The problem with William Lane Craig's thinking - Religion, God, and Theology

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Religion, God, and Theology

The problem with William Lane Craig's thinking

Post Reply Subscribe

...

10-23-2011 , 05:26 PM

VP$IP

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 6,841

In this thread, we will point out the problems with William Lane Craig's thinking.

Start with this one.

While attempting to justify the slaughter of children, William Lane Craig wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...iam-lane-craig

We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven's incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.

[imaginary photo of plane flying into WTC]

Quote

10-23-2011 , 05:44 PM

uke_master

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 15,917

i am glad we have a new thread for this. No chance people would have discussed this in the other two threads.

Quote

10-23-2011 , 05:49 PM

skalf

banned

Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 1,458

In this answer to a troubled Christian, who feels hell is a bit on the harsh side, Craig explains why eternal torture is just fine.
Stunningly vicious stuff.

Quote:

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?...

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/...ter_friendly=1

Quote

10-23-2011 , 05:53 PM

Sommerset

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 3,863

Quote:

Originally Posted by uke_master

i am glad we have a new thread for this. No chance people would have discussed this in the other two threads.

+1...

I see this tit-for-tat threads as pretty pointless, personally

Quote

10-23-2011 , 06:39 PM

gskowal

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 3,521

Quote:

Originally Posted by VP$IP

We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven's incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.

[imaginary photo of plane flying into WTC]

Every murder of a christian should not be punishable because those who kill Christians actually do them a favor. Those murdered Christians quit this earth with joy!!!!

WLC needs meds..

Quote

10-23-2011 , 06:43 PM

Original Position

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 9,426

Quote:

Originally Posted by VP$IP

We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven's incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.

[imaginary photo of plane flying into WTC]

Why did you start this thread? We already have an ongoing thread discussing this topic.

Quote

10-23-2011 , 06:51 PM

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,075

Where is Not Ready? Haven't seen him post lately.

Quote

10-23-2011 , 06:53 PM

bunny

will feast on your soul

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 11,219

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

Where is Not Ready? Haven't seen him post lately.

He indicated he wasnt going to be around much anymore, unfortunately. I think he's not even checking the site (or only extremely intermittently, anyhow).

Quote

10-23-2011 , 07:07 PM

gskowal

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 3,521

Btw is WLC pro choice?

Quote

10-23-2011 , 07:27 PM

#10

VP$IP

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 6,841

Quote:

Originally Posted by Original Position

Why did you start this thread? We already have an ongoing thread discussing this topic.

To achieve symmetry.

If anyone wants to delete both threads:

The problem with William Lane Craig's thinking
The problem with Richard Dawkins thinking

I doubt that anyone would object.

[imaginary Yin-Yang symbol]

Quote

10-23-2011 , 07:45 PM

#11

Original Position

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 9,426

Quote:

Originally Posted by VP$IP

To achieve symmetry.

If anyone wants to delete both threads:

The problem with William Lane Craig's thinking
The problem with Richard Dawkins thinking

I doubt that anyone would object.

[imaginary Yin-Yang symbol]

In order to actually achieve symmetry, you would have to provide some content in your post beyond just repeating what is being discussed in the other thread, but with a new thread title.

Quote

10-23-2011 , 09:19 PM

#12

Hardball47

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 13,301

Can we please stop with these Yin and Yang threads?

Quote

10-23-2011 , 09:56 PM

#13

Splendour

banned

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by Original Position

Why did you start this thread? We already have an ongoing thread discussing this topic.

LOL...par for the course with VP$IP. He must have taken lessons from GIA.

Quote

10-23-2011 , 11:06 PM

#14

CompleteDegen

veteran

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,480

Quote:

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?...

The bolded part really bothers me. I "freely reject God" like I freely reject that the world didn't pop into existence 5 seconds ago with implanted memories for everyone. Saying I freely reject God implies I have sufficient information to make a choice, or that I could simply elect to change my belief with no further evidence. In order to truly freely reject God, I would need to know he exists, then elect not to follow him. Apart from that, changing my belief now (as if that even makes sense) would be insincere and not genuine and I'm pretty sure God would know that.

Quote

10-23-2011 , 11:12 PM

#15

VP$IP

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 6,841

Quote:

Originally Posted by Original Position

In order to actually achieve symmetry, you would have to provide some content in your post beyond just repeating what is being discussed in the other thread, but with a new thread title.

I accept your judgement on the matter, and I apologize.

Quote

10-25-2011 , 02:02 AM

#16

TStar

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 2,521

From the limited amount that I've seen him talk, he seems to rank Atheism as an ideology that requires a proof and doesn't seem to grasp the concept that attempting to prove a non-belief is ridiculous. I don't believe in Leprechauns but I can't prove that they don't exist.

Quote

Post Reply Subscribe

...