The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday
What S&R & Viviane just said ^^^^^^^^^^^
Please explain specifically how drowning a quarter of a million people is a perfect act of love.... ethically comparable to giving medicine to your pet dog.<<<<Click along there <<<<<<
Off to bed.
I don't see the benefit of trying to catch people out with sneaky illustrations, that is not how you reach truth.
Just answer the question. Think bigger than 'death is inevitable and for our good'
The only way any of your answers can work, would be if death was not horrific and unpleasant.
There is no way to justify a god that can do anything, allowing such a thing to exist.
Please explain specifically how drowning a quarter of a million people is a perfect act of love.... ethically comparable to giving medicine to your pet dog.
Cofty, are you ACTUALLY asking the dog to explain why it's owner forcing an emetic (syrup of ipecac) down it's throat is a loving act?
Way to miss the ENTIRE point of the analogy, since it's inexplicable to the dog: he cannot explain it!
(Viviane, replace two children if you like, since you seem to think the dogs not being able to talk has something to do with the price of tea in China (it's irrelevant, and doesn't matter for the purposes of the analogy; just assume they can communicate). Use children if it's easier, as they also undergo painful medical treatments they cannot begin to understand, and asking them to explain why the doctor gave them a "boo-boo' would be useless.)
SNR, you also missed the point: since short-term death by drowning is what is being excused by appealing to ineffability of God, it's done presumably for some greater benefit, eg eternal life in heaven).
Similarly, when a believer says Gods ways are mysterious, it gives them an excuse for not answering that which they cannot begin to explain or understand.... It's unfathomable, so they don't even try.
It's an 'appeal to ignorance' excuse, but in fact it IS legit in some cases, since there are 'unknowns' that may eventually become 'knowns', but remain a mystery at the present. Much of what was chalked up to 'God's mysterious ways' has been explained by a naturalistic explanation (eg rain, as only one example), such that everything seemingly 'miraculous' that happens is not automatically credited to the mysterious workings of God.
Adamah, the analogy is broken. In case you don't understand why, I'll link you to the weak analogy logical fallacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy.
There IS no point to miss of the analogy since it's weak and broken and uses an unknown ungraspable unknown as it's premise.
Also, I never said dogs talking had anything to do with the price of tea in China, strawman fallacy on your part. It's not my analogy, so there is no burden on me to make a better analogy, burden of proof logical fallacy on your part. SNR did not miss the point, he simpky pointed out the error of the analogy, so fallicy of logical fallicy on your part.
Finally, the analogy is an appeal to ignorance and broken on every level. It's amazing you are defending it, but then, you did commit four logical fallacies in one post, so maybe you didn't grasp that his point is not just there could be unknowns, but that there could be unknown ungraspable unknowns and the analogy relies on accepting that and making decisions based on unknown ungraspable unknowns. Ungraspable is the key there.
COFTY SAID- However, a believer cannot have that AND also claim that god is love for the following reason.
NEWS-FLASH: they not only CAN, they DO (and don't need your permission). Most believers don't NOTICE the contradictions, or if they DO, they don't even CARE about the contradictions or deal with it in another manner.
Granted, they cannot claim to have much regard for logical consistency, true, but MANY PEOPLE can manage to hold two contradictory beliefs simultaneously, and not even bat an eyelash, thanks to the power of cognitive-dissonance reducing mechanisms, sweeping it under the carpet and excusing it as something for which they need greater faith to deal with. Nagging doubts are suppressed, even to be put out of mind, and NOT necessarily resolved by theodicy.
COFTY SAID- Christian theists are compelled to accept the following...
1. God observed the Asian tsunami as it evolved
2. God knew it would kill a quarter of a million people and displace 5 million more
3. God had the power to stop the tsuanmi
4. God did not stop the tsuanmi
5. Everything that god does is perfectly loving
6. Therefore allowing a tsunami to drown a quarter of a million people is a perfect act of love.
No, it doesn't.
You know this yourself, in that Jesus often denounced those who attempted to save their mortal life, but sacrificed their eternal soul. This life is the 'testing grounds', the opening act for the headliner in Heaven, so all 250k deaths are excused with a contrite excuse like, "God called his faithful servants home", or God has another cherub in Heaven" etc. That's the so-called 'benefit' of religion: to provide comfort to those in need of it.
COFTY SAID- But this contradicts everything that christianity teaches about love. Jesus greatest command was "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".If we failed to prevent the violent death of others when it was within our power to do so we could not reasonably claim to be following Jesus' greatest command.
Uh, God is the boss (Father) of Jesus, and God makes the rules; Jesus doesn't order God around. The Golden Rule was given to HUMANS, and not God. Chain of command, 101.
Once again, more circular reasoning excuses EVERYTHING God does, since believers start with their conclusion (the Bible says 'God is love') and work their way back to it (God didn't intercede, but it MUST be an act of Love, since the Bible says, 'God is love'). Classic post-hoc (after-the-fact) rationalizations, at their best (worst?), and the Bible is LOADED with excuses.
COFTY SAID-Therefore christian theism is fatally flawed, not only because of external evidence but because it is internally inconsistent.
Congratulations on figuring out that out that the Bible is internally-inconsistent, and shot-guns theodicy and traits of God.
Noah's Flood was the greatest natural disaster recorded in the Bible, and it was even admittedly CAUSED by a "loving" God! The story is written from the perspective of an omniscient narrator, and the reader doesn't indentify with the MILLIONS who drowned, but the eight lucky ones who survived! Everyone's a winna, and most readers tell themselves THEY'RE the ones who will beat the odds! Vegas also operates on the same personality types who believe their own personal myth, and tell themselves THEY'RE special, they're different, since THEY will win: all the other suckers lose in Vegas, but not them, since they're 'special' (illusory superiority).
Also, I never said dogs talking had anything to do with the price of tea in China, strawman fallacy on your part.
LOL! It's a 'figure of speech': haven't you heard it before? It's means you said something irrelevant (non sequitur), and you can deny it all you want, but the proof is on the last page:
Viviane said- Dogs can't communicate like that.
You also made the same mistake SNR made:
Viviane said- Plus, the dogs lived, so it's not a well formed analogy to match the death 250K people.
Of course, the ineffability of God claim is premised on God having some greater purpose for all those who lost their lives that we cannot understand, just as the dog's owner has some greater benefit in mind which the dog cannot understand.
BTW, not all arguments that contain an admission of not knowing are 'appeals to ignorance' fallacies: that's a common mistake of those learning about informal logical fallacies.
And it's not enough to just pop off the names of fallacies (although I applaud you for starting to learn them, as that's a start): they need to actually FIT. Start another thread if you want to practice, as it's off-topic here.
Yes, you wrote a lot. You explained nothing. You committed a lot of fallacies and are just acting petty now that you've been called out on your fallacies, condescending attitude and failed superiority act. Pee Wee Herman did you third grade insults first and better than you. Re-runs are for TV, go there if you feel the need to imitate your betters.
Might not be relevant to this conversation but here is a view of some theists regarding floods:
welcome to JWN randomthoughts - pls start a new thread in the Friends section telling us more about what brings you here...
I noticed that story about the UKIP councillor as well...I wonder what god-dishonouring act the people of Indonesia commited in late 2004?
The dog owner CANNOT properly communicate with the dog even if he wanted to.
God CAN communicate with his 'pets' if he wants to.
In short, god has some explaining to do... NOT leaving it up to his hapless followers to try their best to explain for him with their 'inferior, pet-like minds' (just look at this thread, they airn't doing too well)