However (using his own standards of judgment), this man must be a liar, because he made a number of absolute statements in his reply. He said that "all" planes and elevators are probably safe. That means that he has absolute knowledge of all planes and elevators. There’s not one plane or elevator in this entire universe, of which he isn’t perfectly familiar.
Then he does the same thing with his "all" knowledge. To say "all knowledge is probable," he must have all knowledge to know that it's probable. So he humbly claims omniscience. He thinks that he is God. Then he boasts of his humility (he’s not arrogant like those who use absolute statements) and says "Anyone who claims to have absolute knowledge is a liar."
Richard Dawkins shows the difference between the belief of the atheist and the experiential knowledge of the Christian, with his "There is probably no God." The Christian knows God, while the professing atheist doesn’t. He is an "atheist"--a ("without") theist ("God"). He is without God.
Then Richard (the absolute statement-maker) goes out on a limb and makes another absolute statement, in an effort to prove that God doesn’t keep His promises:
"Now please explain why there has NEVER been a single substantiated report of a single amputee that regained his amputated limb back from God."
How does he know that this has never happened in history, or somewhere else other than in his very limited world? The best he can offer is that he has never heard of such a thing.
His broad statement is typical of those who adamantly say that there is no God. In reality, they don’t know that God doesn’t exist. So they need to sit at the feet of the learned professor Dawkins, and stay with the word "probably."
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Richard, the Liar-heart?
