Osama Bin Laden was probably a good man; sincere, devout and God fearing. But all it takes to make good people do evil is religion. Keep that in mind. That is the lesson of his life. He was deluded in the same way as other believers. Some delusions cause more harm than others though, and he caused a great deal of it. The problem is he will never know he was deluded. Neither will any of the rest of them. What a waste of a life.Obviously, Loftus and other atheists think they are correct when positing such claims. The problem is, they fail to consider the probability of their own delusion. Consider if such words were applied to an atheist, such as Stalin:
Stalin was probably a good man; sincere and devout. But all it takes to make good people do evil is atheism. Keep that in mind. That is the lesson of his life. He was deluded in the same way as other atheists. Some delusions cause more harm than others though, and he caused a great deal of it. The problem is he will never know he was deluded. Neither will any of the rest of them. What a waste of life.The point of the parallel is not to get into a debacle over Stalin's motives, whether they be ideological, political or whatever. In fact, let's just grant for the sake of argument that Stalin's naturalistic worldview did not necessarily, in and of itself, motivate him to do what he did. However, let's keep one thing in mind: was Stalin doing anything that was inconsistent with his professed worldview? In other words, if our universe is nothing short of raw power with particles clashing against one another with no purpose or goal, then why would it matter if a glob of protoplasm (also known as, "humans") chooses to eliminate millions of other globs of protoplasm in accordance with the firing of neurons in that one's brain? Where does one drawn conclusions of "right, wrong, disgusting, delusional, or inconsistent" from such actions?
This is why such judgments of others is completely non-sensical in atheistic worldviews. Why does "delusional" and "worldview/religion" even matter in such a universe? Loftus may claim that such a life is "wasted," but Osama would have probably begged to differ. But again, how does a "wasted life" even make sense in a purely physical, materialistic universe? Nothing is "wasted." Instead, things just are what they are. Atoms react when they clash against other atoms. And in the same way, globs of protoplasm react when large flying objects (i.e. airplanes) fly into large cement structures (i.e. buildings) that are filled with other globs of protoplasm (i.e. humans). Yet, the atheist concedes that one set of reactions is non-moral (i.e. atoms clashing against one another) and the other is immoral (i.e. flying planes into buildings).
It is readily obvious that the atheist finds such action appalling because they are made in God's image. Furthermore, when they react to such tragedies, they are essentially cracking open their Bible's all the while denying it. As the late Van Til once said, "Anti-theism presupposes theism."
Posts
