Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (20 Viewers)
- Thread starter Dinsdale
- Start date
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a Bible and... okay, I thought I had a joke. Never mind.
This, a lot have simple problems admitting they are/were wrong.
---------- Post added 02.06.2012 at 15:19 ----------
How about you read my post again and then try again.
---------- Post added 02.06.2012 at 15:20 ----------
How do you even know they are starving anyway? They could already have food provided for them.
---------- Post added 02.06.2012 at 15:19 ----------
The last time I checked, people curb their hunger by eating food, not by hoping that they'll get food. It's the same reason why school and office cafeteria's serve food and not the Bible.
But don't listen to me; my arguments are flawed.
But don't listen to me; my arguments are flawed.
---------- Post added 02.06.2012 at 15:20 ----------
How do you even know they are starving anyway? They could already have food provided for them.
There are plenty of causes that give food, water, medicine etc and no one is forcing anyone to give to this charity or cause instead. But as an atheist you wouldn't understand that the Bible can give hope to people and make their day brighter instead of being depressed or sad. And it says no one in that picture that those kids are starving or aren't being educated. In fact, the fact that they are reading would lead one to believe that they are being educated and therefore are being supported ok.
I would argue that the Bible is not the only source of hope. I'm sure that our history has provided many real stories that may make such people hope for a better future. I would also argue that they could potentially be false hopes because the promise is salvation is unverifiable. Since these claims are to be taken on faith and not evidence, it's unbelievable.
Also, I think you're being very naive to assume that the picture used accurately portrays the true living conditions there. That picture is used for marketing. That picture is deliberately used to paint a picture to the viewer of how they kids will be when they get the Bible they're supposedly paying for. You shouldn't be taking the scenario depicted in that picture as reality.
PS: BTW, that post doesn't really give a proper description of where the bibles will be sent to, and what the current situation in that place is. So it's not right to assume that they're already being provided with food, water, medicine, education, etc.
Also, I think you're being very naive to assume that the picture used accurately portrays the true living conditions there. That picture is used for marketing. That picture is deliberately used to paint a picture to the viewer of how they kids will be when they get the Bible they're supposedly paying for. You shouldn't be taking the scenario depicted in that picture as reality.
PS: BTW, that post doesn't really give a proper description of where the bibles will be sent to, and what the current situation in that place is. So it's not right to assume that they're already being provided with food, water, medicine, education, etc.
It doesn't matter if it's the only source of hope or not and whether or not it's 'false hope'. You need to stop arguing the little things and look at the bigger picture.
PS: You also can't assume they aren't being provided with food, water etc just as the caption on the side says. That just flaws your whole argument.
I've already said everything else I needed to say about it.
PS: You also can't assume they aren't being provided with food, water etc just as the caption on the side says. That just flaws your whole argument.
I've already said everything else I needed to say about it.