fayfreethinkers.com

DAR
Larry passed this one along. This letter passes along the standard stories Christians pass around but can be easily refuted by referring to good Christian scholarship. Maybe I'll roast it later.

It's online here.

***
Can ants understand computers?

The recent letter by Glen Salter [Times, May 20] has me a little baffled. Is Mr. Salter saying that people who believe in God are ignorant? He apparently has some worldly wisdom, or at least believes he does.

The Messiah was definitely literate since he taught from the Old Testament and was handed the scroll and turned to Isaiah and read to the Pharisees and they were astonished at his teaching.

How could a literate Jesus write the Old Testament, since some of it was written hundreds (and some parts thousands) of years before his time on Earth? And how could he write the New Testament, since most of it was written after his departure? There are four books of the Bible dedicated to the time he was here on the Earth. The Bible was written by men under the inspiration of Holy Spirit.

There are thousands of things written about and predicted about the Messiah in all of Scripture. In fact, the probability for Jesus to have fulfilled the prophesies in his lifetime would be one in 10 to the 52 power.

Is Mr. Salter saying that he has something better to offer than belief in God? Is he offering something better, or just trying to condemn those who believe? If he is offering something better in his own mind why doesn't he give us some insight into it?

If he is correct, and there is no God, then what I believe on this Earth has no bearing on his life and we will all die and exist no more. However, if he is wrong, then he had better enjoy all of life he can on the Earth because it is all the pleasure he will ever have. The next life will be one of horrible torment for him and all who do not believe.

The Bible clearly states that God works with chosen people. Prior to the foundation of the world he knew who those people would be. He gives to those people spiritual ears to hear, and minds to perceive what the Scripture says through the Holy Spirit. Mr. Salter maybe just does not have ears to hear or a mind that can perceive spiritual truth. The Bible also speaks of the mystery of salvation being hidden from those who think themselves wise in this world.

He mentions contradictions but doesn't specifically point to any. Do you think an ant could understand a computer? Then why would you think a created being could ever understand its creator?
Ben Israel / Fayetteville

-----

A response can be submitted online at the above link. Larry says the word limit is: 400 words.

If he is correct, and there is no God, then what I believe on this Earth has no bearing on his life and we will all die and exist no more. However, if he is wrong, then he had better enjoy all of life he can on the Earth because it is all the pleasure he will ever have. The next life will be one of horrible torment for him and all who do not believe.

I hear this pathetic argument all the time. It sounds a bit like Pascal's Wager, but without emphasis on probability. Also, this is a false dichotomy. The writer is assuming that either he or Satler is right and the other is wrong. He ignores the possibility of them both being wrong.

The Bible clearly states that God works with chosen people. Prior to the foundation of the world he knew who those people would be. He gives to those people spiritual ears to hear, and minds to perceive what the Scripture says through the Holy Spirit. Mr. Salter maybe just does not have ears to hear or a mind that can perceive spiritual truth. The Bible also speaks of the mystery of salvation being hidden from those who think themselves wise in this world.

This is an ugly doctine that has been rearing its head lately. It's called predestination. I'm seeing it in churches that used to preach against it (like SBC). Basically, salvation is no longer open to anybody. God chooses who he will save. If you're an atheist like me, it's because God didn't like you enough to save you.

Do you think an ant could understand a computer? Then why would you think a created being could ever understand its creator?

This is such a bad analogy. He said that humans can't understand God because he is our creator. So, ants can't understand computers, because a computer created them? Of course, that's just silly. Computers did not create computers. Also, it doesn't follow that humans would be unable to understand God because he created humans. That's silly too.

Hey, his mix of computers and ants made me think of this fictional computer that uses ants from an ant farm as the one's and zeros.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hex_(Discworld)

Do you think an ant could understand a computer? Then why would you think a created being could ever understand its creator?

RobertMadewell wrote: This is such a bad analogy. He said that humans can't understand God because he is our creator. So, ants can't understand computers, because a computer created them? Of course, that's just silly. Computers did not create computers. Also, it doesn't follow that humans would be unable to understand God because he created humans. That's silly too.

DOUG
It's a disanalogy and thus does not show anything about gods and humans. Ants can't "understand" many basic things that we use as appliances, but we humans (or computers) do not stand in relation to ants as God allegedly stands to human beings--except that both God (as a concept) and computers are created by human beings.

But the main problem with the ant analogy is that an analogy is not an argument. An analogy shows how something could be the case, but it does not show that something is the case. Suppose it is true that if God exists, then we would be like ants to God and thus we would not understand him.

OK. Now show that:

a. God exists.
b. God stands in relation to us as computers do to ants.

Without this further argumentation, the ant analogy is just wishful thinking. It is the kind of thing that theists would LIKE to be able to show, but can't.