上帝搞了這麼多莫須有的荒謬事出來然後才「派自己」下凡救世，那有什麼救恩可言？為什麼上帝說要有天地就有天地，卻不能說要救世就救世，而要派自己被釘上十字架才能救世？這豈不是脫褲放屁，多此一舉？ 傳道人說這正是上帝的愛與公義的表現，因為世人犯了罪，上帝雖愛世人卻也不能無償赦罪。但問題是：那吃水果的罪只是被無限誇大的罪，那沒吃水果的更只是莫須有的欲加之罪，無辜陪人受罪，何況連人類社會也有無償赦罪這回事，難道全能的上帝也「不能」無償赦罪？那齣自編自導自演的荒謬劇《水果陷人與十架自釘》，豈不正是脫褲放屁，多此一舉？ 再說，為什麼上帝那麼遲才派自己下凡救世？他下凡救世之前的世人怎麼辦？如果說，上帝下凡之前的世人沒有得救的途徑，那麼上帝遲遲才派自己下凡就是欠缺愛心公義而不是全善的；如果說，上帝遲遲才派自己下凡是因為別有隱衷，「不能」不遲，那麼上帝就不是全能的；如果說，上帝下凡之前的世人另有得救的途徑，那麼釘十字架一事豈不又是脫褲放屁，多此一舉？ | |
| |
| |
原帖由 约拿·杨 於 2008-8-4 10:43 發表 早上好 !!!   | |
原帖由 prussianz 於 2008-8-4 12:45 發表 | |
| |
 | |
原帖由 weakest 於 2008-8-7 00:11 發表 | |
原帖由 约拿·杨 於 2008-8-7 11:33 發表 沒聽過一種東西叫Dialectical Argument嗎? | |
 回復 8# 约拿·杨 的帖子 "你这句话是承认上帝的创造还是不承认呢？哈哈" --->真狡猾的問題...誰說基督徒不懂玩文字遊戲??連Loaded question也用上了... Complex question or loaded question A question is posed in such a way that a person, no matter what answer he/she gives to the question, will inevitably commit him/herself to some other claim, which should not be presupposed in the context in question. A common tactic is to ask a yes-no question that tricks people to agree to something they never intended to say. For example, if you are asked "Are you still as self-centred as you used to be?", then no matter you answer "yes" or "no", you are bound to admit that you were self-centred in the past. Of course, the same question would not count as a fallacy if the presupposition of the question is indeed accepted in the conversational context. (copy from http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/fallacy/fallacy-list.php) | |
 |
