Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Testing The Christian Apologists
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 31 of 1086 (865099)
10-20-2019 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Phat
10-20-2019 4:55 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
quote:
Well, He gave me a brain. He also gave me free will. I believe that within the context of my perceived relationship with Him I am allowed to question many things. I see what blind obedience does to people. When they refuse to question their books, they blow themselves up, die for ideology, and cause harm to society. I wouldn't want to ever be faced with doing that.
Why not start with questioning the idea that God wrote it? There’s not a single book in the Bible that claims to be written by God, and quite a few identify the author.
And I see plenty of room for questioning interpretations, even if you go with the unBiblical idea of God as the author.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Phat, posted 10-20-2019 4:55 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 32 of 1086 (865109)
10-20-2019 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Phat
10-20-2019 4:42 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
Phat writes:
No, but you use them to present the case for your argument concerning what Christianity and Christian philosophy is and should be about.
No Phat, once again that is simply untrue.
I use the Bible to support what Christianity should be all about, particularly what Jesus is said that his followers should do.
I use Mencius and the Eight Fold Path and Middle Way and Mark Twain to show that wisdom can be found nearly universally.
Phat writes:
I happen to reject the idea that God could lie. I don't care what the book can be shown to say.
But again Phat, it is not what the book can be shown to say, it is what the book actually says. It's not anything I say Phat, you object to what the Bible actually says.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Phat, posted 10-20-2019 4:42 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 4:08 AM jar has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18248
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


(1)
Message 33 of 1086 (865542)
10-27-2019 4:08 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by jar
10-20-2019 8:14 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
jar writes:
But again Phat, it is not what the book can be shown to say, it is what the book actually says.
Numbers 23:19: God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?
1 Samuel 15:29: And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor relent. For He is not a man, that He should relent.
Psalm 92:15: To declare that the Lord is upright; He is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.
Malachi 3:6: For I am the Lord, I do not change.
Romans 3:4: Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.
Titus 1:2: [I]n hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began.
Hebrews 6:18: [I]t is impossible for God to lie.
James 1:17-18: Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.
What does the book actually say, jar? Have you ever read the Bible?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by jar, posted 10-20-2019 8:14 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by jar, posted 10-27-2019 8:02 AM Phat has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 34 of 1086 (865547)
10-27-2019 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Phat
10-27-2019 4:08 AM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
Yes Phat and I understand and have repeatedly said that the Bible is filled with contradictions, errors, fantasy as well as history, laws and opinions.
What I don't do is only take those parts that support my position out of context but instead accept that what is written is actually what the authors wrote.
Phat quotemines writes:
Malachi 3:6: For I am the Lord, I do not change.
I have no doubt that the author of that passage might have believed it was true; yet that does not change the FACT that the authors of Genesis 1 and the authors of Genesis 2&3 described two entirely different and mutually incompatibly Gods.
Phat quotemines writes:
Numbers 23:19: God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?
1 Samuel 15:29: And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor relent. For He is not a man, that He should relent.
Psalm 92:15: To declare that the Lord is upright; He is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.
Romans 3:4: Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.
Titus 1:2: In hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began.
Hebrews 6:18: It is impossible for God to lie.
Again, I have no doubt that the authors of those passages believed they were true or at least wanted to market them as true but it does not change the FACT that in the Genesis 2&3 fable the author does have the God character not telling the truth and the serpent telling the truth.
The point is, what is actually written is what is actually written and trying to pretend that one part cancels out or revises some other part is just plain not being honest.
Edited by jar, : No reason given.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 4:08 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 12:52 PM jar has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18248
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 35 of 1086 (865561)
10-27-2019 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by jar
10-27-2019 8:02 AM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
jar writes:
I have no doubt that the author of that passage might have believed it was true; yet that does not change the FACT that the authors of Genesis 1 and the authors of Genesis 2&3 described two entirely different and mutually incompatibly Gods.
And no doubt those authors believed that what they wrote was true.
You are being dishonest in selling the point that "the Bible says what it actually says" on the one hand, and then "the author of this passage believed it was true" in another context. The passages which you emphasize in your posts represent what YOU take from the Bible. You cant simply declare that it is not what you say but what is actually written and remain honest in criticizing me for quote-mining.
The picture that you paint in your posts to us represents what it is that you want to teach and/or share.
And to dismiss the apologists as a bunch of carny barkers while presenting YOUR choice passages as an example of what a Christian *should* believe needs to be exposed. People are of course free to take from the Bible what they need if anything. I am pushing the agenda that God exists, is knowable through the character and life of Jesus Christ, is larger than simply multiple characters in a book, and is as great of a character as people believe Him to be, for them. GOD may well be far more complex and dynamic than any human can imagine Him as, but it is this that should be emphasized, rather than emphasizing a god character who lies, is uncertain, learns on the job, and is portrayed by some as a human teacher.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by jar, posted 10-27-2019 8:02 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by ringo, posted 10-27-2019 2:23 PM Phat has replied
 Message 42 by jar, posted 10-27-2019 5:39 PM Phat has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 36 of 1086 (865567)
10-27-2019 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Phat
10-27-2019 12:52 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
Phat writes:
... God exists, is knowable through the character and life of Jesus Christ....
The "life of Jesus" exists only in the Bible - and you reject much of what He said in the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 12:52 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 3:13 PM ringo has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18248
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 37 of 1086 (865569)
10-27-2019 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by ringo
10-27-2019 2:23 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
You continually accuse me of this, yet have no proof. Why not just ask me? I won't lie.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by ringo, posted 10-27-2019 2:23 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by ringo, posted 10-27-2019 3:35 PM Phat has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 38 of 1086 (865570)
10-27-2019 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Phat
10-27-2019 3:13 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
Phat writes:
You continually accuse me of this, yet have no proof.
I certainly do have proof. You reject what Jesus said about selling everything you have and giving to the poor. You claim that it isn't meant for everybody but you never back that up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 3:13 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 4:27 PM ringo has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18248
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 39 of 1086 (865573)
10-27-2019 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by ringo
10-27-2019 3:35 PM


Turek and the Atheists
ringo writes:
You reject what Jesus said about selling everything you have and giving to the poor. You claim that it isn't meant for everybody but you never back that up.
Guilty. I do question whether that is meant for everybody. I certainly know of nobody who has done so. I will study more. What else am I failing to obey or follow? I can use constructive criticism--even from a guy who limits the character to the book.
******************************************
Getting back to the apologists, Frank Turek has a new podcast which has some interesting exchanges on college campuses with todays younger generation of atheists.
I Dont Have Enough Fith To Be An Atheist
I listened to this one today: He seems honest enough in his arguments. Of course his challengers have some good replies also. I am searching for a transcript...I know you cant listen at the public library. And yes, Im trying to put what I learn into my own words...but it takes time to get the essence of his argument.
Do atheists just lack a belief in God?
He answers the following questions:
  • Is lacking a belief in God" the proper and helpful definition of atheism?
  • What questions can you ask atheists who say this?
  • By what moral standard are atheists judging God to be immoral?
  • Why atheists have a burden of proof just like Christians(this was helpful)
  • Why Christianity is the best explanation of why reality is the way it is.
    Personally, I learn a lot through our exchanges here at EvC. I am not trying so much to find the proper questions to ask Atheists, but I do want the apologist to be tested by them and see if he is debating in good faith.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
    As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
    ? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 38 by ringo, posted 10-27-2019 3:35 PM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 40 by ringo, posted 10-27-2019 4:38 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
     Message 41 by PaulK, posted 10-27-2019 4:49 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    ringo
    Member (Idle past 402 days)
    Posts: 20940
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005


    (2)
    Message 40 of 1086 (865575)
    10-27-2019 4:38 PM
    Reply to: Message 39 by Phat
    10-27-2019 4:27 PM


    Re: Turek and the Atheists
    Phat writes:
    And yes, Im trying to put what I learn into my own words...but it takes time to get the essence of his argument.
    Isn't it odd that you can decide that the arguments are honest and make sense but you can't articulate what the arguments are?
    Phat writes:
    I am not trying so much to find the proper questions to ask Atheists, but I do want the apologist to be tested by them and see if he is debating in good faith.
    I'm not interested in how apologists attack atheists either. I'm interested in how they justify their own twisting of the Bible.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 39 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 4:27 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 17815
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.1


    Message 41 of 1086 (865576)
    10-27-2019 4:49 PM
    Reply to: Message 39 by Phat
    10-27-2019 4:27 PM


    Re: Turek and the Atheists
    quote:
    Is lacking a belief in God" the proper and helpful definition of atheism?
    It is certainly a proper definition of atheism. Especially when we consider the original definition of agnostic.
    quote:
    By what moral standard are atheists judging God to be immoral?
    This is a pretty silly question since the answer is obvious. Everyone judges by their own moral standard - but there is a very large measure of agreement in those standards.
    Indeed it is strictly speaking incorrect to say that atheists judge God - since atheists do not believe that God did any of the things that prompt the judgement. And liberal Christians like GDR will often agree that God did not do those things because they would be immoral.
    quote:
    Why atheists have a burden of proof just like Christians(this was helpful)
    Atheists who simply lack belief in God have no burden of proof. Even those who say that God does not exist have a lesser burden than those who say that God does exist. And the Problem of Evil is a compelling argument which has no entirely satisfactory response.
    quote:
    Why Christianity is the best explanation of why reality is the way it is.
    It isn’t. The very idea is daft.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 39 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 4:27 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    jar
    Member (Idle past 384 days)
    Posts: 34026
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 42 of 1086 (865580)
    10-27-2019 5:39 PM
    Reply to: Message 35 by Phat
    10-27-2019 12:52 PM


    Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
    Phat writes:
    You are being dishonest in selling the point that "the Bible says what it actually says" on the one hand, and then "the author of this passage believed it was true" in another context.
    That is simply silly Phat, really really silly. Think before you write. There is absolutely no issue between those two statements.
    Phat writes:
    The passages which you emphasize in your posts represent what YOU take from the Bible. You cant simply declare that it is not what you say but what is actually written and remain honest in criticizing me for quote-mining.
    Of course I can Phat. You still miss the whole point.
    The apologists claim the Bible is "a whole" and that one part interprets another part. I simply point out that the evidence shows that the Bible is NOT "a whole" but rather an anthology of anthologies. Each section represents the beliefs or message of the authors at the time they wrote the material.
    Phat writes:
    And to dismiss the apologists as a bunch of carny barkers while presenting YOUR choice passages as an example of what a Christian *should* believe needs to be exposed.
    But it's a good thing that I don't do that then. I don't try to tell anyone what they should believe rather I simply present the actual evidence of what was written.
    Personally I have no reason to think the authors did not believe what they wrote was true; even the author of the Gospel of John most likely believed what he was writing was true.
    Phat writes:
    GOD may well be far more complex and dynamic than any human can imagine Him as, but it is this that should be emphasized, rather than emphasizing a god character who lies, is uncertain, learns on the job, and is portrayed by some as a human teacher.
    Yet once again Phat, the Bible actually says what it says. How many times have I pointed out the differences between the God of Genesis 1 and the much older God of Genesis 2&3.

    My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 35 by Phat, posted 10-27-2019 12:52 PM Phat has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 43 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 3:04 AM jar has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18248
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 43 of 1086 (865596)
    10-28-2019 3:04 AM
    Reply to: Message 42 by jar
    10-27-2019 5:39 PM


    Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
    The point is that these writers actually met God in some way or fashion. They were not simply imagining him, as you might a mugwump.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
    As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
    ? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 42 by jar, posted 10-27-2019 5:39 PM jar has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 44 by jar, posted 10-28-2019 8:47 AM Phat has replied
     Message 47 by GDR, posted 10-28-2019 2:51 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    jar
    Member (Idle past 384 days)
    Posts: 34026
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 44 of 1086 (865615)
    10-28-2019 8:47 AM
    Reply to: Message 43 by Phat
    10-28-2019 3:04 AM


    Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
    Phat writes:
    The point is that these writers actually met God in some way or fashion. They were not simply imagining him, as you might a mugwump.
    But again Phat, what does the evidence show? If each of the writers did meet God and did describe the God they met then the author of Genesis 1 met an entirely different God then the author of Genesis 2&3 or the author of Exodus. Either all of the authors wrote about what the imagined God to be or they all met different Gods or God is simply Coyote who can be a shape shifter and jokester.

    My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 43 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 3:04 AM Phat has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 45 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 2:06 PM jar has replied
     Message 46 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 2:11 PM jar has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18248
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 45 of 1086 (865629)
    10-28-2019 2:06 PM
    Reply to: Message 44 by jar
    10-28-2019 8:47 AM


    The Evolution Of The God Character
    You have an evidence-based argument that does not address nor touch upon belief except to say that nobody actually has a handle on the character of GOD. Christians, on the other hand, (your "club" notwithstanding) believe that GOD can be known through the character of Jesus Christ. Perhaps in OT times, many "Gods" were imagined, none known, and all attempted to be defined and described. We can throw the culturally limited coyote in with that lot. The whole basis of Christian belief, however, is One God (God of very God) described through Jesus Christ. Can you make a valid argument that people invent various "Jesus" Characters just as they invented "god characters" in the OT? If so, I think we are closer to defining God through Jesus and to a lesser extent through the additional writings of Paul, Peter, and John. (Redactors notwithstanding)

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
    As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
    ? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 44 by jar, posted 10-28-2019 8:47 AM jar has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 48 by jar, posted 10-28-2019 3:30 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
     Message 63 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-29-2019 6:47 PM Phat has not replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024