Im Leben und Sterben: Einheit mit Christus!
Ein Vergleich mehrer Philosophen und Theologen – kopiert aus diesem Blogpost:
Question: Why did the chicken cross the road?
John Calvin: The chicken absolutely had to cross the road. He had no choice. It was predetermined that he would cross the road.
Plato: It wasn’t actually a chicken that crossed the road. It was the idea of a chicken.
William Lane Craig: He crossed this particular road because it’s the best of all possible roads. We also know it was an event that started sometime in the finite past; we have excellent evidence that at one time he was not crossing the road, and then he did. He has not been eternally crossing the road.
Jacobus Arminius: He crossed the road of his own free will.
Greg Koukl: He crossed the road because he knew it was absolutely a road. It wasn’t just a road for him, personally. All chickens should cross the road.
Luis de Molina: He crossed the road because he had knowledge of all possible scenarios involving the crossing of the road, and he knew he could achieve the best outcome by crossing it.
Nietzsche: The chicken is dead.
Stephen Meyer: Something in the elegant design of the digital code in the chicken’s DNA pre-programmed him to cross the road.
C.S. Lewis: First we must ask, was it a talking chicken?
Hume: The chicken had a passionate desire to cross the road. He had no real reason. It certainly wasn’t a miracle.
Michael Behe: It’s an irreducibly complex situation. You must have both the chicken and the road. Take away either one, and you have no road-crossing function.
Meine Idee wäre noch:
John Piper: The reason is clear – we’re living for joy; so the chicken sought joy.
Paul Washer: Don’t you know Hell; that’s what we all deserve – the chicken as well.
Habt ihr noch Ideen?