All posts by Wintery Knight

https://winteryknight.com/
Videos

William Lane Craig explains whether all religions lead to God

1 Comment

Here’s a lecture from William Lane Craig in which he explains one solution (middle knowledge) to the problem of those who have never heard of Jesus. If Jesus is the only way to be saved, then what about those who have never heard of him?

Here’s a ten-minute sample from the start of the lecture.

You can watch the other 5 small clips on YouTube, or you can watch the whole thing in one big clip on Vimeo.

And I haven’t forgotten people who can’t see the video, because you can read an essay on the same topic here. I think that this is one of the first William Lane Craig essays I ever saw back when I was just a freshman in college.

Going deeper

In this research paper, Craig explains middle knowledge in detail. Middle knowledge is the view that God foreknows how people will choose in every set of circumstances, and that God uses that knowledge to get everyone where they need to be to have the best opportunity to know him without violating their free will. God wants the best for everybody, and has ordered to whole universe in order to give each of us our best opportunity to have a relationship with him that leads to eternal life.

Related posts

These are related to a debate on Hinduism (in chronological order)

Commentary

Indian economist distinguishes between rights and entitlements

Leave a comment

From the Times of India, a good economics article from Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyar. (H/T Shalini)

Excerpt:

Politicians and activists constantly propose new rights — the right to work, to education, and now to food. The word “rights” is being twisted to mean entitlements, and there is a big difference.

Rights are freedoms from oppression by the state or by society (through ethnicity, religion and gender). These rights do not entail government handouts.  Entitlements, however, are welfare measures entailing government handouts. Rights are not limited by budget constraints, but entitlements are. So, rights are universal but entitlements are not.

[…]US economists calculate that three welfare measures — social security (for the aged), Medicare (for the aged) and Medicaid (for the poor)—will triple from 7% of GDP to 20% in the next decade, swallowing up virtually all federal tax revenue. Jagadeesh Gokhale of the Cato Institute calculates that, including social security, the US is headed for a national debt that’s 500% of GDP, and Europe of 434%.

Some much for entitlement spending. He then explains the origin of human rights in Britain, America and France, and then says this:

These three countries spearheaded the concept of fundamental rights. In all three, rights were about freedoms, not entitlements

In subsequent centuries, people said this was not enough, and proposed entitlements — which some called second-generation rights. Marxists declared that rights to free speech, elections and personal freedom were bourgeois illusions that did not empower the poor. So Lenin proposed a dictatorship of the proletariat that took away all basic freedoms, and instead offered the right to food, shelter and work. Mind you, nobody could sue Lenin for poor provision. Nobody could throw out Mao for the Great Leap Forward that killed 30 million people. Nobody could topple Stalin for murdering four to six million peasants in the Ukraine.

The communist experience shows that giving welfare rights priority over basic freedoms is the road to serfdom. And the capitalist welfare state now shows that entitlements, although desirable and inevitable in democracies, must be limited and targeted at the needy, so that they do not hog all spending or bankrupt governments.

It’s amazing. He’s more American than the Democrats, because he actually understands America. Thanks so much for finding this article, Shalini!

By the way, if you want to learn what the end-game is for the Democrats, you can read “The Road to Serfdom” by the Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek, which Swami alluded to in his article.

News

Another dry-run of a terrorist attack

2 Comments

Story from ABC News. (H/T Foxfier Sailorette)

Excerpt:

Two men taken off a Chicago-to-Amsterdam United Airlines flight in the Netherlands have been charged by Dutch police with “preparation of a terrorist attack,” U.S. law enforcement officials tell ABC News.

U.S. officials said the two appeared to be travelling with what were termed “mock bombs” in their luggage. “This was almost certainly a dry run, a test,” said one senior law enforcement official.

A spokesman for the Dutch public prosecutor, Ernst Koelman, confirmed the two men were arrested this morning and said “the investigation is ongoing.” He said the arrests were made “at the request of American authorities.”

The two were allowed to board the flight at O’Hare airport last night despite security concerns surrounding one of them, the officials said.

The men were identified as Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al Soofi, of Detroit, MI, and Hezem al Murisi, the officials said. A neighbor of al Soofi told ABC News he is from Yemen.

Airport security screeners in Birmingham, Alabama first stopped al Soofi and referred him to additional screening because of what officials said was his “bulky clothing.”

In addition, officials said, al Soofi was found to be carrying $7,000 in cash and a check of his luggage found a cell phone taped to a Pepto-Bismol bottle, three cell phones taped together, several watches taped together, a box cutter and three large knives. Officials said there was no indication of explosives and he and his luggage were cleared for the flight from Birmingham to Chicago O’Hare.

Once in Chicago, officials say they learned al Soofi checked his luggage on a flight to Washington’s Dulles airport for connections on flights to Dubai and then Yemen, even though he did not board the flight himself.

Instead, officials say, al Soofi was joined by the second man, Al Murisi, and boarded the United flight from Chicago to Amsterdam.

The thing about this, we can’t be playing defense all the time. The best thing to do is to specify the terms of what will happen if a terrorist attack occurs. Tell them in advance. For the first terrorist attack, this will happen. For the second terrorist attack, this will happen. You can start nicely, by revoking all student visas, foreign aid, etc. And then military targets. That’s how deterrence works. They have to know that we mean business. Weakness and appeasement just embolden bullies.

UPDATE:

Commenter James reports that PJM has more on the story.