Apparently inspired by my post about the claim that God is not an answer, but a question, reader Pliny the in Between produced this cartoon on Evolving Perspectives. Doesn’t that theologian look familiar?
Is God a question or an answer?
April 16, 2016 • 2:00 pm
Brilliant!
+ 1 !
Now we have an opening for a whole new branch of christian theology:
We had the trinity, Pliny has given us the duality, and, according to the latest calculations, 2X3 = 6. So the theologians must begin analyzing the Holy Sexality of God, consisting of God the amswer Father, …, God the question Son, …, a couple of Holy Ghosts.
Which of 2 of the 6 was Mr. Christ? Will some universities need to create an entire new department to research these questions? When tongues of fire hover above my head, how will I know which ghost it is? Enquiring minds etc.,etc…
Right on the money, as always!
“Doesn’t that theologian look familiar?”
Indeed he does, but isn’t the insulting epithet “theologian” a compliment in his case?
Is “theologian” ever a compliment?
I like it.
Craig really winds me up with his obnoxious mannerisms.
I’m pretty sure that Craig doesn’t describe himself as a theologian. I’ve listened to most of his debates, and a fair amount of his other crap, and I’ve only ever heard him describe himself as a “Christian apologist” and a “professional philosopher”.
Perfect. Incidentally, the center silhouette looks like Boba Fett wearing the hijab.
Mike
Does the theologian look familiar? Sort-of. Same suit, but a different slug, I think.
God is the superposition of a question and answer. When observed, he collapses into one or the other. But we can’t observe him because if we know where he is, we can’t see him and if we see him, we don’t know where he is. God is quantum.
Golden oldie on quantum theology
http://pictoraltheology.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-heisenberg-not-on-amc.html
Lol….nice one!
God is the ultimate agnostino. Always dividing into two the smaller we look. Always there but immeasurable.
The theologian is younger and has more hair than you know whom.
Funny. 🙂
They should do one about the duality of Jesus too.
When preaching Christianity: “Jesus is a divine saviour that healed the sick, walked on water and resurrected from the dead.”
When backed into a corner: “Historians say there might have been a preacher guy named Jesus around that time.”
I see the duality of Jesus used by apologetics almost as often as the duality of God.
I don’t think this characterizes what was going on in the original post. Irwin’s point was thoroughly, shamelessly accommodationist: praising doubtfulness almost to the point of worshipping it, mainly to set up an overfamiliar golden mean argument: both overconfident theists and overconfident atheists are wrong and unreasonable and dogmatic, and why can’t we just get along honestly and open-mindedly, and won’t somebody please think of our common humanity!?
I think something along these lines would be more accurate to the gist of the original:
Irwin: “God is a question, not an answer.”
Skeptic: “OK, fair enough. What kind of question is He?”
Irwin: “I’m sorry?”
Skeptic: “I mean, does the question begin with, say, a ‘What’? Or a ‘Why’?”
Irwin: “I’m afraid I don’t follow you.”
Skeptic: “Well, for example: ‘What is the basis for thinking God exists?’ Or maybe: ‘Why do we believe God is a subject worth tackling, above countless others competing for scholarly attention’?”
Irwin: “If you’re just going to be antagonistic, then please take your fraudulent beliefs elsewhere. This is an open discussion!”
Todesca: (whispering to Irwin) “Oy! How did we offend them so much? It’s such a shame they don’t use their intelligence constructively.”