Rosenberg emphasized that evil “needs to be desperately
explained.” The Christian theologian responded by saying: “The problem here is
that we are assuming that God's purpose is just to make us happy in this life,
but on the Christian view that's false. The purpose of life is not worldly
happiness as such, but rather the knowledge of God. There may be many evils
that occur in this lifetime that are utterly pointless with respect to
producing worldly happiness, but they may not be pointless with respect to producing
the knowledge of God and salvation and eternal life.”
Audience members, the formal debate panel and online viewers
all said that Craig, the Christian theologian, won the debate.
I hope
there was more to it than that but still I seem to have missed the point here
or the whole boat.
The
purpose of life is the knowledge of God?
Empirical
knowledge?
Epistemological
knowledge?
Emotional
Knowledge?
Intellectual
Knowledge?
Scientific
Knowledge?
First
define Knowledge and then go on and define God.
And those
were the second and third assumptions only.
The first
assumption was to ASSUME that life has a purpose.
So
1.
We ASSUME life has a purpose
2.
We ASSUME we know what knowledge is
despite all the contradictions of epistemology and
3.
We ASSUME there is such a thing as one
God vaguely defined amongst 1000 myths.
That is a
lot of ASS and U and ME if you ask ME.
All these
debates seem so absolutely pointless to me.
The rules are bent, the audience is bent, pride and prejudice play the
biggest part in it and it is as invalid as democracy.
We haven’t
moved a single inch forward from the days of the Aeropagus
and public intellectual masturbation.
Rhetoric is not a science.
Rhetoric is a mastering of fallacies to fool the many.
Paul was just one more rhetorician among millions.
and public intellectual masturbation.
Rhetoric is not a science.
Rhetoric is a mastering of fallacies to fool the many.
Paul was just one more rhetorician among millions.
The truth
is that there is NO explanation for our race of violent apes. We are evil and that’s it. We are cruel and
we don’t need no gods and no demons to be so we can do it all by ourselves same
as any other apes do.
What is
the point at all of master debating with another monkey?
Are we going to convert the planet to reason and good sense?
I THINK NOT!
Are we going to convert the planet to reason and good sense?
I THINK NOT!
Greed and
Ignorance will rule forever or until the day the last human dies after having
destroyed all other humans around him.
There is no redemption in the universe.
So what
is the point anyway with debating with greed and ignorance? What does it
achieve?
Majority
and numbers on your side mean nothing at all here.
So Craig
could have just STFU after his first seven words then
The problem here is that we are assuming PERIOD. STOP.
POINT FINAL.