On the one hand:
The late Ken Pulliam appears to have written some blog posts in advance and scheduled them to appear, and so those who read his blog have the eerie experience of reading new posts from a blogger who is no longer with us.
Unfortunately the first comment is from Rhology, known to most readers of this blog, who has decided to bring yet further shame on himself and his faith tradition by harassing someone who has recently died and has no opportunity to respond.
Posted by James F. McGrath at 8:47 AM
http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2010/11/blogger-dies-blog-lives-on.html
On the other hand:
In any case, the universe doesn’t owe us comfort, and the fact that a belief is comforting doesn’t make it true. The God Delusion doesn’t set out to be comforting, but at least it is not a placebo.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article1779771.ece
If it's true that it causes people to feel despair, that's tough. It's still the truth. The universe doesn't owe us condolence or consolation; it doesn't owe us a nice warm feeling inside. If it's true, it's true, and you'd better live with it.
http://www.beliefnet.com/News/Science-Religion/2005/11/The-Problem-With-God-Interview-With-Richard-Dawkins.aspx
McGrath said:
ReplyDelete---
...who has recently died and has no opportunity to respond.
---
On the contrary, I'm sure Pulliam's response, albeit to God, is the foremost subject on his mind right now.
But really, McGrath's comment is ridiculous. If Pulliam has ceased to exist, as he believed would be the case, then Pulliam cannot be offended by Rhology's comments. There is no Pulliam left to be offended. And if McGrath is being offended on behalf of a non-existent entity, then wouldn't that make him delusional?
Yet if Pulliam still exists to be offended, then Pulliam's beliefs are wrong and ought to be exposed.
Yeah, I know, pointing this out is "insensitive." Because as we know, atheists have no arguments so they can only pull the emotional strings and steamroll opposing views. But it really begs the question: Why is McGrath such a whiney sissy about this? Man up. Accept the atheist worldview for what it is or reject it completely.
I'd add that McGrath makes a living by attacking dead Bible writers who can't respond to his attacks.
ReplyDelete"Coping with death"
ReplyDeleteWise people cope by knowing, following, obeying, and loving Jesus before they die.
The fool has said in his heart "There is no God" (Psalms 14:1).
ReplyDelete"The Lord has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men, To see if there are any who understand, Who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; There is no one who does good, not even one." (Psalms 14:2-3)
How ironic:
ReplyDeleteI'd add that McGrath makes a living by attacking dead Bible writers who can't respond to his attacks.
So, if we are not allowed to rely upon dead poets, how are we going to argue? We would be forced to argue with this life and the order of things taught by the life/death/life cycle obviously self-evident with this life.
Nothing wrong with that. Life is Life and Truth is established even with and in this living existence of fleeting life.
Might I refer to a dead poet? Oh, ok, so what, I will:
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
Rom 1:19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
Rom 1:20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
Rom 1:21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
So, what gives? So, they do not want to honor Him as God or give thanks to Him and I do!
So, what gives I ask again? :)
On the other hand, er, the third hand, Ken now knows the truth: Luke 16:27ff. Perhaps he appreciates someone articulately pointing out his premortem errors at this stage.
ReplyDelete