In Greek mythology there are nine goddesses-each in charge of a different area of the arts. (See my very first post for a little more information.) Their names are: Erato, Euterpe, Thalia, Melpomene, Terpsichore, Urania, Clio, Polyhymnia, and Calliope. I realized that because I'm a teenage guy in the 21st century I'll need another muse. You see, I claimed that all my posts could hypothetically be placed under the charge of each of these muses. But I need a new one for specifically Rock music. I decided that Euterpe being the muse of music just didn't cut it. So *drumroll please* the first person I thought of to nominate as the Rock-Muse was Katie Montgomery! This was because of her obvious interest in electric guitars, and her ability to actually play them, her love of rock and the fact that she would just make an interesting muse. In honor of the new muse I'll post my favorite rock songs.
http://youtu.be/3xIxsme-L-E
http://youtu.be/CZ_VFJn2kJM
http://youtu.be/s-7LabndwIk
http://youtu.be/zjAxCx95mO8
Congrats Katie! :)
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Monday, December 12, 2011
Life and the worth of it
"The child will be born with a disability and their life will be harder then normal. Wouldn't it just be better to abort the fetus? Wouldn't it be kinder to make sure that this baby isn't born with any defects by aborting?" This is an argument often given by abortion advocates in America. Does this argument stand? These pro-choicers would be right in part of their argument, that the child will have a harder-then-normal life. But their conclusion doesn't follow at all.
My family has had a large amount of experience with mentally-disabled folks, and a family that's close to ours has a down-syndrome daughter. I know that being mentally disabled is hard. The daughter of our friends turns 14 this year, but in my minds she is about 8 or 9. She struggles with reading and other mental tasks. I'm not envious of her position, but her life IS worth living. She has set-backs. That's undeniable. But she wouldn't want to be aborted. Every moment she gets to see a brilliant blue sky, every moment that she gets to enjoy playing with her sisters, every moment she takes delight in giving people hugs, every moment she performs ballet, every game where she gets to cheer on her brothers, every moment where she can take joy in the fact that Christ is her savior, every moment she knows that she is loved by her family, every moment where she can take joy, deep or shallow, important or trivial in anything is a moment that says, "Life is worth living."
Friday, December 9, 2011
The "Problem" Of Evil. (Not as much of a problem as you think.)
How many times have Christian apologists heard the argument about the "problem of evil"? The argument goes like this:
"God (Assuming He exists) is omnibenevolent and omnipotent. If God is omnibenevolent He wouldn't want evil in the world. If He was omnipotent He would have the ability to get rid of evil in the world. There is evil in the world. God must not exist. QED."
Some Christians would say that this argument is illogical. But they would be wrong. This is actually a perfectly logical syllogism.
"But God does exist! How can this be logical??"many Christians would say. Well, obviously it's false. So how can it be proven wrong? Well the formatting of this argument fits the laws of logic perfectly. But just because an argument is logically formatted right doesn't mean that it's actually true. Here's an argument that is perfectly logic and perfectly untrue:
"If Mr. Davis is an Omnibus teacher, he's the King of France. Mr. Davis is an Omnibus teacher. Therefore Mr. Davis is the King of France. QED."
Perfect logical format. But the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises. The one step that fails is the one that implies that if Mr. Davis is an Omnibus teacher he's the King of France. Does the problem of evil have a failing premise? It has to have one because it's perfect logically, but it's obviously false.
Which step is the one that fails? Well God is omnibenevolent and omnipotent. There is evil in the world. God does have the ability to get rid of evil in the world. So the only one left is "If God is omnibenevolent he wouldn't want evil in the world." It is my belief that this is the weak link in this logical chain.
A friend once asked me "If God is omnipresent, and there's no evil in God, how is there evil in the world?" He was joking, and omnipresent isn't really the correct word, but the question still remains. I couldn't think of a way to answer this problem until Mr. Davis compared the world and history to a story where God is the author. "See, in Lord Of The Rings," Mr. Davis said, "is Tolkien evil for having evil characters? No, because he disapproves what those characters are doing. But he wouldn't have a story if there weren't evil people in it." Imagine LOTR without evil people. The name would have to be changed to, "Frodo and Sam Have The Jolliest Time In The Land Where Nothing Bad Ever Happens." It's a mockery of a story. God is supreme over all of His creations, and I try to just trust whatever He chooses to do with me. This analogy is immensely helpful to me because I love stories. But if this analogy doesn't help you, then it's just an analogy. Find one that works for you, while still saying the truth.
"God (Assuming He exists) is omnibenevolent and omnipotent. If God is omnibenevolent He wouldn't want evil in the world. If He was omnipotent He would have the ability to get rid of evil in the world. There is evil in the world. God must not exist. QED."
Some Christians would say that this argument is illogical. But they would be wrong. This is actually a perfectly logical syllogism.
"But God does exist! How can this be logical??"many Christians would say. Well, obviously it's false. So how can it be proven wrong? Well the formatting of this argument fits the laws of logic perfectly. But just because an argument is logically formatted right doesn't mean that it's actually true. Here's an argument that is perfectly logic and perfectly untrue:
"If Mr. Davis is an Omnibus teacher, he's the King of France. Mr. Davis is an Omnibus teacher. Therefore Mr. Davis is the King of France. QED."
Perfect logical format. But the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises. The one step that fails is the one that implies that if Mr. Davis is an Omnibus teacher he's the King of France. Does the problem of evil have a failing premise? It has to have one because it's perfect logically, but it's obviously false.
Which step is the one that fails? Well God is omnibenevolent and omnipotent. There is evil in the world. God does have the ability to get rid of evil in the world. So the only one left is "If God is omnibenevolent he wouldn't want evil in the world." It is my belief that this is the weak link in this logical chain.
A friend once asked me "If God is omnipresent, and there's no evil in God, how is there evil in the world?" He was joking, and omnipresent isn't really the correct word, but the question still remains. I couldn't think of a way to answer this problem until Mr. Davis compared the world and history to a story where God is the author. "See, in Lord Of The Rings," Mr. Davis said, "is Tolkien evil for having evil characters? No, because he disapproves what those characters are doing. But he wouldn't have a story if there weren't evil people in it." Imagine LOTR without evil people. The name would have to be changed to, "Frodo and Sam Have The Jolliest Time In The Land Where Nothing Bad Ever Happens." It's a mockery of a story. God is supreme over all of His creations, and I try to just trust whatever He chooses to do with me. This analogy is immensely helpful to me because I love stories. But if this analogy doesn't help you, then it's just an analogy. Find one that works for you, while still saying the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)