tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-414946164942126209.post9062106057709596462..comments2024-03-28T06:33:02.061-04:00Comments on Encyclopedia of American Loons: #286: J.P. MorelandG.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08875360501107597863noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-414946164942126209.post-16071073829315766572018-12-21T07:09:00.339-05:002018-12-21T07:09:00.339-05:00I must agree. Anyone who defines an individual as ...I must agree. Anyone who defines an individual as a loon (independent of whether or not the charge is warranted, and in many cases they are) and links to Rationalwiki is someone who has a particular taste for theism. Most of the charges on this website are merely dismissals of individuals as opposed to a robust engagement with their ideas.<br />James Bishophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14714881836444981057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-414946164942126209.post-44996033379944106452013-06-08T10:07:09.950-04:002013-06-08T10:07:09.950-04:00JP Moreland has been exposed here:
http://www.cas...JP Moreland has been exposed here:<br /><br />http://www.caseagainstfaith.com/critique-of-lee-strobels-the-case-for-faith.html<br /><br />“Subobjection 5: Why Doesn’t God Just Snuff People Out?<br /><br />Given the apparently more humane option of annihilating the unsaved, rather than eternally tormenting them, why would God choose eternal torment? According to Moreland, God “refuses to snuff out a creature made in his own image” because such a creature has “intrinsic value” (p. 183). Instead, God punishes beings of “intrinsic value” for all eternity? He sends creatures “made in his own image” to Hell? How is that “morally superior,” as Moreland claims? What school of “morality” is this?<br /><br />Given a choice between not existing at all, or existing in eternal torment, who would choose eternal torment? How can eternal torment possibly be “morally superior” to nonexistence? At the very least, wouldn’t giving the condemned a choice between eternal torment and nonexistence be “morally superior” to automatically damning them to eternal misery?”Winstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14029187310122412297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-414946164942126209.post-83806760572389142732013-01-15T17:29:21.360-05:002013-01-15T17:29:21.360-05:00said a man with the same scientific credentials as...said a man with the same scientific credentials as my cat...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-414946164942126209.post-37534442126974987942012-10-24T23:40:25.052-04:002012-10-24T23:40:25.052-04:00A theory that is unobservable and unrepeatable, su...A theory that is unobservable and unrepeatable, such as biological evolution, is not scientific.A. J. MacDonald, Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02606590381956913426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-414946164942126209.post-30359753038928308402012-02-08T20:15:50.920-05:002012-02-08T20:15:50.920-05:00No. It's a website devoted to anti-science. Bi...No. It's a website devoted to anti-science. Big difference. There are plenty of theist scientists. Those who reject or object to science or scientific results (often evolution or global warming) on non-scientific grounds, and those who contribute to anti-science efforts, are included. Please tell us if we have made any mistakes in that respect. We have deleted entries before when it turns out that our judgment has been off, and we are willing to revise our conclusions in light of new evidence. As for Moreland, the main charge is his involvement with the decidedly anti-science efforts of the Discovery Institute.G.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08875360501107597863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-414946164942126209.post-17968278485478840412012-02-08T19:38:04.543-05:002012-02-08T19:38:04.543-05:00This looks like a theist hate website.This looks like a theist hate website.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com