|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:22:35 AM
|
|
|
whisperingwaters
Posts: 160
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Can the opposing arguments actually make things complicated for some? Is it possible to truly try to believe but find the arguments unconvincing?
I suppose it could make things complicated for some, and you could find the arguments unconvincing but then I don't think you are truly trying to believe.
_____________________________
The words of a man's mouth are as deep waters, and the well-spring of wisdom as a flowing brook. Proverbs 18:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:30:22 AM
|
|
|
BibleL7
Posts: 493
Joined: 2/1/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
quote:
ORIGINAL: BibleL7
well you can not claim it as choosing to go somewhere you werent aware existed for you are aware of it you have been told the truth more than I ever was as an Atheist. I came to a saving knowledge of Jesus after being an Atheist over 30 years. You say you leaned all about bible and stuff before becoming an atheist therefore you are absolutely without excuse. I had excuse of never hearing the Truth till I was 37 at which time I accepted the Lord. I mean if you wish to continue to claim ignorance of truth if you wish. Your circular reasoning will not work when the day of judgement comes. Oh and as for any of the names you mentioned none of them were God incarnate none claimed to be way to heaven nor did the promise salvation.
Is there any psychology to be told behind accepting a belief? Do you acknowledge that evidences and arguments were in broad spectrum? Meaning, my beliefs or lack of beliefs are currently a rather raw product of the evidences and arguments presented both ways?
Perhaps it's a flaw in my character that I fell for the atheist arguments.. in which case..
Perhaps I'm too stupid to realize the validity of the Bible's claims. Should I go to Hell because of this? I'm 100% open to the possibility that I'm too stupid to realize the truth.
I can only agree that there are arguments in broad sectrum for I see no evidences for any other belief other than Judeah Christian beliefs. Yea Darwin and many have arguments for atheism and evolution but there is no evidence. The bible has much evidence to support it scientific, archiological and historical. In case you dont understand this compare what is accepted as scientific evidence and what is not and what the arguments of Atheist have.
As for the muslim child there are many Christians in muslim nations to witness to them and if the muslim seeks to know the Lord the Lord will certainly give him a witness to the truth.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:33:28 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 723
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
Hi,
Good questions.
Regarding the nature of God and moral acts, there is an interesting argument from a book you might be interested in. A World of Difference by Kenneth Samples looks at the historic Christian worldview along with four others -- naturalism, postmodernism, pantheistic monism (the basis for most Eastern religions), and Islam. The book explains the Christian worldview in detail, which may help give you the "big picture". I feel that is important because many of your objections can be answered simply by having a wider view of what Christians believe. You seem to be only focusing on controversial problem points. The book also gives both positive elements of and logical arguments against the four competing worldviews, and shows how historic Christianity passes all the main worldview tests.
Anyway, about the nature of morality, Samples shows how morality relates to God. Some say that morals transcend God, and others say God came up with moral laws. Both are flawed. If morals transcend God, then God would not be truly transcendent over all things. If God invented morals, He would be making arbitrary decisions, which doesn't seem acceptable. Instead, morals are inherent to God's nature. He wants us to act like He would.
About hell, EVERYONE deserves to go there, because everyone has committed vile moral offenses against God. No other reason. And our nature does not allow us to go through life without doing it. That is why God graciously opened the way to be with Him through Jesus Christ.
As for comparing Jesus to the other "gods" and gurus, there's a big difference. Jesus was crucified (we know that from numerous historical sources), and scholars also agree that His disciples knowingly suffered and died for the belief that He rose again. That is illogical if He had not actually risen. They were in the unique position to know for sure, through eyewitness account, whether He had actually risen or not, and they chose willingly to suffer for proclaiming that He had. Sure many people die for lies, but how many die for something they KNOW is a lie?
If I can recommend another book, this evidence is documented in the very scholarly The Historical Jesus by Gary Habermas.
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:38:29 AM
|
|
|
PrexicKehdaki
Posts: 190
Joined: 6/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: whisperingwaters
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Can the opposing arguments actually make things complicated for some? Is it possible to truly try to believe but find the arguments unconvincing?
I suppose it could make things complicated for some, and you could find the arguments unconvincing but then I don't think you are truly trying to believe.
So, if you're trying your darnedest to believe, the arguments will be convincing? Otherwise, they may not be?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:45:29 AM
|
|
|
whisperingwaters
Posts: 160
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
quote:
ORIGINAL: whisperingwaters
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Can the opposing arguments actually make things complicated for some? Is it possible to truly try to believe but find the arguments unconvincing?
I suppose it could make things complicated for some, and you could find the arguments unconvincing but then I don't think you are truly trying to believe.
So, if you're trying your darnedest to believe, the arguments will be convincing? Otherwise, they may not be?
Without faith it is impossible to please God.
_____________________________
The words of a man's mouth are as deep waters, and the well-spring of wisdom as a flowing brook. Proverbs 18:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:49:47 AM
|
|
|
PrexicKehdaki
Posts: 190
Joined: 6/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BibleL7
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
quote:
ORIGINAL: BibleL7
well you can not claim it as choosing to go somewhere you werent aware existed for you are aware of it you have been told the truth more than I ever was as an Atheist. I came to a saving knowledge of Jesus after being an Atheist over 30 years. You say you leaned all about bible and stuff before becoming an atheist therefore you are absolutely without excuse. I had excuse of never hearing the Truth till I was 37 at which time I accepted the Lord. I mean if you wish to continue to claim ignorance of truth if you wish. Your circular reasoning will not work when the day of judgement comes. Oh and as for any of the names you mentioned none of them were God incarnate none claimed to be way to heaven nor did the promise salvation.
Is there any psychology to be told behind accepting a belief? Do you acknowledge that evidences and arguments were in broad spectrum? Meaning, my beliefs or lack of beliefs are currently a rather raw product of the evidences and arguments presented both ways?
Perhaps it's a flaw in my character that I fell for the atheist arguments.. in which case..
Perhaps I'm too stupid to realize the validity of the Bible's claims. Should I go to Hell because of this? I'm 100% open to the possibility that I'm too stupid to realize the truth.
I can only agree that there are arguments in broad sectrum for I see no evidences for any other belief other than Judeah Christian beliefs. Yea Darwin and many have arguments for atheism and evolution but there is no evidence. The bible has much evidence to support it scientific, archiological and historical. In case you dont understand this compare what is accepted as scientific evidence and what is not and what the arguments of Atheist have.
I can't argue against that on this site, so my only question would be: Might someone else interpret the evidence differently, however wrong you may think they are, but should they be sent to Hell for it? Are their interpretations not due to possible character flaws like stupidity or psyche flaws that may lead one to a naturally skeptical predisposition? Are these worthy qualifications for Hell?
quote:
ORIGINAL: BibleL7
As for the muslim child there are many Christians in muslim nations to witness to them and if the muslim seeks to know the Lord the Lord will certainly give him a witness to the truth.
My original question was "Does a child brought up in a Muslim family, in a Muslim society, have less or more chance of getting into Heaven than a child brought up into a Christian family, in a Christian society?"
Is a Muslim child less likely to be accepting Jesus as his or her savior at his or her death than a Christian child? If so, how do you explain this at-least-a-disadvantage for children born in Muslim families, in Muslim societies?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:50:58 AM
|
|
|
PrexicKehdaki
Posts: 190
Joined: 6/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: whisperingwaters
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
quote:
ORIGINAL: whisperingwaters
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Can the opposing arguments actually make things complicated for some? Is it possible to truly try to believe but find the arguments unconvincing?
I suppose it could make things complicated for some, and you could find the arguments unconvincing but then I don't think you are truly trying to believe.
So, if you're trying your darnedest to believe, the arguments will be convincing? Otherwise, they may not be?
Without faith it is impossible to please God.
No further questions. :P
< Message edited by PrexicKehdaki -- 6/29/2008 3:57:21 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:55:35 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 723
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Can the opposing arguments actually make things complicated for some? Is it possible to truly try to believe but find the arguments unconvincing?
That's an interesting question, one I have struggled with for a few years. According to "conventional" evangelical theology, the answer there is probably no; if you try to believe you will find a way to do so.
Reformed theology, towards which I have been leaning lately, says that God chooses His elect, and those elect will, before they die, come to a true faith in Him and persevere to the end.
I always found that somewhat unappealing because that implies that God creates people with no chance of being saved. I'm still not 100% sold on the idea, but I've seen a lot of evidence backing it up. Some in the Bible, but a lot outside the Bible. I see a lot of people, such as yourself, who seem to try to have faith but fail. And a lot of other people who spend their life fiercely fighting against Christianity, only to have an encounter with the true God and become the most "on-fire" Christians you will ever meet. I'm not sure anything else explains that!
It is safe to say that if you ever have a desire for God, you can choose Him and be part of the elect. Election sort of intertwines with our own free will in ways that are hard to understand. It is a bit easier to grasp once you realize that God is outside of time and sees and interacts with all of time, from beginning to end, as we would see and interact with, say, a long unrolled canvas from one end to the other.
< Message edited by PolarBear -- 6/29/2008 4:04:39 AM >
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 4:01:42 AM
|
|
|
PrexicKehdaki
Posts: 190
Joined: 6/26/2008
Status: offline
|
Ah! I was hoping someone would address these questions..
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
Hi,
Good questions.
Regarding the nature of God and moral acts, there is an interesting argument from a book you might be interested in. A World of Difference by Kenneth Samples looks at the historic Christian worldview along with four others -- naturalism, postmodernism, pantheistic monism (the basis for most Eastern religions), and Islam. The book explains the Christian worldview in detail, which may help give you the "big picture". I feel that is important because many of your objections can be answered simply by having a wider view of what Christians believe. You seem to be only focusing on controversial problem points. The book also gives both positive elements of and logical arguments against the four competing worldviews, and shows how historic Christianity passes all the main worldview tests.
Thanks, I may look into it.
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
Anyway, about the nature of morality, Samples shows how morality relates to God. Some say that morals transcend God, and others say God came up with moral laws. Both are flawed. If morals transcend God, then God would not be truly transcendent over all things. If God invented morals, He would be making arbitrary decisions, which doesn't seem acceptable. Instead, morals are inherent to God's nature. He wants us to act like He would.
Why those particular morals, then? Why do these incredibly specific sundry morals exist if God and these morals has always existed. Do they have a reason for being there and being so specific?
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
About hell, EVERYONE deserves to go there, because everyone has committed vile moral offenses against God. No other reason. And our nature does not allow us to go through life without doing it. That is why God graciously opened the way to be with Him through Jesus Christ.
Does that change WHO goes there and WHO doesn't? Does that change the actual criteria for which people are sent to Hell?
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
As for comparing Jesus to the other "gods" and gurus, there's a big difference. Jesus was crucified (we know that from numerous historical sources), and scholars also agree that His disciples knowingly suffered and died for the belief that He rose again. That is illogical if He had not actually risen. They were in the unique position to know for sure, through eyewitness account, whether He had actually risen or not, and they chose willingly to suffer for proclaiming that He had. Sure many people die for lies, but how many die for something they KNOW is a lie?
Did these other gurus and god men not convince their followers of their miracles? Did they not too face hardships for believing in their god man's divinity?
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
If I can recommend another book, this evidence is documented in the very scholarly The Historical Jesus by Gary Habermas.
Again, thanks. I may look into it. But understand, I get recommended books by Christians all the time.. and I'd be broke if I bought them all. So I have to choose carefully. :P
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 4:04:50 AM
|
|
|
PrexicKehdaki
Posts: 190
Joined: 6/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Can the opposing arguments actually make things complicated for some? Is it possible to truly try to believe but find the arguments unconvincing?
That's an interesting question, one I have struggled with for a few years. According to "conventional" evangelical theology, the answer there is probably no; if you try to believe you will find a way to do so.
Reformed theology, towards which I have been leaning lately, says that God chooses His elect, and those elect will, before they die, come to a true faith in Him and persevere to the end.
I always found that somewhat unappealing because that implies that God creates people with no chance of being saved. I'm still not 100% sold on the idea, but I've seen a lot of evidence backing it up. Some in the Bible, but a lot outside the Bible. I see a lot of people, such as yourself, who seem to try to have faith but fail. And a lot of other people who spend their life fiercely fighting against Christianity, only to have an encounter with the true God and become the most "on-fire" Christians you will ever meet. I'm not sure anything else explains that!
It is safe to say that if you ever have a desire for God, you can choose Him and be part of the elect. Election sort of intertwines with our own free will in ways that are hard to understand. It is a bit easier to grasp once you realize that God is outside of time and sees and interacts with all of time, from beginning to end, as we would see and interact with, say, a long unrolled canvas from one end to the other.
Are you saying some people are predestined for Hell? Born only to end up in Hell?
Is there a purpose for this?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 5:00:57 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 723
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Why those particular morals, then? Why do these incredibly specific sundry morals exist if God and these morals has always existed. Do they have a reason for being there and being so specific?
Are you referring to the old testament law? Because such specificities don't exist in the new testament. A full understanding of the Bible shows that the OT law and everything in it pointed symbolically to the new covenant. It had a purpose at the time. I think the laws calling for the death penalty for certain actions and the seemingly senseless violence against groups of people in the OT illustrated the extent of God's wrath against depravity. Nothing has fundamentally changed; God's wrath against depravity is a very real thing, but now we're in the age of grace and don't see that in this life. The law also had the purpose of showing that no one can possibly attain God's standards, except for Jesus who perfectly followed it.
quote:
Does that change WHO goes there and WHO doesn't? Does that change the actual criteria for which people are sent to Hell?
No, but maybe I don't fully understand what you're getting at. The only "criteria" for going to hell is rejecting the only Savior that can argue your case to the Father.
quote:
Did these other gurus and god men not convince their followers of their miracles? Did they not too face hardships for believing in their god man's divinity?
I am not familiar with their stories. Sorry!
quote:
Again, thanks. I may look into it. But understand, I get recommended books by Christians all the time.. and I'd be broke if I bought them all. So I have to choose carefully. :P
Understood. I too have a long list of books to read, and am a slow reader. If you're really interested in exploring the possibility that the God of the Bible is real, those two are excellent. Samples provides logical evidence while Habermas provides historical evidence.
Oh, and since the Big Bang was discussed in your other thread, I'm wondering what you think of this:
Big Bang: the Bible Taught it First!
quote:
Are you saying some people are predestined for Hell? Born only to end up in Hell?
Is there a purpose for this?
I'm not totally sure of that. That is what I find a bit unappealing. I do know that God is just and good and He desires everyone to be saved. That is possible evidence against the extreme interpretation of this viewpoint.
The Bible clearly teaches both predestination AND free-will. A lot of people will say that is a contradiction, but again as I said, God exists outside of time, which offers at least a partial explanation. I think it's also possible that while God "forcibly" chooses some (the apostle Paul is a good example), others may have ways to voluntarily respond to God's grace.
Rather than getting bogged down with theological technicalities, though, I would advise focusing on yourself. Do YOU want God? If so He is reaching out to you and you need to reciprocate. 
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 5:26:27 AM
|
|
|
PrexicKehdaki
Posts: 190
Joined: 6/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Why those particular morals, then? Why do these incredibly specific sundry morals exist if God and these morals has always existed. Do they have a reason for being there and being so specific?
Are you referring to the old testament law?
No.. not really, just specific morals in general. Whatever they may be.. doesn't matter to the question.
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Does that change WHO goes there and WHO doesn't? Does that change the actual criteria for which people are sent to Hell?
No, but maybe I don't fully understand what you're getting at. The only "criteria" for going to hell is rejecting the only Savior that can argue your case to the Father.
I'm reluctant to post a reply to this again. The rest of the thread before you joined was about it, you'll find my explanatory questions there.
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
Did these other gurus and god men not convince their followers of their miracles? Did they not too face hardships for believing in their god man's divinity?
I am not familiar with their stories. Sorry!
hehe, s'ok.
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Again, thanks. I may look into it. But understand, I get recommended books by Christians all the time.. and I'd be broke if I bought them all. So I have to choose carefully. :P
Understood. I too have a long list of books to read, and am a slow reader. If you're really interested in exploring the possibility that the God of the Bible is real, those two are excellent. Samples provides logical evidence while Habermas provides historical evidence.
Sounds pretty sweet. :-)
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
Oh, and since the Big Bang was discussed in your other thread, I'm wondering what you think of this:
Big Bang: the Bible Taught it First!
I'd rather not argue against that here. I'm scared I'm going to get banned at any minute. :P
But I will argue against Islam's same claim of this.. Islam proponents argue that their holy book is somehow a companion to modern day understanding of the Big Bang, but really, it's so loose.. I don't see any purposeful intentions when the very idea of creation is essentially a mythical archetype. Islam's big on making wishful stretches of verses to claim "Hah! See, we knew it first" when really the verses aren't claiming much at all.. it's the assumption of what the verses mean that are really quite decisive, considering an assumption can be interpreted in so many ways.
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Are you saying some people are predestined for Hell? Born only to end up in Hell?
Is there a purpose for this?
I'm not totally sure of that. That is what I find a bit unappealing. I do know that God is just and good and He desires everyone to be saved. That is possible evidence against the extreme interpretation of this viewpoint.
Well, I hope you find a suitable answer.
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
The Bible clearly teaches both predestination AND free-will. A lot of people will say that is a contradiction, but again as I said, God exists outside of time, which offers at least a partial explanation. I think it's also possible that while God "forcibly" chooses some (the apostle Paul is a good example), others may have ways to voluntarily respond to God's grace.
I agree with the soundness of addressing the predestination vs free-will argument with saying God is outside of time, however.. here's my question:
Is the fact that God knows all of our thoughts and actions through time, an indication that those things MUST happen? If they must, and if not by God's will, could laws of nature be dictating the actions instead? Does this interfere with free will?
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
Rather than getting bogged down with theological technicalities, though, I would advise focusing on yourself. Do YOU want God? If so He is reaching out to you and you need to reciprocate.
Heh, I like the idea of living forever just as much as the next person.. but I just can't escape the arguments and rebuttals I know. I debate nearly obsessively as a hobby, so it's possible some brilliant mind some day will shatter my arguments and address my rebuttals. It hasn't happened so far, and every day I find new reasons for the other side. Eh, I guess this is the price of Hell. Hm.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 7:59:32 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 723
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
I'm reluctant to post a reply to this again. The rest of the thread before you joined was about it, you'll find my explanatory questions there.
Yeah, I read them. Maybe we're just on different planes of thinking. I think the answer according to the Bible is clear, and it's been mentioned several times.
quote:
quote:
Understood. I too have a long list of books to read, and am a slow reader. If you're really interested in exploring the possibility that the God of the Bible is real, those two are excellent. Samples provides logical evidence while Habermas provides historical evidence.
Sounds pretty sweet. :-)
For your particular questions I think I'd recommend Samples' book as the more important of the two, if you can only get to one. Samples has an earlier book, Without a Doubt -- Answering the 20 Toughest Faith Questions which I have not read, but it may also be useful.
I suspect you have received recommendations for other popular books like The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. I've read it and like it and think it has good arguments for lay people, but you seem to have dug into deeper arguments and I think my recommendations might engage you more.
quote:
But I will argue against Islam's same claim of this.. Islam proponents argue that their holy book is somehow a companion to modern day understanding of the Big Bang, but really, it's so loose.. I don't see any purposeful intentions when the very idea of creation is essentially a mythical archetype. Islam's big on making wishful stretches of verses to claim "Hah! See, we knew it first" when really the verses aren't claiming much at all.. it's the assumption of what the verses mean that are really quite decisive, considering an assumption can be interpreted in so many ways.
From what I understand, the Koran has significantly less detail about cosmology than the Biblical prophets. In any case, Islam has a HUGE problem -- it builds on the Bible, saying that its prophets including Jesus were actually prophets of Allah, but then it turns around and says that whatever parts of the Bible don't agree with it are corrupt. Well, how then do we know which parts are actually corrupt? In actuality the Biblical manuscripts from the earliest to the latest agree nearly completely. There is also evidence that the Koran diverged shortly after its writing, and a descendant of Mohammad (IIRC) destroyed all copies of all but one of them. That's a nice way to force uniformity! Not to mention the fact that the gods of Islam and the Bible are very different. Islam's god is impersonal and takes arbitrary actions, the Christian God is personal and acts with consistent character. Also, Islam claims that Jesus was never crucified -- something that is historically falsified (see Habermas' book). So, the whole basis for Islam falls out from underneath it.
While I'm at it, that reminds me of an argument from either Sam Harris or Richard Dawkins (probably both) -- they don't believe in our God just like we don't believe in, say, Allah. But as I've shown, the difference is immense. Christianity is grounded in reason and historicity. Plus, He is different than all other religions in several ways -- only Christianity emphasizes God's grace as the sole agent of salvation; every other religion interjects human works in an attempt to appease a god. Only the Bible contains numerous, consistent references to the fact that God exists outside of time, created all time and space, and stretched out the heavens -- essential attributes for the Creator according to Big Bang cosmology.
quote:
Is the fact that God knows all of our thoughts and actions through time, an indication that those things MUST happen? If they must, and if not by God's will, could laws of nature be dictating the actions instead? Does this interfere with free will?
Dang, that's getting philosophically deep. I think that gets to issues of how God's view of everything and our freewill intertwine, and we simply can't understand all of that from our finite view in this life.
quote:
Heh, I like the idea of living forever just as much as the next person.. but I just can't escape the arguments and rebuttals I know. I debate nearly obsessively as a hobby, so it's possible some brilliant mind some day will shatter my arguments and address my rebuttals. It hasn't happened so far, and every day I find new reasons for the other side. Eh, I guess this is the price of Hell. Hm.
Well if you've decided to debate against God you won't get too far with Him -- at least not until He makes a major move.
Although I haven't read any books on atheism by atheists, I have seen a number of arguments by the likes of Harris and Dawkins and, frankly, they don't address any real issues in my opinion. In other words, once you have a more wide view of Christian belief and its implications, their arguments just seem irrelevant.
If you have any serious questions that would be against TOS to post here, you can feel free to PM me. I've seen all the arguments and am not easily offended. But, only if you would have some interest in coming to Christ assuming your objections were to be met. If you're ONLY interested in debating, there's no point in bothering.
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 1:45:21 PM
|
|
|
PrexicKehdaki
Posts: 190
Joined: 6/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
I'm reluctant to post a reply to this again. The rest of the thread before you joined was about it, you'll find my explanatory questions there.
Yeah, I read them. Maybe we're just on different planes of thinking. I think the answer according to the Bible is clear, and it's been mentioned several times.
Well, if you have any specific questions, I'd be willing to clarify.
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
Understood. I too have a long list of books to read, and am a slow reader. If you're really interested in exploring the possibility that the God of the Bible is real, those two are excellent. Samples provides logical evidence while Habermas provides historical evidence.
Sounds pretty sweet. :-)
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
For your particular questions I think I'd recommend Samples' book as the more important of the two, if you can only get to one. Samples has an earlier book, Without a Doubt -- Answering the 20 Toughest Faith Questions which I have not read, but it may also be useful.
I suspect you have received recommendations for other popular books like The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. I've read it and like it and think it has good arguments for lay people, but you seem to have dug into deeper arguments and I think my recommendations might engage you more.
hehe, alright.
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
But I will argue against Islam's same claim of this.. Islam proponents argue that their holy book is somehow a companion to modern day understanding of the Big Bang, but really, it's so loose.. I don't see any purposeful intentions when the very idea of creation is essentially a mythical archetype. Islam's big on making wishful stretches of verses to claim "Hah! See, we knew it first" when really the verses aren't claiming much at all.. it's the assumption of what the verses mean that are really quite decisive, considering an assumption can be interpreted in so many ways.
From what I understand, the Koran has significantly less detail about cosmology than the Biblical prophets. In any case, Islam has a HUGE problem -- it builds on the Bible, saying that its prophets including Jesus were actually prophets of Allah, but then it turns around and says that whatever parts of the Bible don't agree with it are corrupt. Well, how then do we know which parts are actually corrupt? In actuality the Biblical manuscripts from the earliest to the latest agree nearly completely. There is also evidence that the Koran diverged shortly after its writing, and a descendant of Mohammad (IIRC) destroyed all copies of all but one of them. That's a nice way to force uniformity! Not to mention the fact that the gods of Islam and the Bible are very different. Islam's god is impersonal and takes arbitrary actions, the Christian God is personal and acts with consistent character. Also, Islam claims that Jesus was never crucified -- something that is historically falsified (see Habermas' book). So, the whole basis for Islam falls out from underneath it.
While I'm at it, that reminds me of an argument from either Sam Harris or Richard Dawkins (probably both) -- they don't believe in our God just like we don't believe in, say, Allah. But as I've shown, the difference is immense. Christianity is grounded in reason and historicity. Plus, He is different than all other religions in several ways -- only Christianity emphasizes God's grace as the sole agent of salvation; every other religion interjects human works in an attempt to appease a god. Only the Bible contains numerous, consistent references to the fact that God exists outside of time, created all time and space, and stretched out the heavens -- essential attributes for the Creator according to Big Bang cosmology.
I can't reply within the TOS. :-(
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Is the fact that God knows all of our thoughts and actions through time, an indication that those things MUST happen? If they must, and if not by God's will, could laws of nature be dictating the actions instead? Does this interfere with free will?
Dang, that's getting philosophically deep. I think that gets to issues of how God's view of everything and our freewill intertwine, and we simply can't understand all of that from our finite view in this life.
Does free will require a break in the laws of nature in our brains? Can free will exist if every fire of a neuron in our brain is caused by well understood processes of sodium and potassium ion distributions? Would these processes have to be suspended for free will to occur?
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolarBear
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Heh, I like the idea of living forever just as much as the next person.. but I just can't escape the arguments and rebuttals I know. I debate nearly obsessively as a hobby, so it's possible some brilliant mind some day will shatter my arguments and address my rebuttals. It hasn't happened so far, and every day I find new reasons for the other side. Eh, I guess this is the price of Hell. Hm.
Well if you've decided to debate against God you won't get too far with Him -- at least not until He makes a major move.
Although I haven't read any books on atheism by atheists, I have seen a number of arguments by the likes of Harris and Dawkins and, frankly, they don't address any real issues in my opinion. In other words, once you have a more wide view of Christian belief and its implications, their arguments just seem irrelevant.
If you have any serious questions that would be against TOS to post here, you can feel free to PM me. I've seen all the arguments and am not easily offended. But, only if you would have some interest in coming to Christ assuming your objections were to be met. If you're ONLY interested in debating, there's no point in bothering.
I appreciate your offer, but I'll be ok. If debate led me to atheism, it should be able to lead me to Christianity. Let's focus on the thread's OP.
< Message edited by PrexicKehdaki -- 6/29/2008 1:51:59 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 2:15:36 PM
|
|
|
Psalms274
Posts: 984
Joined: 8/13/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
quote:
From what I understand, the Koran has significantly less detail about cosmology than the Biblical prophets. In any case, Islam has a HUGE problem -- it builds on the Bible, saying that its prophets including Jesus were actually prophets of Allah, but then it turns around and says that whatever parts of the Bible don't agree with it are corrupt. Well, how then do we know which parts are actually corrupt? In actuality the Biblical manuscripts from the earliest to the latest agree nearly completely. There is also evidence that the Koran diverged shortly after its writing, and a descendant of Mohammad (IIRC) destroyed all copies of all but one of them. That's a nice way to force uniformity! Not to mention the fact that the gods of Islam and the Bible are very different. Islam's god is impersonal and takes arbitrary actions, the Christian God is personal and acts with consistent character. Also, Islam claims that Jesus was never crucified -- something that is historically falsified (see Habermas' book). So, the whole basis for Islam falls out from underneath it.
I just ended an intensive year long study of Jesus in the Qur'an (Koran) (a study to help in talking about Jesus to those of the Muslim faith) and was amazed about all the misconceptions that Muslims have of Christianity and the misconceptions that Christians have of the Muslim beliefs. Mohammad observed Christians not acting like Christians and the result was the Qur'an and the Muslim religion. The Qur'an states that Isa (Arabic for Jesus) is the mercy of Allah (the word that is translated to God in the English language ... and it is the very same God that the Jews worship) ... it does say that Jesus was crucified and rose three days later in the Qur'an ... and has an enormous amount of references that can be used to point to the bible. There is no place in the Qur'an that states that the bible is corrupt ... it does say that there are people who follow the bible that are corrupt. (Which can be true as we all have seen.  ... there are many who call themselves Christians that act anything but Christ-like.)
It is safe to say that many of the things we have heard are in the Qur'an, simple are not there (mostly because the English translations are not always accurate) ... though admittedly, there are a number of kooky parts.
But as to the OP ... You have a lot of questions ... and frankly, I do not have the time to answer all of them, but I will take a few and then ask one of you ...
I noticed in your other thread you referred to DNA in your argument for a "scientific" origin of life argument. The biggest problem you have for that one is a single strand of DNA (the blueprint needed to form proteins) is composes of 3.1 billion separate elements, all of which need to be in an exact order in order for life to occur. (If one is out of place, the molecule will not fold when it needs to or will fold when it shouldn't, causing the strand give the wrong information.) If you were to write down the exact formula for the DNA strand, it would take 1000 books with 500 pages in each book ... and the font would need to be so small it would take a microscope to see the "words." The probability of this happening, just by chance, and giving it a trillion years for these to come together in the correct order, is the same probability as one person winning the state lottery every week of the year starting at age 18 to age 91.
I noticed you gave the prebiotic soup (protein soup) argument for the first form of life ... the problem with that argument is that there is no evidence for this ancient chemical ocean. It would require large amounts of nitrogen in order to make the amino acids, so when examining the earliest sediments of the Earth, we should find large amounts of nitrogen-rich minerals ... yet the earliest sediments have very low nitrogen, about 0.15%, not even close to the amount needed.
Stanley Miller, an origin of life scientist that have attempted to duplicate the making of a single amino acid (you need 20 for protein). He was able to make three, but only after manipulation the elements (putting together elements in specific quantiles and under specific conditions that do not occur naturally). In his experiment, the amino acids that did form reacted very quickly with other chemicals in the chamber resulting in a brown sludge that was not life friendly at all. So within this prebitic soup, they would have readily reacted to the chemicals around the ... which reminds me of one of the questions I had while studying organic and biochemistry. Why is it that elements naturally go to the lowers energy bonds, yet in a living being they do just the opposite ... as they do in th Krebs cycle and in the way energy is is formed in the body through the ADP ATP reactions? Within in living organisms, thermal dynamic theory goes out of the window at times ...
But let's say you have all the amino acids needed. To make a protein molecule by chance, you would need the right amino acids and the right bonds between the amino acids. You have to remember that amino acids come in right handed and left handed versions. And finally, the amino acids must line up in a specific order, like letters in a sentence. When you run the odds of this occurring without any manipulation over a trillion years (in other words by chance), to form the simplest protein would be one chance in a hundred thousand trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion, that's a 10 with 125 zeros. That would only make one type of protein, a minimally complex cell needs between 300 and 500 protein molecules.
I have often wondered how anyone who truly thinks things through can believe there is no God. The man in charge of the human genome protect (Dr. Francis Collins MD), brilliant by anyone standards, understands that there is a Creator behind the complexity of life.
As to the questions posed here ... many of your questions ask if someone can go to hell for being stupid. The answer ... no ... though you can go there for being stubborn.  You can harden your heart and choose not to look at the evidence with an open mind while examining the facts.
Most of your questions come from a heart that does not have a relationship with God or really understands what that even means ... you ask about a loving God and the world we live in ... you ask about those that are weak, arrogant, gone through trauma, are skeptical of miracles, being discouraged by the number of religions and the conflicts that go with them ... and yet I know people who have indeed entered into a relationship with Christ that have experienced these thing ... my goodness, I have experienced these thing.
As long as you are truly seeking to find the truth, God will find you. Many years ago, I was asking the same questions. I have a really high IQ and thought that Christians were goofy and not too bright. But I started to search with a real heart that really wanted to know the truth .... I examined the evidence and could not deny there was a God ... but the God of the bible? I went to a friend's Pastor and started rattling off a list of questions similar to your own and do you know what he told me? He said before he could attempt to answer, I needed to find out who Jesus really was ... was He who He claimed to be? The Pastor asked me "was that tomb empty, and if so why? I began to dig ... I looked at the historically evidence (Did you know that there is 300 times more evidence that Jesus existed than there is that Caesar Augusta existed? Did you know that historians consider the bible to be THE most historically accurate document we have on this earth today ... both secular and religious historians alike.)
You see it is only after you discover who Jesus really is that you can understand any answer to any question you ask here ... There were a number of books mentioned ... and Lee Strobel's books are indeed deep enough for your questions. The two I would recommend are "A Case for a Creator" and "A Case for Christ." He provides a complex bibliography siting both sides of the argument should you wish to dig deeper.
My questions for you ... Why was the tomb empty? Who was this Jesus?
_____________________________
I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ.
< Linus w/ a friends baby!
http://piswa.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:06:17 PM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 723
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Psalms274
Mohammad observed Christians not acting like Christians and the result was the Qur'an and the Muslim religion.
Yep, and that's no doubt the exact same cause of the popularity of heretical cults like Mormons and JWs today. Pretty sad.
quote:
it does say that Jesus was crucified and rose three days later in the Qur'an ...
Wait ... what??? I've heard from MUSLIMS -- numerous times -- that Jesus was not crucified. They acknowledge historical evidence saying He was crucified, but IIRC believe it was some kind of mix up and the wrong body was identified. 
quote:
There is no place in the Qur'an that states that the bible is corrupt ...
Yeah I think you're right about that, sorry. It is indeed Muslims themselves who say the Bible is corrupt, not the Koran. They had to say that after Muslim theology directly contradicts Biblical theology. Yet the problem persists. If the Bible is corrupt, Islam itself cannot stand. If it is not corrupt, it directly contradicts Islam.
quote:
I have often wondered how anyone who truly thinks things through can believe there is no God. The man in charge of the human genome protect (Dr. Francis Collins MD), brilliant by anyone standards, understands that there is a Creator behind the complexity of life.
More than that. He is an evangelical Christian. I have a few quibbles with some of his positions but I've seen his Christology and it is solid.
quote:
You see it is only after you discover who Jesus really is that you can understand any answer to any question you ask here ...
Right, and that gets back to my point but stated slightly differently. Understand exactly Who Jesus is AND think through all the implications of His Lordship. That's exactly how I put my doubts to rest.
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:13:15 PM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 723
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki
Does free will require a break in the laws of nature in our brains? Can free will exist if every fire of a neuron in our brain is caused by well understood processes of sodium and potassium ion distributions? Would these processes have to be suspended for free will to occur?
That seems like a problem for naturalism, and I've wondered the same. Wouldn't it take something that transcends the laws of physics to cause our parts to move where we want them to move? Christianity claims that we are mostly soul and spirit, with a temporary body attached. That would allow for something to control our movements from something outside the physical realm.
quote:
I appreciate your offer, but I'll be ok. If debate led me to atheism, it should be able to lead me to Christianity. Let's focus on the thread's OP.
OK. Seeking and debating is fine, but what are you going to do when you find evidence for Christ? If you're going to put such evidence aside, your quest is useless.
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions, questions, questions. - 6/29/2008 3:21:49 PM
|
|
|
PrexicKehdaki
Posts: 190
Joined: 6/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Psalms274
But as to the OP ... You have a lot of questions ... and frankly, I do not have the time to answer all of them, but I will take a few and then ask one of you ...
I noticed in your other thread you referred to DNA in your argument for a "scientific" origin of life argument. The biggest problem you have for that one is a single strand of DNA (the blueprint needed to form proteins) is composes of 3.1 billion separate elements, all of which need to be in an exact order in order for life to occur. (If one is out of place, the molecule will not fold when it needs to or will fold when it shouldn't, causing the strand give the wrong information.) If you were to write down the exact formula for the DNA strand, it would take 1000 books with 500 pages in each book ... and the font would need to be so small it would take a microscope to see the "words." The probability of this happening, just by chance, and giving it a trillion years for these to come together in the correct order, is the same probability as one person winning the state lottery every week of the year starting at age 18 to age 91.
I noticed you gave the prebiotic soup (protein soup) argument for the first form of life ... the problem with that argument is that there is no evidence for this ancient chemical ocean. It would require large amounts of nitrogen in order to make the amino acids, so when examining the earliest sediments of the Earth, we should find large amounts of nitrogen-rich minerals ... yet the earliest sediments have very low nitrogen, about 0.15%, not even close to the amount needed.
Stanley Miller, an origin of life scientist that have attempted to duplicate the making of a single amino acid (you need 20 for protein). He was able to make three, but only after manipulation the elements (putting together elements in specific quantiles and under specific conditions that do not occur naturally). In his experiment, the amino acids that did form reacted very quickly with other chemicals in the chamber resulting in a brown sludge that was not life friendly at all. So within this prebitic soup, they would have readily reacted to the chemicals around the ... which reminds me of one of the questions I had while studying organic and biochemistry. Why is it that elements naturally go to the lowers energy bonds, yet in a living being they do just the opposite ... as they do in th Krebs cycle and in the way energy is is formed in the body through the ADP ATP reactions? Within in living organisms, thermal dynamic theory goes out of the window at times ...
But let's say you have all the amino acids needed. To make a protein molecule by chance, you would need the right amino acids and the right bonds between the amino acids. You have to remember that amino acids come in right handed and left handed versions. And finally, the amino acids must line up in a specific order, like letters in a sentence. When you run the odds of this occurring without any manipulation over a trillion years (in other words by chance), to form the simplest protein would be one chance in a hundred thousand trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion, that's a 10 with 125 zeros. That would only make one type of protein, a minimally complex cell needs between 300 and 500 protein molecules.
I h | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
