• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

God kills kids and dad

Yes, Dew, keep praying harder and harder, and maybe he will not smite you.

"God is merciful. Yes! Despite all appearances!"

--Archbishop Bertie Gurney, The Ruling Class

--J.D.
 
I hope that the grieving family will take Dew's word for this and blame God, rather than doing something blasphemous that would insult God's power in this matter, such as suing the Fort Worth Water Gardens.
 
The Rev. Gerald M. Dew, pastor of Antioch Missionary Baptist Church in Chicago, said the man and children had gone to the Fort Worth Water Gardens to play because the pool at their nearby hotel was closed.
Click to expand...

Somehow the hotel will getted sued.
 
Badger said:

I just can't get over the final line in the story. I can understand people craving for a purpose or meaning to life, but the statement made by Dew strikes me as being totally delusional.
Click to expand...

Here's the final line in the article:

"The word that God told me to tell them was that he's still in charge and he's still in control, and that we only see the beginning, but God sees the beginning and the end, so we have to just hope in him," Dew said


I don't know which you think is delusional...the notion that God spoke to him, or the notion that there are just some things that we are incabable of understanding when we ask the question: why?

Or is it just Hope that you object to and somehow find delusional.

As to the former, and a matter of technicality, you should be aware as a skeptic that Reverend Dew was probably speaking to the journalist when he said: "The word that God told me to tell them...," and not to the congregation. We have absolutely no evidence from the article that this causal link was proferred to the congregation (not that you are arguing this) so in saying this to the journalist, his title as reverend would not carry weight for a target of criticism since it amounts to personal opinion.

Additionally, even if he did proffer this to the congregation, or by obvious default through the article itself, words such as God told me are inspirational in nature, and not to be interpreted strictly literal, and as an empirical experience. Remember what ceo_ esq said recently in another thread in that "even determining the literal meaning of a text constitutes an act of interpretation on the part of the reader"...or in language and the listener for that matter.

As to Reverend Dew's latter remarks, and for that matter, the content of his thoughts...I find nothing wrong with them, although you as an Atheist, which I am presuming you are, may.
However you may disagree ideologically with any of the content, I think it's silly to describe them as delusional, after all, what would you say if you were in his position and "standing before his teary-eyed church members..."

...better yet, strike that question.
 
Re: Re: God kills kids and dad

csense said:


Here's the final line in the article:

"The word that God told me to tell them was that he's still in charge and he's still in control, and that we only see the beginning, but God sees the beginning and the end, so we have to just hope in him," Dew said


I don't know which you think is delusional...the notion that God spoke to him, or the notion that there are just some things that we are incabable of understanding when we ask the question: why?

Or is it just Hope that you object to and somehow find delusional.

As to the former, and a matter of technicality, you should be aware as a skeptic that Reverend Dew was probably speaking to the journalist when he said: "The word that God told me to tell them...," and not to the congregation. We have absolutely no evidence from the article that this causal link was proferred to the congregation (not that you are arguing this) so in saying this to the journalist, his title as reverend would not carry weight for a target of criticism since it amounts to personal opinion.

Additionally, even if he did proffer this to the congregation, or by obvious default through the article itself, words such as God told me are inspirational in nature, and not to be interpreted strictly literal, and as an empirical experience. Remember what ceo_ esq said recently in another thread in that "even determining the literal meaning of a text constitutes an act of interpretation on the part of the reader"...or in language and the listener for that matter.

As to Reverend Dew's latter remarks, and for that matter, the content of his thoughts...I find nothing wrong with them, although you as an Atheist, which I am presuming you are, may.
However you may disagree ideologically with any of the content, I think it's silly to describe them as delusional, after all, what would you say if you were in his position and "standing before his teary-eyed church members..."

...better yet, strike that question.
Click to expand...

What I think is delusional is that this guy believes there is a god who would take time out of running the universe to whack a few people for "some greater good", rather than seeing that this horrible accident was the result of ignorance or negligence.

What I think is delusional is that this guy seems to think out of billions of planets in billions of solar systems in billions of galaxies (exaggeration, but you know what I'm saying) god takes time to talk to 120-250 lbs (a guess ) of assorted, randomly organized chemicals.

No, I don't object to hope. I do think that given enough time, we can answer "why?", though.

I'm agnostic, by the way. There may be a god, there may not be a god, there may be an afterlife, and there may not be. I don't know, but I'll find out when I get there. All evidence shows that there are a whole lot more reasonable explanations for things than having to invoke a "god".

What would I say to the congregation? "We have lost friends, family, that were very special to us. Grieve for them, and carry their memory with you always. Remember the good things, and strive to be the person you wanted them to see you as. Live your life as a tribute to them and our other loved ones who are no longer with us." That's what I would say.


(Sorry Zakur. I didn't see your thread)
 
I don't know which you think is delusional...the notion that God spoke to him, or the notion that there are just some things that we are incabable of understanding when we ask the question: why?
Click to expand...

Both obviously are. [Ipse dixit.--Ed.] Oh hush!

Actually, the first is delusional if he honestly believes it, and the second is an argumentum ad ignorantiam.

--J.D.
 
Re: Re: Re: God kills kids and dad


What I think is delusional is that this guy believes there is a god who would take time out of running the universe to whack a few people for "some greater good", rather than seeing that this horrible accident was the result of ignorance or negligence.

What I think is delusional is that this guy seems to think out of billions of planets in billions of solar systems in billions of galaxies (exaggeration, but you know what I'm saying) god takes time to talk to 120-250 lbs (a guess ) of assorted, randomly organized chemicals.


Well, then there's part of your problem, since this is your delusion and not his...and demonstrably so.


No, I don't object to hope. I do think that given enough time, we can answer "why?", though.

Empirically, or ontologically.
If the latter, then how do you show it empirically.
See the problem?


I'm agnostic, by the way. There may be a god, there may not be a god, there may be an afterlife, and there may not be. I don't know, but I'll find out when I get there. All evidence shows that there are a whole lot more reasonable explanations for things than having to invoke a "god".

Again, on which level...empirically or ontologically.

In my world, they are compatible...in yours, they are conflictual.

Maybe you're not as agnostic as you seem to think



What would I say to the congregation? "We have lost friends, family, that were very special to us. Grieve for them, and carry their memory with you always. Remember the good things, and strive to be the person you wanted them to see you as. Live your life as a tribute to them and our other loved ones who are no longer with us." That's what I would say.

How do you know he didn't say that in addition to what was said in the article, and I think it's a little insulting to imply, even if vaguely, that he was not as compassionate as you would be.
 
Doctor X said:


Both obviously are.
Click to expand...

Indeed, and to think that you didn't even have to write this for me to know that they would be delusional to you.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: God kills kids and dad

csense said:

What I think is delusional is that this guy believes there is a god who would take time out of running the universe to whack a few people for "some greater good", rather than seeing that this horrible accident was the result of ignorance or negligence.

What I think is delusional is that this guy seems to think out of billions of planets in billions of solar systems in billions of galaxies (exaggeration, but you know what I'm saying) god takes time to talk to 120-250 lbs (a guess ) of assorted, randomly organized chemicals.


Well, then there's part of your problem, since this is your delusion and not his...and demonstrably so.

My problem? I'm not the one invoking god, so it's not my problem. I'm merely offended that such a blatent lack of grasp on reality is not only condoned, but is aspired to by others.

No, I don't object to hope. I do think that given enough time, we can answer "why?", though.

Empirically, or ontologically.
If the latter, then how do you show it empirically.
See the problem?

Both. No, I don't see the problem. The fact that we don't have enough info to get from "here" to "there" at the moment doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep progressing.

I'm agnostic, by the way. There may be a god, there may not be a god, there may be an afterlife, and there may not be. I don't know, but I'll find out when I get there. All evidence shows that there are a whole lot more reasonable explanations for things than having to invoke a "god".

Again, on which level...empirically or ontologically.

In my world, they are compatible...in yours, they are conflictual.

Maybe you're not as agnostic as you seem to think

No, I'm pretty sure I'm as agnostic as I think I am. And again, the answer is "both".

What would I say to the congregation? "We have lost friends, family, that were very special to us. Grieve for them, and carry their memory with you always. Remember the good things, and strive to be the person you wanted them to see you as. Live your life as a tribute to them and our other loved ones who are no longer with us." That's what I would say.

How do you know he didn't say that in addition to what was said in the article, and I think it's a little insulting to imply, even if vaguely, that he was not as compassionate as you would be.
Click to expand...

It doesn't say what else he said. You asked what I would have told the congregation (and then said "better yet, strike that question" which if you really wanted it struck, you could have used the "edit" function) so I told you. I made no judgements on his compassion, but did on his delusion.
 
So how would one ever tell the difference between simple delusion driving bizarre actions and the "word of Adonai"?

Surely answering that is prerequisite to any theism?
 
Indeed, and to think that you didn't even have to write this for me to know that they would be delusional to you.
Click to expand...

That one shares in the man's delusion is really nothing to be proud of.

--J.D.
 
Doctor X said:


That one shares in the man's delusion is really nothing to be proud of.
Click to expand...


You're right, my belief in God and Jesus Christ has nothing to do with pride.
 
To which I would only add that you, csense, cannot consider the recognition of this reverend's belief as delusional as unreasonable.

Otherwise, your belief would be very much tied to your pride.

--J.D.
 
Doctor X said:
To which I would only add that you, csense, cannot consider the recognition of this reverend's belief as delusional as unreasonable.

Otherwise, your belief would be very much tied to your pride.

--J.D.
Click to expand...

Oh, please...

A foolish argument is a foolish argument.
 
csense said:
You're right, my belief in God and Jesus Christ has nothing to do with pride.
Click to expand...
Then you admit you are ashamed of your belief in God and Jesus Christ, right? If it has nothing to do with pride, then it must have everything to do with shame.

(Yes, I changed the usage of the word "pride", just as you did. We can both play these little semantic games.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom