The Wit of Dr. Craig - Part 14 "Fairness in a world of moral relativism"

Table of Contents: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=B5F1CFD398216BB6

William Lane Craig jokes whether fairness is at all meaningful in moral relativism.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Wit
• Fairness
• Moral
• Relativism
• Ethics
• Absolute
• Subjective
• Objective
• Atheism
• Naturalism
• God
• Christianity
• Theism

[AceofDlamonds]

owned

[eclipsesonic]

Lol, so funny!! :)

[Mentat1231]

@darrylsloan

And, btw, these very unfortunate, sad occasions saddened God Himself (2 Peter 3:9; Ezekiel 33:11), and He will undo the effects (Acts 24:15; Psalm 37:10, 11, 29)?

[Mentat1231]

@darrylsloan

Do you have any idea how illiterate you seem right now? Read the whole post; don't just re-interpret a few words however you wish.

Better that they have a chance to live forever in Paradise, than that they be left to a few decades of sickness, misery, self-mutilating worship, and death in battle. Yes. Better that they live, than that they have a few miserable years and then become fertilizer.

[darrylsloan]

@Mentat1231 It was better that they were murdered than had they lived? Have you any idea how insane you sound right now?

[Mentat1231]

@darrylsloan

You're back to the surgeon. I wouldn't want to be cut open, and see my insides either, but some surgeries require it. I wouldn't want a bone to be re-broken, so that it can heal correctly, but it is necessary. Their pain ended very quickly, and they will awaken into a world where they will never experience pain again. Had He left them alone, they would have experienced much pain for a few decades and then died (probably at the tip of a sword anyway), and that would be it.

[darrylsloan]

@Mentat1231 You equate the brutal and bloody mass murder of children with being temporarily knocked unconscious. Would you want to die as a three-year-old being rammed through the belly with a sword? Or lying in a cradle feeling a cold blade against your neck, while hot blood rushes out and you screech in terror? I rest my case. I know many a Christian who would be horrified by your stance.

[Mentat1231]

@darrylsloan

2) You didn't read my earlier post did you. If He has the power to resurrect (and promises to do so), then he really just temporarily knocked these children unconscious; and the world He will re-awaken them into will be infinitely better, and there lives infinitely longer. How can you look at an event in the Bible through atheistic (i.e. no resurrection, no eternal life, no Paradise) eyes, and not realize you're begging the question?

[Mentat1231]

@darrylsloan

1) Who cares what your view is, if it's all subjective? The criminal may get great delight from raping and killing your relative, and how can we say he is wrong? What about his view? On your view "successful" vs. "unsuccessful" is precisely what we're left with. But that is not what we perceive with our moral sense (just as clearly as we perceive sight or sound).

[darrylsloan]

@Mentat1231 "Or is that subjective too?" Yes! Now let me clarify: saying that something is merely successful or unsuccessful is too dispassionate. We do have natural feelings: empathy towards children in particular. So my view that killing children is subjectively wrong is not likely to ever change. Here's the thing: if you think that killing children is objectively wrong, why did God command it in 1 Sam 15? And where is this empathy? Absent! That's why we call such acts "inhumane."

[Mentat1231]

@darrylsloan

And yet you seem to think there is something objectively wrong with humiliating children or stoning women. Or is that subjective too? What happens when that gets turned on you, and a completely unfair trial lead to your completely unfair tortured and death?

So you confirm that rapists, Nazis, etc are not "right" or "wrong"; merely "successful" or "unsuccessful", yes? And what about when they rape or wrongfully imprison a relative of yours?