Friday, May 13, 2016

A Fallacious Tear-Jerking Scenario (1)

From the Errancy Discussion list, 9-10-97: 

Even the suffering angle is fallacious. If Jesus was himself God, then he too was omniscient and omnipotent, so he had nothing to fear during his trial and crucifixion, because he knew that he wasn't really going to die. If he had all power, then he could have anesthetized himself so that he wouldn't feel anything, so if he suffered any pain, it was his own fault. Furthermore, how could a preacher know that "pain" would be the same to a god, whose ways are always higher than man's ways? This whole tear-jerking scenario is too ridiculous for words. 

I could not hold off responding to this post by you any longer Till :) What is ridiculous is your complete misunderstanding of what is claimed happened to Christ on the cross, and what the sufferings of Christ involved. Suggest you learn what Christians believe this was as you obviously do not have a clue based on your above comment. Once you have educated yourself on this perhaps you would consider retracting the last line of your above post as being down to your ignorance of Christianity rather than a true representation of the same.

What exactly have you answered? You remind me of a couple of Christian airheads that I am having exchanges with on another list. They claim that they don't have to explain or prove anything because their faith is sufficient enough to show that they are right. My contention is that the anthropomorphic nonsense about a "heavenly father" grieving over the death of his son is completely idiotic, because it offers no explanation of why an omniscient, omnipotent deity who would know that his "son" was eternal would have any reason to experience grief that could be compared to an earthly father whose son is killed. Blame yourself and not me for the stupidity of this scenario. To be blunt about it, Matt, who gives a rat's ass what Christians believe? The issue is not what Christians believe but whether what Christians believe is logically defensible.

Farrell Till

No comments:

Post a Comment