Sunday, August 12, 2007

William Lane Craig explains why God orders expectant mothers to be killed

Question and Answer

Some of William Lane Craig :- 'Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself, He has no moral duties to fulfill. He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are. For example, I have no right to take an innocent life. For me to do so would be murder. But God has no such prohibition. He can give and take life as He chooses.'

'Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.'

'Christians believe that God is all-loving, while Muslims believe that God loves only Muslims. Allah has no love for unbelievers and sinners. Therefore, they can be killed indiscriminately. Moreover, in Islam God’s omnipotence trumps everything, even His own nature. He is therefore utterly arbitrary in His dealing with mankind. By contrast Christians hold that God’s holy and loving nature determines what He commands.'

8 Comments:

Blogger pbandj7 said...

steven

i think you put words into craig's mouth that arent there. there is no call from craig to kill muslims or even attack islamic states. where do you get that from?

as far as attacking muslims, as a follower of Christ, i think this is reprehensible. Christ is the one who said, "love your enemies and do good to those who harm you."

i am in a muslim country right now, and i do try to love them. i certainly dont condone killing them and i want their good, not evil.

peter

11:43 AM  
Blogger stephen said...

this is a rather confusing way to post steve

you just quote WLC as though the fallacy was obvious

having no real ability as a human to understand things from Gods point of view, in the same way that God does, means that a description of Gods authority, as it pertains to the giving and taking of life, may seem arbitrary or capricious or even down right ruthless... WLC's statement may sound like that but it is obvious that he is describing bare facts without emotional embellishment.

you could counterpoint this statement with the idea that God so loved every single one of these little children that he would have gone through the crucifiction a hundred times to save one of those little souls... and there would be no contradiction.

but we are not able to look at the world with his full understanding of eternity, justice, love, righteousness etc etc..

11:13 PM  
Blogger Steven Carr said...

God so loves children he cannot bring himself to lie to them, but he will let them be crucified in their thousands by enemy soldiers?

12:34 AM  
Blogger Steven Carr said...

STEPHEN
'having no real ability as a human to understand things from Gods point of view, in the same way that God does'

CARR
So why can your puny earthling brain tell God that he can never have a morally good reason to lie?

12:35 AM  
Blogger abtruth said...

"God so loves children he cannot bring himself to lie to them, but he will let them be crucified in their thousands by enemy soldiers? "

evil that humans through their free will choose to inflict on others cannot be blamed on God.


Steven Carr said...
STEPHEN
'having no real ability as a human to understand things from Gods point of view, in the same way that God does'

CARR
So why can your puny earthling brain tell God that he can never have a morally good reason to lie?

again i ask

are you putting forward the notion that there are moral obligations that are universal.??

6:15 PM  
Blogger Frank Walton said...

Stevie is still trolling away about Dr. Craig.

12:41 PM  
Blogger Mr Patel said...

Hi Steve

What evidence do you have for the moral obligations (that you are obviously implying) that are consistent with your worldview?

I hope your examples are better than what Dawkins proposed (mainly rhetoric) in the debate against Lennox

Await you answers : )

3:06 PM  
Blogger Steven Carr said...

Mr Patel wants evidence that sticking a sword into an expectant mother produces bad results, and should be avoided.

I guess he is is a psycopath, incapable of realising the horror of the act.

According to Christians, the people that Craig advocated the killing of were 'termites'...

Termites

10:25 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home