God Quote 5
Patrick
appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the
whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present
thoughts are mere accidents - the accidental by-product of the movement of
atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers
as well as for anyone else's. But if their thoughts - i.e., Materialism and
Astronomy - are mere accidental by-products, why should we believe them to
be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to
give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It's like expecting
the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should
give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.
C.S. Lewis
mani deli
wrote:
God is the immature man's Santa Claus
Christopher A. Lee
wrote:
What does Patrick imagine he achieves by citing some Liar For God's
dishonest straw man?
ar...@hobbiton.net
wrote:
>If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the
>appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the
>whole evolution of Man was an accident too.
Agreed.
>If so, then all our present
>thoughts are mere accidents - the accidental by-product of the movement of
>atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers
>as well as for anyone else's.
Of course. But don't forget to include the thoughts of Xian
apologists, Clive old buddy. They, too, are accidental by-products.
>But if their thoughts - i.e., Materialism and
>Astronomy - are mere accidental by-products, why should we believe them to
>be true?
Believe -- or at least accept -- them because in this accidental world
their accidental mental by-products have at least as much foundation
as the accidental mental by-products of a lay theologian like you.
>I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to
>give me a correct account of all the other accidents.
Demanding a generalization from a single example is frowned upon in
logical circles.
>It's like expecting
>the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should
>give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.
Only someone who believed in magic would try to wring that much
causality out of one small effect.
>C.S. Lewis
Christopher A. Lee
wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:53:55 -0500, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
Did Patrick really mean to tell us just how dishonest a writer
C.S.Lewis was?
As if we didn't know already?
Patrick
ar...@hobbiton.net
wrote:
<snip>
>>>It's like expecting
>>>the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should
>>>give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.
>>
>> Only someone who believed in magic would try to wring that much
>> causality out of one small effect.
>
>Do you believe in magic?
Penn & Teller are sometimes amusing.
Patrick
> <bark...@erinot.com>> wrote:
>><ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote ...
>>> <bark...@erinot.com>> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>>It's like expecting
>>>>the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug
>>>>should
>>>>give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.
>>>
>>> Only someone who believed in magic would try to wring that much
>>> causality out of one small effect.
>>
>>Do you believe in magic?
>
> Penn & Teller are sometimes amusing.
I love those guys.... especially the talkative one.