as bad. Of course, "social deterioration concerning morality" is very much a matter of perspective.

Proponents of monarchy in France would have (and did) say the same about the introduction of democracy. Proponents of theocracy say the same about religious freedom etc.

694. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170511 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 7:55 pm

:)
____________


Say, where's smellhound?
Wow, first smellhound being a nice chap and now this from Adam... I think we're under a charm-offensive :)

Of course, there's still melissa, defending god's genocides and munchhausen-by-proxy-syndrom as "love".

695. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170503 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 7:50 pm

annabanana,

you have a serious error in the second line of your comment... I know it wasn't intentional... but it distorts the meaning quite a bit :)

696. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170502 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 7:48 pm

Adam,

I commend you for having the courage and honesty for your apology!

697. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170496 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 7:45 pm

Brian,

sure, here you go:

This (with the "related documents" at the right side - they are essential):

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/graham_oppy/davies.html

and this:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/christianity/craig.html


Should keep you busy for a while :)

698. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #170494 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 7:43 pm

Well, if anyone is suffering from Munchhausen's syndrom by proxy, it's definitely the Christian God:

Omnicient, making humans so that he knew they would use their "free will" (however that is to be reconciled with omniscience) to be sinful, then placing them in a world full of tests and full of pain and agony (by far not all due to acts of free will) - just to send them himself as his son to "save them" from eternal, infinite torture which he would otherwise bestow upon them.

Please - "God doesn't want anyone to go to hell"... obviously he does, those who do not do as he says. He's a celestial dictator who tortures people for disobeying him. Only that with real dictators, the torture ends at death.

God's is a blackmailer in that regard. It's like "I don't want to have to torture you... all you have to do is obey me, love me, worship me... Or you WILL be tortured forever! Am I not merciful?"

Honestly, anyone seeing this as kind and loving has a serious ethical problem.

It's also just like Munchhausen's by proxy - your god knew how his human's would turn out, after all he is supposed to be omniscient. First he creates them so that they do terrible things to one another (rape, genocide, torture for example), and then throws them into a world where they suffer even more through tsunamis, disease, volcano-eruptions, droughts, hunger etc.

Then he comes in to "save them" from the evils he created... what an asshole.

Or he kills them... or he tortures them.
Face it - your God is worse than Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Gengis Khan, Kim Jong Il and all the other dictators and mass-murderers combined.

699. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170478 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 7:16 pm

I myself haven't gone through the entire exchange of papers between Craig and Oppy... and it's hard to find exactly where Craig is wrong. As I said, he is competent - albeit his character is more than questionable, and his position wrong.

But he does provide food for thought.

700. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #170468 by MPhil on April 27, 2008 at 6:55 pm

Nah, Brian - your point is valid (at least I think so), I just wanted to provide a justification for my position.