A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-08-2012, 03:19 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
Oh, so many posts after my last one! lets se...

(21-08-2012 09:24 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(21-08-2012 07:50 PM)SomeOne Wrote:  I have some questions.

knowing that:

  1. God is all-knowing, he knows past present and future
  2. God is all-mighty/powerful
  3. God is perfect

Before creating Adam and Eve he knew they will sin?

If he created us as imperfect beings, Why did he make the prohibition of eating from that apple tree (eventually had to happen that they eated from it)?

Knowing the imperfections he imposed on us, knowing they will fail to keep away from the tree, he even allowed the devil to motivate them to eat the forbidden fruit. Why?

Why the hell should I be responsible from what someone else did?

You are not knowing, you are assuming.

Yes, I am assuming. Thanks for the correction.

(21-08-2012 10:10 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  
(21-08-2012 07:50 PM)SomeOne Wrote:  I have some questions.

knowing that:

  1. God is all-knowing, he knows past present and future
  2. God is all-mighty/powerful
  3. God is perfect

Before creating Adam and Eve he knew they will sin?

If he created us as imperfect beings, Why did he make the prohibition of eating from that apple tree (eventually had to happen that they eated from it)?

Knowing the imperfections he imposed on us, knowing they will fail to keep away from the tree, he even allowed the devil to motivate them to eat the forbidden fruit. Why?

Why the hell should I be responsible from what someone else did?
God created humans despite the fact that he knew they would fall, their free will would result ultimate good which is a relationship with good. God didn't want robots. He wanted autonomous agents to be in relation with. That involved allowing for the possibility that man would fall. God valued this choice so much that he even allowed Satan to tempt them. He wanted them to really choose him, and not have it be simply some default function.

Why are you responsible?Well, every action has it consequences. Choices made by our parents, and even by ancestors from previous generations have an effect on us today. As the representatives of mankind, Adam and Eve chose to rebel against God, and thus they brought on the curse. Individually we all choose to rebel against. Therefore there is a individual and corporate responsibility for our rebellion.

If you don't accept the presuppositions of Christian belief, it will be difficult to accept this explanation. I'm assuming you don't even believe in God, so it would be extremely difficult, but that's the explanation.

If he knew we would fail to follow his command, there is just no reason to do things in the way he supposedly did.

Quote:That involved allowing for the possibility that man would fall

So, he didnt really know if they were going to fail? it would seem that he just knew the probabilities. Therefore I can conclude that he doesnt really know the future and that he is not "all knowing" (if he does exist).

Quote:Why are you responsible?Well, every action has it consequences. Choices made by our parents, and even by ancestors from previous generations have an effect on us today.

So... if your father kills someone and goes to jail for that and dies before getting out, would it be really fair, just and "mercifull" to send you to complete his sentece?

if your faith can move mountains it should be able to withstand criticism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like SomeOne's post
22-08-2012, 03:22 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 02:04 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  
(22-08-2012 08:12 AM)Chas Wrote:  But that is precisely a god of the gaps and an argument from ignorance and an argument from personal incredulity. You can't come up with how the big bang came about and say it must be supernatural.

You have no evidence for the existence of any god.
It must be supernatural in the sense that nature (the result) cannot be its own cause. Can you tell me what evidence you believe is necessary to prove the existence of God?

I would need to see evidence that cannot possibly have a naturalistic explanation.

Note, not "doesn't currently have", but "couldn't possibly have".

There are several good naturalistic hypotheses for the existence of matter and energy. We don't yet know whether any of them are true or not, but we're working on it. What we don't do is say "Gee, I don't know - must be a god". That's intellectually lazy and philosophically dishonest.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
22-08-2012, 03:23 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 02:21 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  
(22-08-2012 02:13 PM)morondog Wrote:  What evidence would you accept which proves that Zeus exists?

Zeus is a god, therefore you are just asking me the question I asked you, in which I've given you my answer, so now answer mine. At this point, I'm not arguing for the God of the Bible.

OK, but why don't you believe in Zeus or Zoroaster or Mithras or Odin or ...

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 03:25 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(21-08-2012 07:40 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  What's at issue here is not how one came to believe something, but what it is you actually believe. [...] We must look at the facts.

(21-08-2012 10:00 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  Trying to describe God and how he operates with physical laws and properties is like trying to weigh a chicken with ruler. The measurements are simply not the same.

(21-08-2012 10:43 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  Science simply cannot explain everything. I'm never said that you just need faith. What I will say is that you need to look beyond empirical evidences, or you will find that much of what you believe about life has little sound grounding. Metaphysics, philosophy go beyond what can be empirically proven, and deal with the ideas I was discussing.

[...]

Lastly I believe in the big bang. I wholeheartedly and enthusiastically believe in the big bang. It is scientifically undeniable. My one question is what caused the big bang? While you have found my explanation insufficient, explanations atheists seem to offer are equally insufficient. My conclusion however isn't God of the gaps. It is the only sound philosophical conclusion one can come to when searching for the ultimate cause of the universe.


I think we've hit the point of fundamental disagreement here. Let me explain how I see it:

"Science" and "reason" are, to me, one in the same. If we're going to talk about presenting evidence and reaching logical conclusions, we're talking about using our brains to reason about these issues. (Science also often means a discipline of reason that uses well-documented observations and repeated experiments to solidify evidence, then uses, or ought to use, formal logical methods to draw conclusions. We're not asking for that much here.)

You want evidence of God? You have to observe it. If someone just tells you about God, you have substantially weaker evidence, and for the folks in this community that evidence isn't enough. We want to see/hear/feel/indirectly observe God before we'll believe. BUT...

According to you, God is outside the "realm of the physical." Unknowable. Infinite. She communicates with the world (by inserting voices or allowing miracles, what have you), but she does so in a way that leaves only ambiguous evidence of its cause or having happened at all. She exists, in a nutshell, everywhere we cannot look. If we COULD look, then God WOULD be part of the natural world, available to our senses and studiable as a natural phenomenon. By your very definition, any God that we could reasonably prove to be God....would not actually be God since her unprovability is baked in.

(I will never be able to see the wild invisible pegasus unicorn, but I can at least know in my heart that he loves me!)

Well, I cry bullshit and hope you realize you've been duped. Acknowledge that your only tools for making any sense of the world are your senses and your thoughts, and that they are prone to mistakes. Otherwise, you're just fooling yourself.


(21-08-2012 10:50 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  But it is... We don't know how( and if even) the universe was caused, so you ASSUME A GOD DID IT.

Let me ask you, why not believe in a Big Crunch, instead of a UNCAUSED BEING.

Why is a UNCAUSED BEING more plausible that anything I could thing of.

Why not an ALL POWERFUL UNICORN? A UNICORN who is reborn into another UNICORN AND THEY WERE FOREVER UNICORNS.

Sorry if it sounds like I am mad, but this is frustrating.

Virtual particles are uncaused.

Philosophy has no place in empiracle science, and empiracle evidence is the shit that is going to matter in this conversation.

Oh, er.....what Atothetheist said.


(22-08-2012 01:13 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  To use a popular apologetic example, if we a find shoe print in the sand, the theist would say "someone wearing a shoe caused that." The naturalistic atheist responds, "Oh yeah, well who made the shoe?" While it may be a valid point of discussion sometime later on, it doesn't take away from the fact that SOMETHING must have cause that print to occur.

Okay, the problem here is that nobody in the world of your example has ever seen a shoe. So it goes more like this: we find a "shoe print" in the sand. The shoeist would say "someone wearing a shoe caused that." The naturalistic ashoeist responds, "What's a shoe?"

Something made the patterns in the sand that the shoeist decided to call a "shoe print". Apparently we've only found the one "shoe print", though, and to make matters worse the damn shoeist is not only telling us that they can't really describe the shoe, except in a sort of general philosophical sense, but that the "shoe" is invisible and, actually, not even part of our universe! Some shoeists go so far as to say that the shoe influenced the sand before the sand was there, resulting in the "shoe print" we now see without there having to be a shoe around today. Other shoeists don't take such a hard line and think of the "shoe" as more of a pattern of action of the wind on the sand to make it into the surprising "shoe print" that we've found.

Meanwhile, the ashoeists think the shoeists are crazy and just want to see the damn shoe already.


(22-08-2012 01:28 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  I could make a similar psychological argument and say that you don't want to be held responsible for your actions before a just God who will punish all mankind for our rebellion against, and so you hold to the belief that God doesn't exist by demanding solely naturalistic explanations for the origin of the universe and accepting only empirical evidences.

If you don't accept that the "shoe" I have envisioned made the "shoe print" we found, you will forever be kicked and stomped by it after you die.


(22-08-2012 08:12 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(21-08-2012 10:43 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  Science simply cannot explain everything. [...] What I will say is that you need to look beyond empirical evidences, or you will find that much of what you believe about life has little sound grounding. [...] My one question is what caused the big bang?

[...]

My conclusion however isn't God of the gaps.

But that is precisely a god of the gaps and an argument from ignorance and an argument from personal incredulity. You can't come up with how the big bang came about and say it must be supernatural.

You have no evidence for the existence of any god.

Accept that Chas pwn3d you. ACCEPT IT.


(22-08-2012 02:04 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  
(22-08-2012 08:12 AM)Chas Wrote:  [...]
You have no evidence for the existence of any god.
It must be supernatural in the sense that nature (the result) cannot be its own cause. Can you tell me what evidence you believe is necessary to prove the existence of God?

Dammit!


(22-08-2012 02:01 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  We are awaiting the return of Christ in which everyone will be resurrected from the dead and given new bodies.

I'm waiting for the zombie apocalypse, too! Have you got a bunker dug out and lots of shotgun ammo yet?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like rook2004's post
22-08-2012, 03:31 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 03:25 PM)rook2004 Wrote:  I'm waiting for the zombie apocalypse, too! Have you got a bunker dug out and lots of shotgun ammo yet?

He aspires to be a zombie...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 03:37 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 03:31 PM)morondog Wrote:  He aspires to be a zombie...

Shit, you're right.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 03:38 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 03:31 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(22-08-2012 03:25 PM)rook2004 Wrote:  I'm waiting for the zombie apocalypse, too! Have you got a bunker dug out and lots of shotgun ammo yet?

He aspires to be a zombie...

Note to self: Buy more ammo.Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
22-08-2012, 04:11 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
I notice I was skipped over apparently. Was my honest question mocking of him?

I demand my deity-damned answer, sir!

[Image: peacock-spider-dance-o.gif]
The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Free Thought's post
22-08-2012, 05:18 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
I hoped that TrueReason answered the last group of questions made for him on this thread before he opened new ones.

I wrote questions for him on my last post and ended unanswered, now I dont know if asking them again on other thread, copying what he and I said that led to the questions/comments on a new thread...

if your faith can move mountains it should be able to withstand criticism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 05:23 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 05:18 PM)SomeOne Wrote:  I hoped that TrueReason answered the last group of questions made for him on this thread before he opened new ones.

I wrote questions for him on my last post and ended unanswered, now I dont know if asking them again on other thread, copying what he and I said that led to the questions/comments on a new thread...

Perhaps we should just ask on his new thread?

(this guy is quite active i've noticed. maybe 'es too busy?)

[Image: peacock-spider-dance-o.gif]
The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: