Weather or Not

Severe Outflow by R. Edwards

  • Home
  • About
  • Archives

Powered by Genesis

Fallacy of the Epicurean Paradox

March 31, 2026 by tornado Leave a Comment

One of the most common quotes and memes of the era of the “New Atheist,” the very online phenomenon of virulently polemic, attention-seeking, anti-God “intellectuals” that took root in the early part of this century and (fortunately) seems to have run its course for the most part, is this one. It still is quoted a lot, however, by lingering and aging followers of the likes of Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and other celebrities of the “Angry Atheist” cadre, as well as a few social-media acquaintances who have had bad experiences in their lives, therefore in their minds, God must not exist.

Epicurean Paradox Meme

The fallacy behind this supposed “paradox” has been apparent to me vaguely yet powerfully (a big but blunt mallet) for a long time, 25 years or more, in the wantonly presumptuous judgmentalism directed at God by statement two of that string (malevolence). However, not until recently, in a comment to another hoisting of the tiresome meme, I finally struck the root problem and then was able to articulate it.

Epicurus’ paradox is trite and superficial. The issue ultimately revolves around the concept of God-given liberty (free will). How?

* God values significantly free creatures: A world containing intelligent beings with genuine moral freedom (the ability to choose good or evil) is more valuable than a world of automata who always do good because they have no real choice. True love, virtue, and relationship with God require the real possibility of refusal. That’s because involuntary love is not love. To allow for voluntary love, He permits malevolence to exist. This doesn’t mean He is malevolent, any more than my permitting my kids to fail and risk pain (in order to learn) would mean I hate them. Put another way: tough love!

* Freedom and evil are logically linked: It is logically impossible for God to create beings who are significantly free to choose, yet guaranteed never to choose evil. If God forces them always to choose good, they are not truly free to make that choice. As Plantinga put it, even an omnipotent God cannot do what is logically contradictory (e.g., create a square circle or free creatures who are not free). This is not a constraint on God if you realize that logic and reason are His creations, bestowed upon us as gifts of capability.

Therefore, moral evil is possible and actual: Much of the evil we see (war, murder, cruelty) results from the free choices of humans (and possibly fallen angels). God allows it not because He is powerless or malevolent, but because eliminating the possibility of evil would require eliminating genuine freedom — a greater good.

This is logically consistent with God’s Biblical attributes; in the Bible, he knowingly allowed numerous good people, even his own Son, to suffer, deeply. Before Jesus, He also directly inflicted suffering and death upon evildoers and those who disobeyed Him, precisely for those reasons. Under these contexts, God quite possibly — reasonably in fact — has a morally sufficient reason for creating a world with free creatures, even though it contains evil. Plantinga constructs a possible world (a coherent scenario) where God and evil coexist without contradiction.

The skeptic must prove it is impossible for God to have such a reason — something no one has successfully done.

Faced with that, the skeptic either admits that hole in his argument, or claims (without evidence) that there is no God. I’m thankful not to be in that person’s shoes, and instead, to understand that God, having an intellect infinitely superior to mine, logically must possess reasoning and reasons I cannot possibly grasp without being on His level, and live with that. That includes reasons for evil and suffering. So it is.

I’ll acknowledge, I’m smart — since I was a little kid, many have said, very much or extremely so. Regardless, I still cannot compare to God, who graced me with a strong gift, yet still, an infinitely tiny fraction of His own capacity for understanding. I’m content to concede that without hesitation, and with waiting until I’m in His infinite and holy company to find out more than I’m capable of understanding, under the current physiological limitations of my quite imperfect, earthly neurological construction. Once one has reached that level of both self-awareness and surrender of pride, it’s actually easier to comprehend His vastness, even if in the smallest of ways. I encourage the same from fellow “intellectuals,” because it’s both a reassuring and rational place to be with one’s own capacities.

Filed Under: Not weather Tagged With: Alvin Plantinga, atheism, atheists, evil, free will, freedom, freedom of choice, God, intellect, love, New Atheism, philosophy, religion, suffering, tough love, virtue

Charlie Kirk’s Murder, Response and Legacy

October 4, 2025 by tornado Leave a Comment

As somebody who was born four floors above and four years after JFK’s murdered body was rushed into the ER in futility, who was immersed in knowledge of his assassination throughout childhood, and who has studied it extensively, along with the killings of RFK and MLK, I know a bit about political violence. We seem to be back into that sort of terrible era again with two attempts on Trump, a couple of state-legislator killings by a sicko in Minnesota, and the assassination of Charlie Kirk last month. [This occurred on my flight to Hawaii for Kilauea Episode 33…more on that later.]

Charlie leaves behind a lovely young widow, Erika, and their two little kids, all because some deranged radical didn’t like his ideals. Must it be this way?

Political violence is evil, absolutely intolerable, and has no place in civil society. Disagreements and grievances should be aired through rational debate and discussion, with logic, reason, facts, and the humility that comes with not having all the answers. That is a nonpartisan statement.

So far, I’ve seen posts from men, women, people of different faiths, nationalities, backgrounds and appearances, mourning the loss of Charlie Kirk. Let their voices ring truest—none I’ve read yet more well-written under intense personal grief than Dennis Prager’s (below), who knew Charlie as a brilliant mind, faithful servant of God, and also, husband and father to a young family.

As an American, as a Jew, and as Dennis, I am devastated at the assassination of Charlie Kirk. The truth is, as I write these words, I can’t believe I am writing them. I am in the denial stage of mourning. As an American, we have lost the most articulate spokesman for America and its unique value system—a country founded to be free, based on Jerusalem and Athens, the Judeo-Christian value system and the Greek emphasis on logic and reason. Charlie was a uniquely gifted individual who, in his teens, created the largest movement of young Americans committed to preserving and growing America and its ideals. He tirelessly went from campus to campus, from Oxford to Utah, dialoging with any student who wished to debate him. Using his vast reservoir of facts and his exceptionally speedy and articulate mind, he gave them what seemed to be unlimited amounts of time, and then calmly eviscerated all their anti-American, anti-Western, and anti-Judeo-Christian positions. I watched an inordinate number of these exchanges and thanked God that Charlie Kirk was there to do this work. America’s youth in particular have lost a moral and intellectual leader, one who would, perhaps, have one day become their president. As a committed Jew, I thank God regularly that a non-Jew, a committed Christian, became one of the few great public spokesmen on behalf of Israel and the Jewish communities outside of Israel. Few Jews could match Charlie’s knowledge and eloquent arguments on behalf of those two entities.

As Dennis, I have lost a very close friend. Charlie repeatedly visited me in the various hospitals that I have been in since November 12 of last year, when I suffered a catastrophic fall which has left me paralyzed. When members of the nursing staff heard that Charlie Kirk was visiting me, my room became the most popular one in the hospital. Charlie brought me the manuscript of his forthcoming book arguing that everyone—Christians as well as Jews—should observe Shabbat, the Jewish Sabbath, just as he and his family had begun to do from Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. It is a measure of our close relationship that he dedicated the book to me. His brilliant exposition of these arguments provide clear evidence for the non-necessity of a college education for most young Americans.

My heart breaks for his young widow, Erika, and for his two children, who have lost as great a man and a father as children can have. And for Charlie, who did not live to see them grow up. For one of the first times in my 20 years with my wife, Sue, I have seen her sob uncontrollably. The Prager home is in deep mourning, as are the homes of countless Americans. The loss to us personally and to the country generally is immeasurable.

Commentator Ivyonna Corrine had a brilliant post too, which I’ll also reproduce below, corrected for punctuation and grammar:

It’s wild to me how quick people are to slap labels on Charlie Kirk without actually knowing what he stands for. He’s been called racist…but where is the evidence? Go back through his years of speaking at college campuses, podcasts, interviews, debates, you won’t find him using racial slurs, degrading a race, or promoting hate. Not once. What you will find is him debating issues like immigration, education, the economy… and culture. Those are policy discussions, NOT racism.

Calling him racist because you don’t like his politics is lazy. It waters down the meaning of the word and takes away from the fight against actual racism. If someone truly believed he was racist they would be able to show proof. But they can’t, because it doesn’t exist. All they have is name calling.

He’s had thousands of open conversations on college campuses with people of every background, and guess what? The majority of those exchanges end with respect, even if they disagree. He’s been called sexist, but why? Because he’s pro life? Because he believes men and women are different? Having a conviction about protecting unborn children or recognizing biological differences doesn’t make you sexist. It means you are willing to stand for life and truth even when it’s unpopular.

He’s been called homophobic/transphobic, but again, where’s the proof? Saying “men can’t become women” is not hate on his part. It’s biology. Protecting kids from being pushed into irreversible decisions isn’t hate. It’s compassion. He has debated LGBTQ+ issues face to face without name calling, without hate, with facts.

He’s been called a fascist/Nazi, which is honestly laughable. Fascism silences speech. Charlie has spent his entire career defending free speech. Nazis took away rights, and Charlie advocates every day for the protection of rights in the Constitution. The comparison doesn’t even make sense.

He’s been called a bigot or accused of spreading hate, but what is hateful about encouraging young people to think critically, question government, and protect their freedoms? If you actually listen, he debates respectfully, and even when people scream at him he holds himself fully. That’s not hate, that’s self control.

And he’s been accused of spreading misinformation, but here’s the thing: every time people try to “fact check” him, the debates usually end with the person walking away because they can’t answer his questions. He brings data, statistics and constitutional backing. That’s not misinformation, that’s inconvenient truth.

At the end of the day, Charlie Kirk was not racist. He was not sexist. He was not hateful. He was bold. He was outspoken. And he was unafraid to say the things that needed to be said in a world where people get canceled for speaking how WE FEEL and the truth. He’s allowed his thoughts, just as in America you are too. So if you’re going to label him at least label him correctly: unapologetically American.

Let voices like these drown out those demonic cackles of celebration sprinkled over social media. The overtly diabolical celebrators are obvious. Block and move on if it helps, but do pray for the expulsion of their demons.

Perhaps more insidious are the passive-aggressive folks—some even labeling themselves as fellow Christians—who assigned Charlie such wholly unfounded labels as Ivyonna covered, based on weak and out-of-context interpretations and assumptions, but not actual hard evidence, who haven’t read his literature nor seen multiples of his videos, who talk often about tolerance, love, kindness and empathy without showing those qualities toward Christian conservatives, and who are showing two faces.

When people reveal themselves from behind the mask of virtue signaling and faux tolerance and “empathy”, pay attention. Observe, be watchful, and pray for them. A mask of kindness and empathy, hiding a mindset of the very opposite, reveals itself in such times as these. Charlie wasn’t perfect. None of us are free of sin. That includes me. I certainly recognize sin when I see it, and I see a lot of stones being cast Charlie’s way from behind those “kindness and empathy” facades.

To all fellow conservatives/libertarians who are infuriated, feeling helpless in the face of this and other recent violence, tempted to lash out: I get it. This enrages me as well. But remember who Charlie followed: Jesus. And remember how Charlie both followed and set a great example in taking obvious risk to go into hostile atmospheres to engage through dialog and ideas. Never resort to true hate (not the same as the false equivalency of hate and disapproval continually posited by the left), destruction or retaliation in kind. Be better than those psychopathic ghouls and mouth-foaming zealots of the left who readily could be found celebrating or rationalizing evil, across social media in the days following the killing. They need urgent psychological treatment, and most of all, they need to find the Lord, who ultimately will be the final judge of all events and people.

Finally, for 50 years, I’ve read and watched great speeches by political figures from antiquity through the men on Mount Rushmore, to Churchill, Reagan and beyond. This, from Utah Governor Spencer Cox, has come out of nowhere to take its place among the very best, not only for the transcribable text, but for the raw and unvarnished sincerity plainly apparent behind the wise words. For context in posterity, I linked not just to the video, but a local news story containing it.

We all could do well to heed. As I’ve stated in some recent comment: Freedom of speech under threat of violence is not freedom at all.

Rest in Heaven, Charlie. We can honor his legacy, and that of other nonviolent agents of change like MLK and Jesus, by fighting bad ideas not with violence and destruction, but with better ideas.

Filed Under: Not weather Tagged With: Charlie Kirk, Christian, Christianity, conservative, crime, debate, Dennis Prager, empathy, Erika Kirk, evil, hate, hypocrisy, Ivyonna Corrine, leftism, logic, love, morals, murder, nonviolence, passive aggression, politics, reason, religion, sin, sociopolitics, Spencer Cox, tolerance, toxic empathy, TPUSA, violence, zealotry, zealots

Roy Moore and More and More

November 14, 2017 by tornado Leave a Comment

Pedophilia, rape, statutory rape, sexual abuse, and sexual coercion of any sort (whether on the job or otherwise) are wrong, and evil…period. No ambiguities or “what ifs” exist there. I should not have to state the obvious, but there it is — and most definitely not in response to any demands for such a statement. It is simply a fundamental truth of my Christian, sociopolitically conservative worldview.

The standard should be no different for any actors, celebrities, public officials, or politicians — whether with a label of D or R. It doesn’t matter of the sexual miscreant is Roy Moore, Harvey Weinstein, or Bill Clinton. If he is guilty, he shouldn’t be kept in a position of authority in the private sector, nor elected to public office. If they are guilty, they should go to jail too; alas, for Moore’s case, the legal statute of limitations long since has expired for his accused acts in Alabama.

Ted Cruz had the best response I’ve seen from any of the politicians, so far:

    “One of two things should happen: If these allegations are true, Judge Moore should drop out now. Today. The people of Alabama deserve to have the option of voting for a strong conservative who has not committed criminal conduct. Or two, if these allegations are not true, then Judge Moore needs to come forward with a strong, persuasive rebuttal demonstrating that they are untrue.”

    Both last week and this week, there are serious charges of criminal conduct that if true, not only make him unfit to serve in the Senate but merit criminal prosecution. Judge Moore, like any American, is entitled to present a defense. He’s entitled to put forth the facts demonstrating that the charges are not true, but as it stands, I can’t urge the people of Alabama to support a campaign in the face of these charges without serious, persuasive demonstration that the charges are not true.”

Yes, the timing is suspicious — right after the Alabama Republican primary and not before…why? A valid question! Still, given the detailed allegations at hand, and their apparent credibility, from the large variety of people making them who do not know each other, Moore should step down and make room for a conservative candidate without such a shadow overhead, as Cruz also has stated.

What I do mind here is the hypocrisy on the left, as Matt Walsh so forcefully elucidates in a recent essay:

    “Bill Clinton, who held a position far more powerful than Senator from Alabama, was credibly accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick. Right around the time that Roy Moore was allegedly seducing teenage girls, Bill Clinton was allegedly pinning Broaddrick down on his hotel bed, biting her lip to keep her from screaming for help, and brutally raping her. And Clinton’s alleged predatory behavior didn’t stop once he reached the White House. While there, allegedly, he sexually assaulted Kathleen Willey, kissing her without consent and forcing her hand onto his erect p___s. [Partly edited to avert bot censors.] He also exposed himself to Paula Jones shortly before becoming president, allegedly. Yet he was made president, and then made president again, and then liberals tried to put him back in the White House last year by electing his wife, who allegedly led the campaign to silence and discredit her husband’s victims.”

The left’s (and much of the right’s ) outrage at the Moore allegations is justified. Now where was the left’s outrage at this behavior from one of their own? I believe Juanita Broaddrick. When was the last time you saw anyone on the left say that? Very telling…

As for the right, any preachers or conservatives who are defending Moore at this time are terribly misguided and not living up to moral righteousness demanded of us. They should stop doing so, repent, and seek forgiveness immediately. Moreover, as with many who preceded them, they are unwittingly feeding the Beast — Satan, that is, who plays the long game. Satan has planted pedophiles and other sexual miscreants within the Church for hundreds of years (whether lay or priest) in an attempt to divide and conquer. I can see right through Satan’s anti-Christian tactics in this regard, and they continue today. Case in point:

The red label is mine. [Yes, a Christian can use the word “bullshit”. I just did. Sue me.] The claim that Christians “own this” is absurd, of course, in light of the facts that
1) Pedophilia violates the Christian worldview at least as much as it does the so-called “11 rules” claimed there, [as if “rules” alone stop sin anyway, hah!]
2) It long predates Christianity, which doesn’t “own” any sin. In fact, Jesus, when truly followed in deed as well as word, frees from all sin. This is where the laughable ignorance of Satan and his “church” comes into play.
3) Such conduct is worldwide, and exists among self-proclaimed followers of every faith or no faith at all; as noted below, “this stuff is everywhere”.

Yes, pedophilia and rape have been going on for thousands of years. So have other ghastly behaviors that fall outside God’s firm, unambiguous, monogamous, husband-wife-only sexual prescription, such as: adultery, promiscuity, bestiality, homosexuality, self-mutilation (e.g., sex “change”), pornography and related exploitations, Islamic genital mutilation of girls, ancient Chinese gelding of boys, and many more. While forced acts are evil, even “consent” is not particularly relevant. Consent to commit sin doesn’t eliminate the fact of sin. Consensual deviancy still is evil — and a more insidious form, in that it is evil disguised as “love” — another part of Satan’s plan. So spare me the “consensual” argument; it is irrelevant in the big picture. Wrong is wrong is wrong, even when the act of wrong is mutually agreed.

Yet a lot of sexual misdeeds are coming out of the woodwork in this era of instant publicity and social media. As Matt Walsh also elaborates bluntly in a different essay, when we throw aside societal mores against sexual deviancy, what else should we expect?

    This stuff is everywhere. It really can’t be broken down on political, or religious, or even gender grounds. Men seem more likely to be the abuser, but the problem is not exclusive to them. Though we tend to brush these kinds of cases to the side, the fact remains that an enormous number of female teachers have been found guilty of sexually harassing or assaulting their pubescent male students. Any attempt to place the blame on one particular group falls apart. The crisis it too widespread. It encompasses too many different types of people. It has leaked into too many corners of our society.

    It appears that there’s a serious problem with our culture as a whole. Of course, the first problem with our culture is the same with every culture: we are a fallen and sinful species. But our fallen and sinful nature seems to be manifesting itself more and more in the form of degeneracy and sexual predation. Why?

I know why. Christian worldviews, when truly and authentically lived, do not endorse nor commit these sins! The Christian worldview is being abandoned more and more, every year, all the time. All who do such deeds, and who claim to be Christian regardless, are deeply broken people who so desperately need the Lord’s grace, forgiveness and redemption, and need to return to Jesus far more than to have any public political office or Hollywood job.

Filed Under: Not weather Tagged With: abuse, Bill Clinton, Christian, Christianity, conservative, crime, evil, Harvey Weinstein, Juanita Broaddrick, liberal, morals, Roy Moore, Satan

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next Page »

Search

Recent Posts

  • Token Participation for a Check Box
  • Public Access to Public Land
  • Independent Review Needed for Weather Disasters and Warning Verification
  • Socialism vs. Communism
  • Critique of Some Weather AI Slop

Categories

  • Not weather
  • Photographic Adventures
  • Scattershooting
  • Weather
  • Weather AND Not

Blogroll

  • CanadianTexan
  • Chuck's Chatter
  • Cliff Mass Weather & Climate
  • Digital Photography Review
  • DMN Dallas Cowboys BLOG
  • Dr. Cook's Blog
  • Dr. JimmyC
  • E-journal of Severe Storms Meteorology
  • Eloquent Science
  • Image of the Week
  • Jack's Cam Wall
  • Jim LaDue View
  • Laura Ingraham
  • MADWEATHER
  • Michelle Malkin
  • Photography Attorney
  • Severe Weather Notes
  • SkyPix by Roger Edwards
  • Tornatrix
  • With All My Mind

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Recent Posts

  • Token Participation for a Check Box
  • Public Access to Public Land
  • Independent Review Needed for Weather Disasters and Warning Verification
  • Socialism vs. Communism
  • Critique of Some Weather AI Slop

Categories

  • Not weather
  • Photographic Adventures
  • Scattershooting
  • Weather
  • Weather AND Not

Archives

Blogroll

  • CanadianTexan
  • Chuck's Chatter
  • Cliff Mass Weather & Climate
  • Digital Photography Review
  • DMN Dallas Cowboys BLOG
  • Dr. Cook's Blog
  • Dr. JimmyC
  • E-journal of Severe Storms Meteorology
  • Eloquent Science
  • Image of the Week
  • Jack's Cam Wall
  • Jim LaDue View
  • Laura Ingraham
  • MADWEATHER
  • Michelle Malkin
  • Photography Attorney
  • Severe Weather Notes
  • SkyPix by Roger Edwards
  • Tornatrix
  • With All My Mind

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org