William Lane Craig is great at warping logic by playing with words and creating false-dichotomies (would make a good lawyer). We know Indians exist, we have proof that they do. We do not have any proof of God, this is the end of the line. We have proof that people wrote of this 'God character', but no evidence of the actual character's existence in reality. You cannot believe everything you read, there are many books of fiction that aren't properly labeled. Science should be an atheistic-force until it is able to provide evidence for a God-created universe. Obviously atheists see this man as being a fool, but I wonder what believers think of him. Do they think he presents sound arguments?
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Dr. William Lane Craig: "Richard Dawkins destroys science"
William Lane Craig is great at warping logic by playing with words and creating false-dichotomies (would make a good lawyer). We know Indians exist, we have proof that they do. We do not have any proof of God, this is the end of the line. We have proof that people wrote of this 'God character', but no evidence of the actual character's existence in reality. You cannot believe everything you read, there are many books of fiction that aren't properly labeled. Science should be an atheistic-force until it is able to provide evidence for a God-created universe. Obviously atheists see this man as being a fool, but I wonder what believers think of him. Do they think he presents sound arguments?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Our senses from which we perceive the world are fatally limited in terms what tye are actually able to perceive. Fatal in terms of being able to state what is real and what is not real based on what we can perceive. Our perceptual limitations do not allow us the priveledge of making such lofty statemens. "Seeing is believing". Really? What about not seeing? Is it because what we do not see cannot exist, or what we do not see may exist because our eyes are incapable of seeing?
ReplyDeleteMnay have claimed to see God through out of body experiences )NDEs). During these experiences the limitations of their physical vision was no longer restricitve as 'spritiual eyes' because the primary source of 'visual perception' and what could not be seen by the physical eyes could not be seen through the 'spiritual eyes'. It is not one person who has made this claim, but thousands upon thousands. It is unnecessary for those who do not have these experiences to be able to see for themselves. There are a lot of 'scientific facts' that I have not not seen but believe anyway because scientists have said it is so. It os a kind of 'blind faith' if you will. If this is wrong and I should be more skeptical please let me know. But we should believe the emperical testimonies of those who have had NDEs and say they have seen God. After all, seeing is believing...