The Tragedy of Death
An article from 2012 on CARM is the starting point here. "Looking at Whitney Houston’s death through atheist eyes"
It wasn’t Wax’s argument that gave me pause but rather one of the comments made by one of the hatetheist trolls that consistently man the comment boards of Christian Post. Predictably, the hatetheist mocked anyone who would dare to believe in a personal evil such as Satan, but he went on to say that the death of Houston was “tragic.”
You just know an article is going to be intellectual when the author uses terms like "hatetheist trolls"...
If someone wants to define Whitney Houston’s death as “tragic,” then he is going to need a couple of things. First, he’ll need to show that she possessed some innate worth that was marred by the lifestyle that eventually took her life.
Whitney Huston possessed innate worth because she was a person. It is as simple as that.
Compare to the Christian position. What is the difference? God? Does God give a person innate worth? Of course not, because innate literally means you have it inside; it does not come from an external source, such as God.
Slick seems pretty sure Houston had innate worth. Well I agree. Nothing in atheism stops a person having innate worth.
But I would go further. Houston did not merely have innate worth, she was a good person who did not deserved to be tortured for eternity in hell. Now compare that to the mainstream Christian view, which says sure she had innate worth, but like every other member of the human race she was a sinner who deserved to be tortured for eternity in hell!
You really want to tell me she has worth after that, Slick?
Second, he must show that the way her life ended was in stark contrast to a far different standard, which instead describes how things ought to be.
I am not quite sure what Slick is getting at, but it seems to me that Houston being alive is the way it ought to be, and her being dead was a tragedy (it looks like cocaine was a factor in her death, and he could be referencing that).
By contrast, the Christian worldview says that Ms. Houston possessed true moral worth and value because she, like all humans, was created in the image of a purposeful God. She is different from pure matter, animals, and every other created thing.
But the Christian worldview also says that Ms. Houston was a sinner who deserved to be tortured for eternity in hell! Odd that he forgot to mention that.
Is Whitney Houston’s death a tragedy? In the atheist world view it was; she died too young. But she was a Christian, and in the Christian worldview, she is now in the after life with Jesus. Why is that a tragedy?
But what if she was not a Christian? Or the wrong sort of Christian? Or abandoned Jesus because of the drugs? In that case in the Christian worldview, Whitney Houston is being tortured in hell for eternity. That is the tragedy he should be talking about.
And it has nothing to do with drug abuse.
The God he loves and worships has chosen to have her suffer for eternity for rejecting him.
Slick makes clear that that is his belief elsewhere:
Hell – The place created for the devil and his angels and is a place of torment. Unbelievers will join the devil and his angels in hell.
Houston was a believer, so in Slick's worldview she is probably fine, but billions of unbelievers have died, and are in hell right now.
This is the Christian worldview. If you are a Christian, you will be fine after you die. If not, you will burn in hell. And what makes the Christian worldview so horrific is they do not care about the billions suffering in hell. Why should they? Those idiots are not Christians.
Just like the Germans in Nazi Germy. They did not care what happened to the Jews, because the Jews were the outsiders., the lesser, the sub-humans. And just as the German people applauded Hitler despite of the Holocaust (or because of it), so Christians love and worship their God despite him torturing billions for eternity in hell (or because of it).
If the truth be told, everyone’s death is tragic whether they are murdered, die young from a drug overdose, or pass away in their sleep at age 100. The Bible calls death an enemy of humanity, but it’s an enemy that Christ defeated in His resurrection.
And yet people still die. People died before the resurrection, and people died after the resurrection. And they died of the same afflictions and the same unfailing regularity.
The defeat of death should have been a huge deal, but no one outside Jerusalem noticed! There are no reports from Ancient Rome or Ancient China about the dead coming to life, or the terminally ill suddenly getting better or anything at all that might suggest death had been defeated.
In fact, as far as I can see, nothing in the gospels or Act indicates death was defeated.
Odd kind of defeat that.
Personally, I’m so glad that the truth of Christianity proclaims not only Jesus’ victory over death but also His followers triumph as well.
So he is happy about what Christianity proclaims? Rather than what is true?
This almost seems a tacit admission of doubt. He is not convinced about the defeat of death, so he cannot rejoice in that. But he does know Christianity makes the claim, and that over-joys him.
So okay, Christianity makes the claim that death is defeated, but also makes the claim that two thirds of the world's population are going to go to hell to suffer for eternity for rejecting God. More like five sixth if he thinks Catholism and Eastern Orthodox are not real Christians, as other articles suggest.
Is Slick happy about that too?
Or does he just turn a blind eye to that evil?
Comments
Post a Comment