Grilled
June 30, 2004 | 8 Comments
It’s a blog rather than a cookbook, but Grill a Christian is nevertheless a tasty little snack. You can devour the entire thing in a minute or two, since the author gave up after just three posts. But don’t blame me for your indigestion:
Before we get to logic and God, let me lay down a few ground rules about theism, especially Christianity, and logic. Lets begin with Christianity. God is real. How can it be proven to you? Honestly, I can’t that is why it is by faith. But by using the rules of logic and common sense, the evidences for God are there and in such a vast amount that saying that there was no higher power is just a statement of arrogance in wanting life to be all about you and a statement that proves that your predisposed biases toward life keep you from being able to weigh the options and decide.
Having trouble inducing regurgitation? Try this:
A popular question “intellectual” detractors of Christianity often ask is, “Can God create a rock too big to pick up?” This question takes many forms but this is its basic one. I want to demonstrate that this question is flawed in its presuppositions and therefore invalid as a theological issue. Some have said that it is a yes or no question therefore does not open itself to this type of criticism, this too, is a faulty statement. To say that the nature of the question must dictate the type of answer is to limit the answer and therefore negate the purpose for asking the question. So with that said: This question is dealing with theological issues but it is presupposing things about the nature of that theology. It automatically assumes certain things on the creativity and nature of God that contradict a scriptural understanding of who God is. The fact that God would create something for man or for the challenge of picking it up is a human concept with human presuppositions about the nature of deity. Therefore this question is leading in nature and not deserving of, or possible to answer. If the question were worded differently, perhaps addressing the creativity or attributes of God it would contain some validity, otherwise, it is useless beyond those who hold anti theistic presuppositions. In conclusion, when asking a question we should always either acknowledge our own presuppositions in the question, or when responding to a question we should acknowledge and address the presuppositions of others.
Link Courtesy of Ocmpoma
June 30th, 2004 @ 11:47 am
Raving, I like the “omnipotence is incoherent” argument as much as any atheist, but the problem is that intelligent non-Catholics invariably drop the omni assumptions when criticized. For this reason, it’s helpful to have a broader, methodological critique (Mencken’s “Theology is the explanation of the unknown with the not worth knowing”, for instance). However, if there is some compelling argument as to why non-Catholic theists (or at least Christians) can’t drop the omni assumptions, I would love to hear it. It would certainly make my job a lot easier – it takes much longer to set up and use the methodological/empirical arguments than it does to show logical incoherence.
June 30th, 2004 @ 12:11 pm
This is what happens when you manufacture bullshit in order to rationalise bullshit. You’re left with… *drumroll*
BULLSHIT CRITICAL MASS!!!
June 30th, 2004 @ 12:19 pm
‘A popular question “intellectual” detractors of Christianity often ask is, “Can God create a rock too big to pick up?” ‘
This is a questions “intellectual” people come up with? Yikes! What questions do the dumb people ask?
June 30th, 2004 @ 12:25 pm
wow Ben, I think you just discovered nuclear bullshit! I dont wanna be around when THAT bomb explodes!
Hmmm, “nulcear bullshit” would make a cool band name…
HappyNat: You gotta understand that, to this particular GodIdiot, the atheists that ask the rock question ARE the intellectuals LOL
June 30th, 2004 @ 3:28 pm
I thought I lectured on this recently. Doesn’t anyone take notes here? Well, since this is the end of the month they named after me, I will repeat myself.
OK, the solution to the “rock too big to pick up” dilemma is to ping-pong rapidly between the dilemma’s horns. First, God makes a rock so big that he certainly will never ever be able to lift it. Boom. Next, he lifts the goddam rock. Boom. Next, he makes the rock so inconceivably big that no way can he ever lift it. Boom. Then he lifts the rock. Boom. Now he makes a totally humungous rock, each atom as big as the rock he just lifted. Boom. Then he lifts that effing rock.
Condense this sequence into a few nanoseconds, like boomboomboomboomboom at the same time. And there you have it: God is making and lifting what he cannot make and lift!
Let this be a lesson! We’re not talking about the paperboy here. This is God, the Awesome Dude, the Big Boss, the Heavy Hitter, the Shakalaka they said could not make a universe the size of a basketball. Ha Ha. Ever heard of the Big Bang? Talk about your nuclear bullshit!
July 1st, 2004 @ 1:25 am
I didn’t know that John Madden posted to this blog..
July 1st, 2004 @ 9:24 am
TRA, that is SO very April 19.
July 1st, 2004 @ 11:04 am
Just found this blog. Nice. Love the Grill a Christian non-logic. Also, love the same tired and meaningless arguments I used to see when I still had the interest to argue what was already evident, for me, 30 years ago. Always enjoy seeing the kids come through the same doorway I walked through.
Yes, I’m an atheist, by the way, in case that was an ambiguous graph. It has nothing to do with anyone’s gods for me, though. I just think atheists have the nicest T-shirts.