Friday, June 21, 2013

The square one gambit and the Atheist assualt on Theology

  photo ChurchBurning.jpg

Here's another example of that game atheist play where anytime you get them in a corner they run back to square one and say "but God doesn't exist." This time on CARM Trollala (tralala) quotes Pyscists Krauss saying:

"I have challenged several theologians to provide evidence contradicting the premise that theology has made no contribution to knowledge in the past five hundred years at least, since the dawn of science. So far no one has provided a counterexample. The most I have ever gotten back was the query, "What do you mean by knowledge? " From an epidemiological perspective this may be a thorny issue, but I maintain that, if there were a better alternative, someone would have presented it. Had I
presented the same challenge to biologists, or psychologists , or historians , or astronomers , none of them would have been so flummoxed. " L Krauss

 Various Christians play around with it:


You are prioritizing empirical, scientific knowledge over deductive, philosophical reasoning. However, there are theists who would say that deductive reasoning should be preferred to inductive reasoning, because it leads to certainty. In their view, science doesn't really lead to knowledge, but merely inductive probabilities. So, why should we adopt your empiricist stance rather than their rationalistic stance?

 they go through a long thing about weather or nto Krauss an idiot, (a possiblity introduced bh Christian defender Damian:
 Isn't Lawrence Krauss the same idiot whose idea of nothing is the same as something?

Yeah, I don't put a lot of stock in atheist charlatans and their claims about anything.
The atheists are saying O no he's a great physicist! then

 Originally Posted by Fanghur View Post
I would say that people oftheology, sometimes with theological motivations and sometimes not, have contributed to our scientific growth, but theology itself has not.
Meta: why should it? It's purpose is to be scinece.

this illucited:

 You mean its purpose is to assert that which isn't evidently true or likely isn't true as absolute truth and oppose anything that contradicts its dogma. In my opinion the only reason why Christianity, or at least certain factions of Christianity, have adapted to modern science is because if they didn't they would eventually die off. I think they'll eventually die off regardless as more and more people embrace reason rather than faith, but they are doing all they can to delay the inevitable.

 No matter what the question is, regardless of the point being made, everything turns on this one issue.It doesn't matter how many arguemnts proving the existence of God you win, the atheist template says "no God" so there's no God. It's not a matter of proof not a matter of evidence, make a God argument they say "you can't make this argument because you are talking about something that hasn't been proven yet." but the reason to talk about it is to prove it. In other words you can't make the argument until you prove the arguemnt. That's just insane. that means you could never talk about it. That's like a law that they on the books in Texas at one time:  "if two trains meet on the same tack they both shall go to the siding and neither shall move until the other has passed." So they will never move.

We can never talk about god until we prove God and includes proving God. so how can we ever prove it?

What's going on here is the need to destroy theology. They are trying to do the same thing to theology that they did to the Bible. Why? Because theology pours water on the fire of animosity. You can't keep hate alive and nurse it into red hot action with cool headed reason an historical understanding. If they undersatnd what theology is and what's it's about they will know why religious doctrines are as they are and they wont be able to hold them in contempt anymore, at least not in a  way that makes them seem so stupid.If they have to study to learn about those ideas they can't consider them idiocy. Keeping hate at a red hot pitch really depends upon making the other into some alien stupidity that has not nothing at all to commend it. Without the Bible or organized academic theology religious belief is just a disorganize set of intuitive feelings are easily ridiculed and made to seem badly thought out. They have already done it with the bible. The bible could be saved with theology so they have to work on destroying theology.

Liberal theology makes belief in God seem rational. So they have to put a taint on the word "theology" so that it's associated stupidity and unreasonable unreasoning. This is their goal it's their project. It's phase II or whatever. We have to counter this with an unrelenting defense of theology every chance we get.

No comments: