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…
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…
Just a few points that I really want to clear up. I've edited the list down extremely and these are the most important things, I think.
"Unfortunately it seems to be impossible, either by intelligent design or evolution, to eliminate the possibility of evil choices."
Please show your work. Since you have exactly one (1) observable reality from which to draw your inferences and nothing to compare it to. I'm curious as to how you came to this conclusion. Also, and I know I've harped on this point, but Intelligent Design only suffers from that problem if the designer is not omnipotent. An omnipotent designer would not be preventable from creating such a reality by definition, regardless of the way that things seem to be in the reality we're in. 'By definition "free will" includes the abi…