Questions for Apologists?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-07-2012, 08:29 AM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(19-07-2012 09:34 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
Quote:It could very well be that one is true and one was embellished legend. This doesn't damage the claim of inspiration.
That depends on your definition of divine inspiration. We really need a Christianese thread to explain the difference in words that theists and the rest of the world use.
Quote: Matthias replaced Judas.
He did so in Acts. So he either stays in that book or he gets to be as out of context as my revelation quote.
Quote: The Revelation verse you mentioned is about Revelation... not the entire Bible. It was giving credence to John's vision.
Revelation 19:9 - "These are true words of God." If that doesn't apply any where else in the bible then how can Matthias apply anywhere else in the bible other than in it's own story?
Quote: Your entire argument is based on the literal accuracy of the Bible; something that is never claimed in scripture.
Actually it's not. By pointing out the problems you force a person to rectify things, and learn how they do so.
Hopefully the cognitive dissonance the contradictions provide will eventually force a person to drop the bible all together.

Interestingly it's fun to see how you adapt to arguments. Big Grin

NOTE: This is what arguing with an apologist is like.

Oh okay, I see what you're getting at with the Matthias thing... sorry misunderstood.

You're saying why did Jesus give authority to Judas to judge. I'm saying He didn't because Matthias replaced Judas. You're saying that Jesus said this before Matthias. Got ya.

Jesus excludes Judas in the verse by saying "in the regeneration". "Regeneration" is the phrase that describes a person's realization of their election. Those that followed Christ and were regenerated will be on the thrones. Jesus could have easily not said this; however, He knew of Judas' betrayal so made was deliberate with His words.

The twelfth disciple would be Matthias (some say Paul).

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 02:43 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(19-07-2012 09:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(19-07-2012 09:39 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  Doesn't this statement of yours imply that you fully believe that there is no god?
Either I am reading you guys all wrong, or you guys keep saying things that prove the narrower definition of Atheism.
I need someone to please be honest here, when you say a statement like this guy just did, what do you expect us to think?
Do you really expect us to just accept your vague definition of what you believe?

So, if I were to just brainstorm this for a sec...

(Example)
An Atheist says: "The claim that there is a god is false"
Someone else says: "So your belief is that there is no god?"
Atheist: "No, it's not a belief! It's a rejection of belief!"
Dodgy

So someone please clear this up for me cause it's getting annoying...
You're confusing rejection of positive claims (existence of God, Bible as proofs) for an assertion of the opposite.

You have no proof of your claim, so I state that your claim is not true.
I don't claim proof for no gods, I state that there is a paucity of evidence God and an enormous amount of evidence against the claim that there is.

I don't believe in this.

Once a claim is made, and therefore enters reality, you can only have a positive, neutral, or negative stance towards it.

You can't have "no stance" towards it because it exists. The only way that you can have a "no stance" is not having the knowledge of the claim. Once your ignorance has been removed, it is impossible to claim "no stance".

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:01 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 02:43 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  I don't believe in this.

Once a claim is made, and therefore enters reality, you can only have a positive, neutral, or negative stance towards it.

You can't have "no stance" towards it because it exists. The only way that you can have a "no stance" is not having the knowledge of the claim. Once your ignorance has been removed, it is impossible to claim "no stance".
This makes a lot more sense then the vague work-around that many Atheists have been offering.

One thing I really want to know is, what are Atheists trying to avoid by being defined a certain way?
Maybe once I know that, I will understand more why it's a big enough deal to them to go to lengths just to prove otherwise.

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:05 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:01 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  
(20-07-2012 02:43 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  I don't believe in this.

Once a claim is made, and therefore enters reality, you can only have a positive, neutral, or negative stance towards it.

You can't have "no stance" towards it because it exists. The only way that you can have a "no stance" is not having the knowledge of the claim. Once your ignorance has been removed, it is impossible to claim "no stance".
This makes a lot more sense then the vague work-around that many Atheists have been offering.

One thing I really want to know is, what are Atheists trying to avoid by being defined a certain way?
Maybe once I know that, I will understand more why it's a big enough deal to them to go to lengths just to prove otherwise.

I can't answer that since I'm not an atheist.

My assumption is that they want discredit and insult the belief as much as possible. They want to make it seem so insignificant and ludicrous that they don't even want to acknowledge it into existence. Some may feel that if they even acknowledge it, then that gives credence to the idea.

Again, likes I said, these are just my assumptions.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:05 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
I would ask an apologist why they don't accept Allah into their hearts, since the consequence of being wrong is unthinkable (another version of hell) and the cost is free.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:07 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
Nice one ideasonscribe Wink We *must* have a sneaky ulterior motive. Like wanting to sin and have sex a lot. I know I do Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:07 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:05 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  I would ask an apologist why they don't accept Allah into their hearts, since the consequence of being wrong is unthinkable (another version of hell) and the cost is free.

*playing the apologist*

Because that would be blasphemy and worshiping of a false god.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:17 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:01 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  
(20-07-2012 02:43 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  I don't believe in this.

Once a claim is made, and therefore enters reality, you can only have a positive, neutral, or negative stance towards it.

You can't have "no stance" towards it because it exists. The only way that you can have a "no stance" is not having the knowledge of the claim. Once your ignorance has been removed, it is impossible to claim "no stance".
This makes a lot more sense then the vague work-around that many Atheists have been offering.

One thing I really want to know is, what are Atheists trying to avoid by being defined a certain way?
Maybe once I know that, I will understand more why it's a big enough deal to them to go to lengths just to prove otherwise.
I am more than fine admitting I have a negative stance towards belief in a deity.

I believe there is no God, I reject the idea of a God.

They are negative stances.

I don't believe in a God is a negative stance because you don't side with that deity, and you have no wishy-washy attitude towards it's existance.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:25 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:07 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(20-07-2012 03:05 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  I would ask an apologist why they don't accept Allah into their hearts, since the consequence of being wrong is unthinkable (another version of hell) and the cost is free.

*playing the apologist*

Because that would be blasphemy and worshiping of a false god.
...Which is exactly the type of double-standard that one would try to tease out with that question, to be followed up with "from their point of view, your god is false and your faith is blasphemy, and your method of reasoning leaves an outsider with no way to decide which one of you is right."

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:29 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:25 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(20-07-2012 03:07 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  *playing the apologist*

Because that would be blasphemy and worshiping of a false god.
...Which is exactly the type of double-standard that one would try to tease out with that question, to be followed up with "from their point of view, your god is false and your faith is blasphemy, and your method of reasoning leaves an outsider with no way to decide which one of you is right."

Faith.

I believe God grants us faith in Him because we are elect. Those that do not have faith have not been given it; therefore, they aren't elect.

In this same way, God gives us faith that Christ is the one true way.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: