A fascinating concept, perfectly executed:
Hardly a relative theory.
Posted on 09/27/2009 3:38:59 PM PDT by NYer
It’s in German.
It has sub titles...and is worth watching!
I love to see professors get smoked but I have to post this food for thought.
I don’t need to get FLAMED for this:
“I form the light and CREATE darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do ALL these things.”
—Isaiah 45:7
Ausgezeichtnet.
No flaming necessary .... thank you for posting that line from Isaiah!
thanks....
i just sent this to my soon to be ex-wife...
According to Snopes there’s no evidence this exchange ever happened, it seems someone attributed it to Einstein to make a chain email story sound plausible.
Not to mention this:
“I form the light and CREATE darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do ALL these things.”
—Isaiah 45:7
I seem to recall that Einstein also said; “man will be free only when he is free of religion”. Maybe not exactly those words, but close to it. I see here a young school boy, not an old Mathematician/Scientist, he obvious changed his mind later on, after years of research??
Wow.
Did he really say that?
Well, the way I see things, the line of reasoning in the video is conflating scientific definitions with observed phenomena. Science may define darkness as the absence of light, but the fact still remains that the phenomena of darkness exists, or there would be no need to define it.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/einstein.html
So, the quick answer to the question is that Einstein did not believe in a personal God. It is however, interesting how he arrived at that conclusion.
Einstein became a deist - a believer in an impersonal creator God:
“I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.”
“I seem to recall that Einstein also said”
In the past few decades, such a cloud of disinformation has been created with regard to what Einstein did or did not say, that I distrust any quotation that does not antedate 1970. And by “antedate,” I mean that a quotation was widely known and attributed to Einstein prior to 1970.
I am pretty well convinced that the quotations purporting to show that Einstein was either a socialist or an atheist are distortions or outright fabrications.
This opinion is buttressed by dsc’s first law of dealing with leftards: All leftists lie all the time. This is only to be expected, as all leftist thought, from the limousine liberalism of a George Clooney to the mass murders of Mao, Stalin, or Pol Pot, is of and from Satan. It is a contaminant in the human cognosphere, not a natural component of it.
And Satan, as we know, is the father of lies. How could his minions and useful idiots be anything other than liars?
No flaming necessary; the young tyke had a great answer.
“the fact still remains that the phenomena of darkness exists, or there would be no need to define it.”
The boy was not arguing God’s existence, but God’s nature. The professor said that the existence of evil showed that God is evil. The boy rebutted that logic by giving examples of two things that are not positive forces in their own right, but are rather only the absence of other forces. He then said that the existence of evil is just such a thing.
Rather than demonstrating that God is evil, therefore, the existence of evil is merely the manifestation of God’s absence.
(This is a proposition to which I do not subscribe, by the way. The boy’s argument does not suffice to rebut the professor’s assertion; that must be done on other grounds.)
It’s easy to do a search on bible passages and get the bible to say what you want it to say by taking passages out of context and by not having an understanding of the bible in the first place.
Be careful what you attribute to God without wisdom.
Jesus said, “But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. 37 For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
Pretty powerful stuff too.
My point was that just because something can be defined as merely the absence of something else, doesn’t make the thing you are defining any less real. Since, as the quote from Isaiah that posted demonstrates, God has taken credit for not only creating light, but also darkness, even if it is only the absence of light. He created the phenomena of the presence as well as the phenomena of the absence, and both are equally “real” phenomena, no matter how you define them.
You are right that the boy’s argument doesn’t really rebut the professor’s assertion. Even if evil is only the absence of God from our hearts, an omniscient God must have known that condition would arise if he created beings with the freedom to choose to turn away from him. So even if the boy can successfully argue that God didn’t created the absence, the professor could reply that God created the opportunity for the absence, knowing full well that the absence would necessarily occur.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.