I recently shared a link to a great little article by The Atheist Advocate on patheos.com in which Christians are challenged to wear an Atheist t-shirt for one week, in order to learn about what persecution means, due to the apparent misunderstanding which is often spread by Christians.
Pretty good idea, no?
Now, I know that '____ Challenge' is currently extremely cliche, but would a good name for this be 'Persecution Challenge'? Too emotive maybe?
I may have found a taker, and I think it would be a really great experience, probably for both of us. You see, she's a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
I would be required to wear a Mormon t-shirt for one week, while she would be required to wear an Atheist t-shirt during the same time.
If we both agree on this, how should we document everything? I'm thinking that…
I am going to make a bold statement."For all practical purposes, it is always irrational to assign a supernatural cause to an event observed in the natural world."
Now I am going to attempt to back up that statement.
The only reason (of which I am aware) to assign a supernatural cause to a given event is the following: "I do not currently understand the details and outcome of this observation given my current state of knowledge and understanding of the natural world."
Also, I suspect that many of you would prefer to add the caveat "And the details and outcome of this event are consistent with a particular supernatural belief or belief system", but that is clearly an example of circular reasoning and cannot be a valid part of this discussion. The supernatural belief or belief system is, in fact, the item in question, or to be more accurate, the observation cannot be assigned a cause which has not been demonstrated, it can only be assigned a hypothesized c…
Just a quick addendum to my review of 'God's Not Dead', and also a comment about the current state of Apologetics.
The Problem of Evil, simply put, is the idea that an All-Powerful 'God' would be able to abolish evil and apparently has chosen not to do so. To many, this idea of a 'God' is evil itself. Imagine, if you will, a grown man raping a 2-year old toddler. Now imagine that an all-powerful bearded man in the sky is watching this unfold, yet doing nothing. For myself, I consider this being to be completely immoral. If it were a human watching this happen, with the power to stop it yet not doing so, we would never hesitate to call the person completely immoral. Why is it so different for a 'God'?
Well, according to the movie and to current Apologetics, the solution to the Problem of Evil is 'Free Will'. By abolishing evil in this world, such a being would be abrogating human 'Free Will'. This seems to make sense on the surface, b…