tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post1150804683609629258..comments2024-03-22T06:22:08.010+00:00Comments on Stephen Law: BEYOND THE VEILStephen Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-6099106499377018482011-11-25T09:02:31.483+00:002011-11-25T09:02:31.483+00:00Hi anonymous. I am pretty sure it is Craig's v...Hi anonymous. I am pretty sure it is Craig's view. It's in Reasonable Faith, which I don't have to hand to quote you. Also see this:<br /><br />http://bit.ly/nxskBYStephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-60313894363042863272011-11-24T22:07:03.145+00:002011-11-24T22:07:03.145+00:00Please accept my sincere apologies for posting thi...Please accept my sincere apologies for posting this in the wrong place but I am visually impaired and consequently had to get sighted help. However I would like to respond to the 'nuclear' question that you planned to pose to William Lane Craig.<br /><br />I fear that such a question would be a case of scare-mongering and I do hope that wasn't your intention. It is a useful thought experiment I have found to see if there are secular equivalents to religious assertions. So the phrase “we are all sinners” is pretty well synonymous with “hey, nobody’s perfect!” and consequently both are cop-outs, excuses not to take responsibility for one’s actions. However it also cuts the other way. It is no fairer for you to ask Bill the ‘nuclear’ question than it is to ask a social liberal “if you absolutely knew that by torturing someone for information you could avoid a terrorist atrocity, would you do so?” The response could only possibly be “how can you ever possibly be certain that torture would avoid an atrocity”. I realise that 'evidence' for God's existence is subjective but I remain to be convinced that Bill absolutely knows with 100% certainty that God exists (and I have seen 5 of his debates). If I found that he does then I would find this deeply troubling – with the proviso that I also find 100% certain atheism just as troubling albeit in different ways. I don’t of course know how Bill would respond but if I were him I would say that he can never absolutely know God’s existence since this negates the whole idea of faith and belief. Consequently if God were to manifest himself with 100% certainty Bill would have very strong reasons to believe that this is not the Christian God whom he worships (and might in fact be the Devil), and would therefore be justified in refusing to push the button. Of course whether this would be Bill’s response does depend on whether he believes with 100% certainty that God exists. <br /><br />Now you may respond at this point that Bill might well push the button with only a 98 or 99 percent certainty that God wishes him to do so. That is true, yet can you equally conceive of a non-religious person in the US sentencing a man to death with only 98 or 99 percent certainty that the accused is guilty? It seems to me that the scenario is at the very least possible, especially as neither atheist nor theist can claim moral superiority over one another, and consequently such corner cutting would reflect not on Bill’s faith but on his broader personality.<br /> <br />On a separate matter I enjoyed your 4thought slot yesterday.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com