Tag Archives: Threat

News

As Obama pushes Ground Zero mosque, Iran readies first nuclear reactor

10 Comments

Story here from Yahoo News.

Excerpt:

Iranian and Russian nuclear technicians made final preparations to start up Iran’s first reactor on Saturday after years of delays, an operation that will mark a milestone in what Tehran considers its right to produce nuclear energy.

Nationwide celebrations are planned for the fuel loading at the Bushehr facility in southern Iran, while Russia pledges to safeguard the plant and prevent spent nuclear fuel from being shifted to a possible weapons program.

The West has not sought to block the reactor startup as part of its confrontations over Iran’s nuclear agenda, a clash that has resulted in repeated rounds of U.N. sanctions against Tehran. Washington and other nations do not specifically object to Tehran’s ability to build peaceful reactors that are under international scrutiny.

[…]Of greater concern to the West, however, are Iran’s stated plans to build 10 new uranium enrichment sites inside protected mountain strongholds. Iran said recently it will begin construction on the first one in March in defiance of the U.N. sanctions.

And there’s more – a new advanced surface-to-surface missile.

Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi said Friday forces have test-fired a new liquid-fueled missile with advanced guidance systems for ground targets.

Vahidi gave no other details of the new Qiam-1 missile during a nationally broadcast address ahead of Friday prayers at Tehran University. But it could raise Western fears about another advance in Iran’s missile arsenal, which already can target Israel and other parts of the region.

And here’s some more news from the UK Telegraph about Iran’s other activities.

Excerpt:

The third generation Fateh 110 (Conqueror) missile was also to be test fired during this period. Iran has previously paraded a version of Fateh 110 which has a travel range of 150 to 200 kilometres (90 to 125 miles).

Also during government week, the production lines of two missile-carrying speedboats, Seraj (Lamp) and Zolfaqar (named after Shiite Imam Ali’s sword) are due to be inaugurated, while a long-range drone, Karar, is expected to be unveiled.

The firing of Qiam comes days after a top commander from the Revolutionary Guards said Iran will mass produce replicas of the Bladerunner 51, often described as the world’s fastest boat, and equip them with weapons to be deployed in the Gulf.

On August 8, Iran took delivery of four new mini-submarines of the home-produced Ghadir class. Weighing 120 tonnes, the “stealth” submarines are aimed at operations in shallow waters, notably in the Gulf.

Surface-to-surface missiles are the kind that you launch from land-based or ship-based launchers for land-based or ship-based targets.

This is all happening while Obama dithers with the Ground Zero mosque, cap and trade (carbon  tax) bills, and card check bills (to force the unionization of workers). What good is equalization of life outcomes through state-controlled redistribution of wealth if we’re all dead in a crater? Does he not understand that? Maybe he doesn’t think that protecting the American people is his job or something.

UPDATE: The Appeaser-in-Chief is busy fund-raising for the elections.

Excerpt:

Obama’s giving Air Force One a real workout. He was raising money in Milwaukee on Monday, then L.A. Tuesday he started in L.A., dashed up to Seattle and then back to Ohio. Next up is Florida.

At least he’s not playing golf every other day.

Polemics

Why doesn’t God show us more evidence for his existence?

9 Comments

Have you ever heard someone say that if God existed, he would give us more evidence? This is called the “hiddenness of God” argument. It’s also known as the argument from “rational non-belief”.

Basically the argument is something like this:

  1. God is all powerful
  2. God is all loving
  3. God wants all people to know about him
  4. Some people don’t know about him
  5. Therefore, there is no God.

You may hear have heard this argument before, when talking to atheists, as in William Lane Craig’s debate with Theodore Drange, (audio, video).

Basically, the atheist is saying that he’s looked for God real hard and that if God were there, he should have found him by now. After all, God can do anything he wants that’s logically possible, and he wants us to know that he exists. To defeat the argument we need to find a possible explanation of why God would want to remain hidden when our eternal destination depends on our knowledge of his existence.

What reason could God have for remaining hidden?

Dr. Michael Murray, a brilliant professor of philosophy at Franklin & Marshall College, has found a reason for God to remain hidden.

His paper on divine hiddenness is here:
“Coercion and the Hiddenness of God“, American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol 30, 1993.

He argues that if God reveals himself too much to people, he takes away our freedom to make morally-significant decisions, including responding to his self-revelation to us. Murray argues that God stays somewhat hidden, so that he gives people space to either 1) respond to God, or 2) avoid God so we can keep our autonomy from him. God places a higher value on people having the free will to respond to him, and if he shows too much of himself he takes away their free choice to respond to him, because once he is too overt about his existence, people will just feel obligated to belief in him in order to avoid being punished.

But believing in God just to avoid punishment is NOT what God wants for us. If it is too obvious to us that God exists and that he really will judge us, then people will respond to him and behave morally out of self-preservation. But God wants us to respond to him out of interest in him, just like we might try to get to know someone we admire. God has to dial down the immediacy of the threat of judgment, and the probability that the threat is actual. That leaves it up to us to respond to God’s veiled revelation of himself to us, in nature and in Scripture.

(Note: I think that we don’t seek God on our own, and that he must take the initiative to reach out to us and draw us to him. But I do think that we are free to resist his revelation, at which point God stops himself short of coercing our will. We are therefore responsible for our own fate).

The atheist’s argument is a logical/deductive argument. It aims to show that there is a contradiction between God’s will for us and his hiding from us. In order to derive a contradiction, God MUST NOT have any possible reason to remain hidden. If he has a reason for remaining hidden that is consistent with his goodness, then the argument will not go through.

When Murray offers a possible reason for God to remain hidden in order to allow people to freely respond to him, then the argument is defeated. God wants people to respond to him freely so that there is a genuine love relationship – not coercion by overt threat of damnation. To rescue the argument, the atheist has to be able to prove that God could provide more evidence of his existence without interfering with the free choice of his creatures to reject him.

People choose to separate themselves from God for many reasons. Maybe they are professors in academia and didn’t want to be thought of as weird by their colleagues. Maybe they didn’t want to be burdened with traditional morality when tempted by some sin, especially sexual sin. Maybe their fundamentalist parents ordered them around too much without providing any reasons. Maybe the brittle fundamentalist beliefs of their childhood were exploded by evidence for micro-evolution or New Testament manuscript variants. Maybe they wanted something really bad, that God did not give them. How could a good God allow them to suffer like that?

The point is that there a lot of people who don’t want to know God, and God chooses not to violate their freedom by forcing himself on them. God wants a relationship – he wants you to respond to him. (See Matthew 7:7-8) For those people who don’t want to know him, he allows them to speculate about unobservable entities like the multiverse. He allows them to think that all religions are the same and that there is nothing special about Christianity. He allows them to believe that God has no plan for those who never hear about Jesus. He allows them to be so disappointed because of some instance of suffering that they reject him. God doesn’t force people to love him.

More of Michael Murray’s work

Murray has defended the argument in works published by prestigious academic presses such as Cambridge University Press, (ISBN: 0521006104, 2001) and Routledge (ISBN: 0415380383, 2007). The book chapter from the Cambridge book is here.  The book chapter from the Routledge book is here.

Michael Murray’s papers are really fun to read, because he uses hilarious examples. (But I disagree with his view that God’s work of introducing biological information in living creatures has to be front-loaded).

Here’s more terrific stuff from Dr. Murray:

Related posts

News

Obama administration threatens health insurance company for dissent

16 Comments

This AP story explains how a private company sent out a mailing explaining the effects of Obamacare on seniors.

Excerpt:

“While these programs need to be made more efficient, if the proposed funding cut levels become law, millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable,” it said.

It urged seniors to sign up with Humana for regular updates on the health care legislation, and encouraged them to contact their lawmakers in Washington.

But Obama doesn’t like it when people question his socialist plans.

In a warning letter to Humana, HHS said the government is concerned that the mailer “is misleading and confusing” partly because the company’s lobbying campaign could be mistaken for an official communication about Medicare benefits.

HHS ordered the company to immediately halt any such mailings, and remove any related materials from its Web site. In the letter, the government also said it may take other action against Humana.

A later post by Ace of Spades updates the story. (H/T ECM)

Let me explain how socialism works. Socialists tell you that you are not responsible for your life outcomes. They say that other people are to blame for your troubles. They get elected by sowing division, hate and envy among the people. Then they try to take control of the economy to reward the people who elected them, using the money from people who did not elect them.

But when you start to rob one group of people to pay off the groups who elected you, the victims of the theft start to debate with you. Maybe they stop producing as much as before, so that less is stolen from them by the government. And that’s when socialists like Obama start to crack down on dissenters – first with intimidation, then with coercion, and eventually with violence. That’s just historical fact.

Most countries realize their mistake before it’s too late. But if a country has placed an ignorant, arrogant, unqualified buffoon in charge, it may be a long time before that happens. That is the way the world actually works, and has worked, for anyone with eyes to see. And that is why even socialist countries like Sweden eventually have to pull back from the brink by cutting taxes, in order to get people working and having children again.

I recommend the book “The Road to Serfdom” by F.A. Hayek, and you can read a summary here. It’s the number one most recommended book on Human Events’ list of top books every conservative should read. Fascism is the natural endpoint of socialism, if it is not checked at the ballot box.

Share