|
PrexicKehdaki -> RE: Questions, questions, questions. (7/3/2008 1:33:57 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki " In what way am I denying God by not being aware he exists when first examining the evidences of all the world religions, then not psychologically "clicking" with any of it to set the belief in motion? quote:
By denying the evidence that He does exist, you deny Him. quote:
It's more of a matter of it not convincing me. How does the quality of the evidence not being enough to convince me (and I have an open heart, I promise) a matter of me actively trying to deny something I'm not aware exists? You do understand I treat all other religions the same way. Their evidence doesn't convince me either, as I'm sure they don't convince you. If their religion's god exists, and it doesn't -- but if it did, would you and I both be guilty of actively denying their god? Or are we both just unconvinced by their arguments or evidence? Prex, I am not saying that you shouldn't be doing what you are doing, which is testing the truth. I don't really like the comparison to all other religions because only our faith lies in a true and living God. Buddha was a man who is now dead, Muhammed was a false prophet who is now dead, and so on and so on, so if you try the evidence for them, then yes they fall short. But I do see your point, to them we would be denying their God, but we know their God is not real. Yet most of the other religions acknowledge Jesus Christ was real, and some go beyond that while denying His divinity. It is all summed up in the romans passages I posted earlier, which you have replied to. quote:
I think the confusion comes in the fact that 'denying' in a linguistic, psychological sense has a different meaning then in a Biblical sense. To me, denying is denying. You deny to see the evidence of His creation, so you deny His word as truth. Denying Him biblically or linguistically is the same to me. They're demonstratively different. Psychologically, if I were to be unaware of someone's existence after contemplating the evidence.. I would not be denying him even though he is being "denied" somehow. I'm not literally doing the denying. Biblically, simply not believing in God is somehow an act of actively denying God.. regardless of the fact that I'm not aware he exists. quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki I have no questions that I'm denying God Biblically, but when we're discussing a matter of psychology, motive, guilt, and reason.. I'm asking questions using the linguistic 'deny'. You can't possibly deny, in any psychological sense, something you aren't aware of unless you really are aware but are in denial. Are you suggesting atheists are aware of God? (gr, I probably shouldn't ask that.. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Bq2b6i8spEU ^-^) So you admit you are in denial, finally we are getting somewhere.[:D][;)] lol, biblically, sure. quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD If you search for evidence that says He does not exist, then yes you are actively trying to find some way to deny Him, because in doing so, you are missing all of the obvious evidence that says He does exist. It is a choice you are making to lay aside the evidence of Him. quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD quote:
Trying to find some way to deny him? Or just tickling our atheist fancies with a good read? I'm not following you. Yes trying to find a way to not have to lay down your pride. Tickling your atheistic fancies by denying the evidence He has given us, and laying the credit on some unfounded theories. By looking out upon God's creation and saying it all happened by matter of chance, is denying the evidence God has given us. Pride gets in the way, we think we are to smart to believe in that God story, lets prove it wrong type of thinking, is looking for a way to deny God. Do you get this or am I mumbling jumbling bumbling things up here. I have the IQ of a watermelon, so it may be hard to understand.[sm=hammerhead.gif] It has nothing to do with pride. You gotta get rid of this "atheists are just trying to spite Christians" mind state.. or "atheists are really aware of God but for some reason God insults their pride so in order to maintain their pride they deny him". We just see the evidence differently. quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD quote:
With the above in consideration, am I also in effect actively choosing Hell, as is the common apology? Can I choose to go somewhere I wasn't aware existed?" quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD Truth being told, you do know that hell exists, don't you. You may not acknowledge it as being real. But you know about it, and why it is there, and who goes there, and really all there is to know about it. So no that is not an excuse. quote:
I guess this goes back to the "atheists believe in God" point in the video. ^-^ I know about Santa, I know why Santa hands out presents, I know who gets presents -- do you think I believe in Santa too? Because I know about Santa? Sure we all know about santa, why shouldn't we, oh no, please don't tell me he is not real. Then who brings my presets every year.[:o] Seriously, as silly as that video was, it did make some good points. Like consequences, and the only way to live free of facing judgment is for there to be no God. Santa loosely based on a real man, the easter bunny loosely based on a real bunny, the tooth fairy loosely based on a real fairy, or on a real tooth, jj, I think you get my point. Stories do exist, tales do exist, myths do exist. What they lack is evidence. What God does not lack is evidence. Christianity is based on claims beyond just a possible "Jesus was based loosely on a real man" statement. The fact that Santa may have been based on a real man has got nothing to do with me accepting Santa's current mythical state. And the reason I brought it up, is that your point that I simply know about Hell is somehow me knowing it exists is about as valid as saying I know Santa exists because I know about his outfit. quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD quote:
ORIGINAL: PrexicKehdaki Ah, Pascal's Wager. I think I'm allowed to address this directly since the argument isn't directly taken from the Bible. Pascal's Wager is kind of an insult to people. It's so much of a salesman like tactic. Because it, by it's premise, ignores actual evidence and just goes with just the consequences. So, really, the scarier consequence you can conjure up.. the more "logical" it is to do whatever it takes to avoid it. It's more logical to never travel further than you need to by this line of reasoning. But enough insulting the integrity of the wager, here's where it fails.. Unless I'm actually convinced by the evidence and someone debunks opposing evidence, I can't possibly just choose to believe in God. I can say I believe in God, I can pray, I can go to church, but that doesn't mean I'm being true and God, of all people, should be able to tell if I really accept Jesus as my savior or if I really believe in him. Life isn't a board game. I don't believe things based on probabilities of consequences. I believe things based on evidence. Pascal, who is that, is he real? Seriously I never heard of him, but you seem to have more knowledge than I so I will take your word for it. But I disagree, I don't believe just to escape the consequences, but the consequences do show me the need for a savior. Does that make sense. Of course faith in God and love for God need to be from the heart. We can put on a show for others, but not for God, for He knows the heart. That being said, knowing that there is consequences for our actions, and that judgment looms on the horizon, can show us our need for a Savior, which will lead us to Jesus. To get back to all the other religions of the world for a minute, I am no scholar on world religions, but I would guess that only Christians and Jews have a God that offers salvation, only we have a God who offers to save us. As unworthy as we are, He loves us enough to reach out His hand and say, take hold and I will never let you go. Salvation isn't really that new.. but I fail to see why a threat of Hell is suppose to show me I need a savior. Sounds circular. If I BELIEVED in the threat of Hell, THEN I would need a savior. Which doesn't get me any where and doesn't really address my argument. quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD Here is a verse that I say answers all your questions Romans 1:19-21 19 They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. 20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. 21 Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. (NLT) quote:
Are you sure I "know" God in any way other than Biblical? Do I psychologically know God? Are all atheists in denial? I feel a dead end coming up with the answer to those questions. [X(] You see, what this passage is saying is that we have all been presented the evidence of God. All of us. So in the end saying I didn't know will not suffice. There is a dead end, life always leads to a dead end. But that dead end leads to eternity. Where do you want to spend it? You can be with God in heaven? I know you know this. He is reaching out to you, and you know what He is saying. Take my hand, and I will never let you go. Hold fast to your faith and believe, and no one will be able to snatch you from my hand. Well, you're claiming to know more about me than you do. But then again, your Bible tells you all about people like me.. so how am I to pursued you? I guess I can't. quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD You see, I see one huge problem with not believing in God. You know what it is. Meaning. So I pose this question to you If you take God out of the equation, what is the meaning of this life? It's what you make it. Atheists aren't without meaning.. we just find different meanings in our lives. quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD 4.6 billion years ago the big bang, through the eons, evolution, through life is death, and for what? To just be? Is that an existence you really want? No purpose, no meaning, no reason for being? That is just empty, void, and not something I want. But there is a purpose to all of this. It is to find Him, or better put, to stop running from Him, because He is looking for you, He has left the 99 to find the one, and you are the one. His hand is out to you, take hold, and He will never let you go. May His peace be with you, and the joy of His love engulf you. Take care. Seems like an appeal to emotions. Just because we want something to be or don't want something to be doesn't make it so. I would love to live forever (I think) but I don't just believe what I think would be nice.
|
|
|
|