DOES GOD EXIST? William Lane Craig vs Antony Flew (HQ) 6/11

Click to add a description...

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Click
• to
• add
• keywords...

[judoyodan]

You would have to be a moron to fall this bullshit Craig keeps spewing.

[Christianjr4]

For all the big talk you got going on isn't it somewhat ironic that not one of your comments deals directly with his arguments? Instead of spewing your own BS, I challenge you to refute the arguments themselves and tell me what exactly is wrong with them. Mere assertion and empty rhetoric isn't enough to defeat an argument.

[lzekl]

You are correct.. The subject of the debate is weather God exists.. William does not have to prove the superiority of Christianity, that would be a totally different debate... The issue here is whether God exists.. so your comment is totally irrelevant...debate is theism or atheism. not Hinduism or Christianity

[josephboy1000]

Craig's thoughts about the the formation of the universe requiring a deity is plausible.However, his arguments for christian god are weak. The christian god is huge contradiction, I almost certain there is no christian god. Since there might be a deity that created everything, but certainly is does not want worship/ it's not part of this universe anymore then we can say that having a belief is irrelevant/useless.

Conclusion: Atheism is more logical, and one should just live their lives.

[Pearmanb8484]

@judoyodan Don't worry. I feel better already. Thanks. I'll work on my courage. You work on your arguments. Deal? oxox

[judoyodan]

@Pearmanb8484, awwww...did i huwt youah feewings? I soweee.

Buddy, it's high time you grew a pair, grew the fuck up, and grew out of this ridiculous superstition.

Do yourself a huge favor and take my advice.

[Pearmanb8484]

@judoyodan I assure you I'm very aware of that objection. I studied philosophy in college and I called myself an atheist once. I was pushed from atheism by scientific and philosophical evidence and the mean-spiritedness of its most fundamental supporters, which I found shameful. I don't know you, but our brief exchange suggests to me that you think name calling is an adequate substitute for adult discussion. Too bad. I wish you the best.

[judoyodan]

@Pearmanb8484, what is "strange" is that you obviously don't know anything about "atheists", or science for that matter.

It is also "strange" that you ignore the infinite regression problem that your introduction of a god presents.

If you are over ten years old, then you should know that when you believe in fairy tales, you are bound to be disappointed.

[Pearmanb8484]

@judoyodan It's strange to me that you are claiming that the ontological argument is made from a position of ignorance when it is the atheist who is hoping for more science to come in and disprove either of the two premises. Clearly science has shown that the universe began and that nothing comes from nothing. What then should we conclude?

It seems to me that your suggestion of nonlinear thinking (Non-deductive? I hope not.) is heavily laden with wishful thinking. I'm interested in your ideas.

[judoyodan]

@Pearmanb8484, Lane's ontological argument is absurd. He is arguing his point from a position of ignorance. Simply because the answer might not be available at this time, he imposes a falacious supernatural force that fills his gaps in knowledge. He seems oblivious to the problem of infinite regression that his magical sky daddy brings to the argument.

The answer to the "origin" of the universe might not be a product of linear thinking that we are so comfortable with.

[Pearmanb8484]

@judoyodan These sort of assertions confuse me. What exactly is fairy tale-like in Craig's assertions? I see the problem being strange either way. Option #1 The universe popped into existence uncaused. Option #2 An immaterial mind caused the universe. Both seem miraculous to me. The question is which is more plausible.