Posted on 06/25/2020 12:27:52 PM PDT by JAG 5000
I wrote the story below to poke fun at Atheists whose gods are Their Own Selves, Empiricism, Rationalism, Secularism, Logic, Science,
and what THEY claim is Rational Argumentation.
Its a dumb story but it does make a serious point.
So relax, read my short crazy story, and have a little harmless fun.
_____________
`
A Very Short Story About John And Bob and Tom.
by JAG 5000
There are two atheists that are having an argument over contradictory propositions.
John Atheist and Bob Atheist.
They are having a private debate in their own thread.
They are now on page 40 in the thread and they are not writing short posts, but long drawn out lengthy screeds.
They both claim victory and claim that they have established a high degree of Probability that their position is the correct one, and that their opponent's position is incorrect.
I have utterly defeated you says John. My arguments stand at a 90% Probability of certainty and your arguments stand only at a 40% Probability of certainty and here are my reasons to support what I say.
No, all that is incorrect replies Bob. My arguments stand at a 90% Probability of certainty and your arguments only at a 40% Probability of certainty and here are my reasons to support what I say.
_____________
The two atheists, John and Bob, decide to meet in Real World and continue their arguments.
They do this and they continue to argue back and forth for 10 days until they are near exhaustion.
Neither John or Bob will budge an inch.
How can we settle this, asks John.
Bob replies, let's go to the academic community and let them decide.
You mean we take a Majority Vote within the academic community?
Well no, replies John that would ruin our scholarly reputations and we'd be howled out of the room because everybody knows that taking a Majority Vote can not settle who has won an argument.
So my Ph.D's against your Ph.D's is not a very smart plan.
By the way Bob, again I have won and you have lost this argument.
No John, again you have lost and I have won this argument.
I know how we can settle this, said Bob, we can go and put our case before this organization:
The International World Authority That Has The Power To Decide Who Has, Or Has Not, Presented The Most Plausible Arguments.
That's a great idea replied John, but where are they located?
I don't know said Bob, lets ask Tom where we can find them.
So they asked Tom, but Tom said Listen fellas there is no such organization in the world as that, and you both should know this.
John and Bob both said well okay Tom, I guess you are right about that, but what in the world are we going to do now?
How can we settle who has won this argument with the highest degree of Plausibility?
I know how we can settle it, said John. We can let Tom settle it.
Okay said Bob, we will let Tom settle this.
Okay Tom, which one of us has won this argument?
Tom replied I declare that John has won this argument with the highest degree of Plausibility. I declare that John has won and that Bob has lost.
And so it came to pass that it was forever settled by Tom. John had won, and Bob had lost.
Ahh victory is sweet said John. I love it when I win and can know for certain that I have won.
The End.
LOL
_______
Yeah, I told you it was a dumb story, but it did make a few serious points if you stop and think about it seriously.
The takeaway point, in case you missed it, is that Atheists are not as smart as they think they are.
``
``
Who or what is perfect created within space and time?
Well, if you have a perfect God, it shouldn’t be a problem. I mean, he created Space and Time, didn’t he?
More like exercised ex nihilo and was “perfect” with the outcome.
The outcome doesn’t look perfect from here any more than those protests looked peaceful.
Quite a parody (as far as i understand it.) Thy great learning hath made many atheists mad.
The author is engaging in a false dilemma, a false either/or dichotomy, ignoring any alternative to his assertions, for they presuppose a definition of good and evil - and in which which an omnipotent omniscient being must be the supreme judge - and being both willing and able to prevent evil does not mean that what is objectively evil cannot be allowed in order to work for good.
The presumption that a omniscient and omnipotent, just and merciful Being was unjust in allowing evil or in sending judgments presumes omniscience and omnipotence on the part of the one who is judging God (not that I am not guilty of that, at least as a emotional yet irrational reaction). For to be evil presumes that such was not justly warranted in the light of what it would accomplish, not simply in this life but for eternity. And only the God of the Bible knows what all the effects of even our next breath will be - not only for this life life but for eternity - and can and will make it all work for the good of those who love God, and thus the Good. (Rm. 8:28)
And an omniscient and omnipotent Being is able to accomplish His plan without forcing man to go against his will, as intolerable as that can be to some whose knowledge is less in this realm than a cave man trying to code a software program in dim light that would run the Pentagon which he never heard about.
Finally, God gives all that is good, and His command for creation to worship Him as the infinite omniscient and omnipotent being who cannot fail, is unselfish, for God does not need anything, (Acts 17:25) and to worship perfection is only right and to the benefit of man, who actually causes God grief. But rather than wipe man out again and again, God spared not His own Son to save us, and who himself loved us and gave Himself for us, that we may live thru Him, thanks and glory be to God!
Well-reasoned. Thanks.
Dang!
I’ve been OUTTED!
Seems more correct to say 'IF'.
Let’s teach dim yutes LOGIC 101 first.
Well; there ARE some explanations that just don't add up!
Which came first?
The vagina or the penis?
If people won’t comment on my tagline; why do I have it?
I see you noticed the IS-IF thing; too.
they’ve got bigger problems than this
Probably; but they either have one or the other of them; so it’s gets down to a mighty personal level to think about.
Trying to divide us eh?
You have no proof of that!
“equally” neither do you....LOL
I love word games...
Since you seem (by your post) that you do not believe, how do you define love? Can love be given, or taken, by force?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.