Author Topic: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss  (Read 8931 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline yeshaberto

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8970
  • Gender: Male
  • Somebody Get Me A Doctor! - VH
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #175 on: September 14, 2013, 12:22:23 PM »
my biggest concern with religion is not when they adhere to the text, but when they twist the text into shallow, man-made rules.
this was one of Jesus' greatest themes when he challenged the religious leaders of the day

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40294
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #176 on: September 14, 2013, 01:07:10 PM »
But hefdaddy, if you're just going to edit the parts you don't like, why not start from scratch and start a new religion the way you like it? If you're going to be a Christian, shouldn't you conform to the text? Not the other way around?
First of all, I have no interest in editing parts "I don't like."  I am more interested in editing parts that I don't think are authentic or original, or are more apparently fabrications of certain interested parties rather than original records of the history of God's interaction with man.

Secondly, "conforming to the text" is only helpful if you think the text is the be-all and end-all of your faith, or if you think the text was essentially written by God.  I don't think either of those things.

And I think Jesus was 100% correct in challenging the religious leaders of his day.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline jammindude

  • Posts: 8633
  • Gender: Male
    • The Jammin Dude Show
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #177 on: September 14, 2013, 07:25:45 PM »
my biggest concern with religion is not when they adhere to the text, but when they twist the text into shallow, man-made rules.
this was one of Jesus' greatest themes when he challenged the religious leaders of the day

THIS!   :slowclap:
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world.
Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - Neil Peart

The Jammin Dude Show - http://www.youtube.com/user/jammindude

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #178 on: September 14, 2013, 11:54:22 PM »
But hefdaddy, if you're just going to edit the parts you don't like, why not start from scratch and start a new religion the way you like it? If you're going to be a Christian, shouldn't you conform to the text? Not the other way around?
First of all, I have no interest in editing parts "I don't like."  I am more interested in editing parts that I don't think are authentic or original, or are more apparently fabrications of certain interested parties rather than original records of the history of God's interaction with man.

Secondly, "conforming to the text" is only helpful if you think the text is the be-all and end-all of your faith, or if you think the text was essentially written by God.  I don't think either of those things.

And I think Jesus was 100% correct in challenging the religious leaders of his day.
Oh I see. You've never been 100% clear about your view of the role of the Bible, but I'm starting to see it now. It was a bit hard to piece together, but let me ask you to clarify if this is what you think:
-The Bible is a generally good collection of documents (with some inauthentic writings) portraying man's encounters with the divine in history.
-The Bible is written by human beings and not by God.
-God and his nature cannot be truly understood, nor can it be expressed in any of our human languages, but we can talk about our experiences using our language (which is what the Bible does).
-The message and gospel of Jesus are best expressed using Jewish resurrection terminology, which Paul and the apostles adopted. Did Jesus rise from the dead? Yes and no. Jesus' literal flesh and bones didn't reanimate and come back to life, but He showed us that we can live on by dying for something worth dying for (i.e. we can metaphorically be resurrected).
-Is Jesus the Son of God? Yes and no. It depends who you ask. The Jewish terms "Messiah", "Son of God", and "Son of Man" are the ways these people in the first century understood Jesus to be. They saw God working through him and thought him divine. But was he actually divine? Again, it depends who you ask. Each of our experiences with the divine are subjective and are true for those that have them.

Tell me if I'm way off base, and if I am, correct me.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40294
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #179 on: September 15, 2013, 05:19:33 AM »
Tell me if I'm way off base, and if I am, correct me.
OK, sure.

-The Bible is a generally good collection of documents (with some inauthentic writings) portraying man's encounters with the divine in history.
Pretty much.

-The Bible is written by human beings and not by God.
Yep.

-God and his nature cannot be truly understood, nor can it be expressed in any of our human languages, but we can talk about our experiences using our language (which is what the Bible does).
Well, I don't think that God can be completely understood by humanity, in much the same way that an ant can't understand a nebula.  But aspects of God and God's personality can be understood.

-The message and gospel of Jesus are best expressed using Jewish resurrection terminology, which Paul and the apostles adopted. Did Jesus rise from the dead? Yes and no. Jesus' literal flesh and bones didn't reanimate and come back to life, but He showed us that we can live on by dying for something worth dying for (i.e. we can metaphorically be resurrected).
I certainly think that metaphor is very, very important in understanding the Bible, and particularly in the message and teachings of Jesus. 

I am undecided about a physical resurrection of Jesus, but it also doesn't matter that much to me, because regardless of whether or not his physical body reanimated, I definitely believe that in some fashion that I don't fully understand, he continued to be experienced by his disciples as a reality following his crucifixion in a way that had never been done before (or since), and that he can continue to be experienced by Christians today.  It may have been physical, or it may have been something else, but either way it was real.

-Is Jesus the Son of God? Yes and no. It depends who you ask. The Jewish terms "Messiah", "Son of God", and "Son of Man" are the ways these people in the first century understood Jesus to be. They saw God working through him and thought him divine. But was he actually divine? Again, it depends who you ask. Each of our experiences with the divine are subjective and are true for those that have them.
I agree with most of this, although I don't think that I would make your last sentence a blanket statement.  While I certainly believe that each of us that experience God can experience God in different ways, I don't think that everyone that claims to have an experience of God has actually had one. 

And I know that you mentioned that I've never been 100% clear about this stuff, and I guess that's probably true, but I'm not sure that I'm comfortable about thinking that I have this stuff figured out 100%.  Certainly, all of my opinions on these things developed over time, and have frequently changed as I have learned and experienced new things.  All I can say is that the things I believe are the best I can do for now, with the stated recognition that I could be wrong about some or all of it.  But with the gifts God has given me, this is the best I can do thus far.  And if it flies in the face of convention or orthodoxy, so be it.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26445
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #180 on: September 15, 2013, 05:48:38 PM »
If I've ever understood your faith correctly, Hef, I took it that the admission of "noise" is an integral part in your quest for understanding what's beneath that noise. Almost in that scientific sense of "individually we're all reasonably wrong, but when taken together we end up being more right".
"I liked when Myung looked like a women's figure skating champion."

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #181 on: September 15, 2013, 06:38:44 PM »
Well this thread has evolved into something completely different...

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40294
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #182 on: September 15, 2013, 07:26:15 PM »
If I've ever understood your faith correctly, Hef, I took it that the admission of "noise" is an integral part in your quest for understanding what's beneath that noise. Almost in that scientific sense of "individually we're all reasonably wrong, but when taken together we end up being more right".
There is certainly an element of that.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 20031
  • Gender: Male
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #183 on: September 16, 2013, 11:39:56 AM »
I'm 30 minutes into the first video of the OP. I would be extremely uncomfortable if I was in Craig's place.

edit:

50 minutes

"Science is not something that is natural to mankind. Science is an invented cultural constitution" - Craig ... Are you fucking kidding me? Every person is born a scientist. You can't leave a child alone for more than a minute before they lay waste to everything in your house. They want to touch everything. They are asking the questions "what is this?", "What does this do?", "What just happened when I knocked this glass off the shelf?". Children demonstrate the scientific method with everything they do in life (even if they won't understand the concept for years to come). I'm sorry, but this guy isn't saying anything that helps his case.

"Without God there wouldn't be any objective foundation for moral values" - Craig ... From an evolution standpoint, if there were no natural tendencies to demonstrate what we've defined as morality, it would be terrible for our species. It would not be in our best interest to just want to kill each other for no reason at all. Acting 'morally' is what allowed us to eventually live in civilized societies that would be able to work together and ensure everyone's survival.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2013, 12:40:08 PM by Chino »

Offline soundgarden

  • Posts: 912
  • Gender: Male
Re: Three dialogues between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss
« Reply #184 on: October 02, 2013, 06:09:30 PM »
my biggest concern with religion is not when they adhere to the text, but when they twist the text into shallow, man-made rules.
this was one of Jesus' greatest themes when he challenged the religious leaders of the day

...which then led to scriptures written by men, edited by men, and interpreted by men.  Sure, one can claim those men were divinely guided; why not the Zeus to the Romans or Allah to Mohammed?  Or was one religion's faith more true because they had sharper swords and better fighters?

The religion of one era is the myth of another.