Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Testing The Christian Apologists
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 46 of 1086 (865630)
10-28-2019 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by jar
10-28-2019 8:47 AM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
jar writes:
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.
You and I could meet the same person and come up with two different books describing how that character impacted our world view. Take Andrew Jackson. He is described in different ways by those who knew or claimed to know him or of him. Their conclusions were based in some way to their initial ideology and world view to begin with. Different gods serve different purposes to the devotees who describe them. This does not negate the idea that it may be only One (the same One) who has at that point in time impacted their life in any meaningful way.
While I dont think that OT authors actually met God the way that we can in todays post resurrection world, but even that is open to argumentation.

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 49 by jar, posted 10-28-2019 3:31 PM Phat has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(2)
Message 47 of 1086 (865632)
10-28-2019 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Phat
10-28-2019 3:04 AM


Understanding Scripture
TGP 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.
I probably shouldn’t insert myself in your conversation with jar but I will anyway.
I suggest that you might start with the understanding that the entire Bible is written by fallible men, and that in many cases it is written from their imaginations. (There are the historical books as well where the writers have their own biases.) However, I contend that God reaches out and inspires us through our imaginations.
For example we have a little guy in our church who is severely autistic and is non-verbal. His mother is a wonderful woman and when I see her holding and loving that little guy I see God in that love. In my imagination I see God loving us in the same way as she loves her autistic son. It is hardly conclusive evidence and I suppose that is where faith comes into it.
I believe that the Bible can be read in one sense as a cohesive narrative. As you read through the early chapter I see a progressive understanding of the nature of God from the vengeful God that wants to destroy the enemies of Israel, through the latter prophets such as Isaiah, until the Israel story climaxes in Jesus who perfectly embodied the Father’s nature.
It seems to me that to understand the OT we have to do it through the lens of the understanding of God’s nature and its meaning to our live as we see it in Jesus. If we want to understand the meaning of Jesus we need to do it through the OT as the writers of the NT frame much of what they write around the OT.
I suggest that if we try to understand the Scriptures as being inerrant in terms of a 21st century mindset we close ourselves off to hearing what God has to say to us through our imaginations.
One easy example, as we have covered many times before, is when we read accounts of Yahweh committing and/or ordering genocide and contrast that with Jesus telling us to love our enemies, which were to His target audience the Romans. Those divergent understandings of God cannot be reconciled in spite of what some will say. When we read the accounts of genocide through the lens of Jesus we can know that God did not command or commit genocide. We can also see that the results, of believing in a violent and vengeful god, were hardly fruitful. We can also see that we have to be very discerning when people tell us what it is that God wants us to do.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 3:04 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 48 of 1086 (865635)
10-28-2019 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Phat
10-28-2019 2:06 PM


Re: The Evolution Of The God Character
Phat writes:
Can you make a valid argument that people invent various "Jesus" Characters just as they invented "god characters" in the OT?
Yes, of course people invent their own Jesus character. You are a great example.
We all need to invent what we believe since there is absolutely no actual evidence to support our beliefs.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 2:06 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 49 of 1086 (865636)
10-28-2019 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Phat
10-28-2019 2:11 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
Phat writes:
Different gods serve different purposes to the devotees who describe them.
Correct. Different gods serve different purposes to the devotees who describe them.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 2:11 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 3:39 PM jar has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 50 of 1086 (865637)
10-28-2019 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by jar
10-28-2019 3:31 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
There are certain world-changing moments in people's lives that they never forget. Being at the scene of 9-11 or even watching it on TV could be said to be one of such moments. No one present shall ever forget the event. And though they may embellish it some in their later years, it will essentially remain etched as it occurred. Arguably the same could have been said to have happened due to the resurrection. If people simply heard second-hand accounts or made it up, the impact would not transfer to succeeding generations. Additionally, the event would not register as a world view changing moment. And yet it does. For some of us, anyway. Would you argue that many Biblical authors had world view changing moments that led to their writings? Or would you say they simply made it up.

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 49 by jar, posted 10-28-2019 3:31 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Stile, posted 10-28-2019 4:20 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 52 by jar, posted 10-28-2019 4:59 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 51 of 1086 (865639)
10-28-2019 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Phat
10-28-2019 3:39 PM


Re: Testing Whom? Testing What?
Thugpreacha writes:
There are certain world-changing moments in people's lives that they never forget. Being at the scene of 9-11 or even watching it on TV could be said to be one of such moments.
I think you need to spend a bit more time on how memory works.
Although most will remember "two planes took out the twin towers"... everything after that is pretty much up for grabs.
Some will remember near perfectly.
Others will get things mostly wrong.
Most will be hit-and-miss for this-and-that.
Take a look at this:
quote:
The Mind, Explained - Episode 1
It begins with a woman named Melanie Mignucci detailing her memories of 9/11. She describes her panicked phone call with her mother, who worked in New York City at the time. Mignucci recalled how smoke from the towers circled outside her classroom window. She continues telling her story from that day, unaware that nothing she knew about her memory was true.
The memory this day never occurred it had simply been altered over time, leaving her able to recall something that never happened. After a few more similar stories, the viewer is left in a state of skepticism after realizing memories aren’t necessarily reliable most of what people think they know isn’t completely true. The idea of this unreliability was unsettling, as these are how people remember their entire lives.
This entire first episode (about 20 minutes) is available free on YouTube, I think, if you're interested.
From what I can remember [ ], the lady learns that her mother was not in the City "at the time" and it's impossible for her to see the smoke outside her classroom window - the school is geographically too far away to even see any smoke, let alone have it circling her school... and the wind was blowing in the opposite direction that day anyway. No smoke from the towers ever got closer to her school - it got further away.
That's how memory works - people think it's accurate, but it's not.
That's why we don't rely on memory when something's important. Do you not record important dates/meetings to remember on a calendar? Why would you ever need to do such a thing if your memory was accurate?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 3:39 PM Phat has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 52 of 1086 (865641)
10-28-2019 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Phat
10-28-2019 3:39 PM


memory, story telling and reality.
Phat writes:
Would you argue that many Biblical authors had world view changing moments that led to their writings? Or would you say they simply made it up.
Again Phat, what does the evidence show?
First we have absolutely no idea who wrote any of the Old Testament and we only have a very few New Testament writings than can be said to likely have a known author.
We do not know who the actual author of any of the Gospels might be but we do know that nothing in Luke is a first hand account.
If we look at the portions common to more than one book we see two patterns, either direct quotes that likely came from so other unknown source or particularly in the stories in Luke and the other Gospels classic embellishment. The two examples you and I have discussed many times and in depth are the Great Commission and Paul's highway experience. In only one instance of the latter is there a hint of attribution and that is the tale supposedly told by Saul himself which is really pretty much mundane and without any strong details.
There is a notable lack of "world view changing moments" that are first person accounts and changes that are written are more evolutionary than revolutionary. Even Paul's writings show an evolving theology.
As one by one the very most basic cornerstones of the early theology failed to match reality the theology itself changed and the Apologist began their revision of the initial theology to try to make it fit reality. The classic example is the END not coming within the time predicted by Jesus thus the Apologist had to redefine the meaning of what was really pretty clear to claim that what Jesus was reported to have said really didn't mean what Jesus was reported to have said.
The evidence for such revisionism is pretty ubiquitous; when God says that if you eat the fruit you will die God didn't mean really really dead just spiritually dead.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 3:39 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 53 of 1086 (865678)
10-29-2019 4:36 AM


Frank Turek & The Cosmic Skeptic
Alex O'Connor is a highly intelligent young man! He is but 18, yet he held his own with Frank Turek, a skilled apologist. What impressed me and many others was the mutual level of respect which both of them had for each other and how the argumentativeness seemed to be a joyful quest for knowledge, truth, and consensus.
Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.

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

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 54 of 1086 (865696)
10-29-2019 3:02 PM


Mark Mittelberg
Reviewing his book, found here
Table Of Contents
Typical apologetic questions...I'm not too impressed with this guy yet. Sean McDowell seems more experienced and Frank Turek has some good answers to questions, though I am finding that it all boils down to belief rather than evidence. Turek claims that atheists simply do not want to believe and many wouldn't even if presented with irrefutable evidence. Tureks podcast
Tangle and Stile have argued that this is not true and is a common claim from apologists.
Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.

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

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 3:06 PM Phat has replied
 Message 56 by Tangle, posted 10-29-2019 3:23 PM Phat has replied
 Message 68 by Tangle, posted 10-30-2019 3:21 AM Phat has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 55 of 1086 (865697)
10-29-2019 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Phat
10-29-2019 3:02 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Phat writes:
Turek claims that atheists simply do not want to believe and many wouldn't even if presented with irrefutable evidence.
And that is sufficient evidence to simply throw him and his worthless opinions away.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 3:02 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 3:32 PM jar has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 56 of 1086 (865703)
10-29-2019 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Phat
10-29-2019 3:02 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Phat writes:
Turek claims that atheists simply do not want to believe and many wouldn't even if presented with irrefutable evidence.
Well he's wrong, so you can disregard everything else he says.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 3:02 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 3:34 PM Tangle has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 57 of 1086 (865707)
10-29-2019 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by jar
10-29-2019 3:06 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
WRONG. You are quick to make judgments. Though you have a right to your opinion (and likely have some prejudice of your own regarding apologists in general) you must first listen to at least one of his podcasts before making any statement. After all, you insist I read the Bible in context before challenging your beliefs and statements.
Turek has some valid arguments. In response to atheists who simply say they lack a belief in God and that the onus is on the believers to support the argument, he challenges by asking them to give their explanation (as far as they believe) as to how the universe came about. I cnt simply paraphrase his arguments, though I am beginning to think on my own after listening to the many sides of these faith & belief vs evidence-based discussions.
You want to throw anything away that challenges your comfort zone. You think you have it all figured out, don't you? You likely will claim only that you report what the books say and that you rely on logic, reason, reality, and evidence. What is telling, however, is your unmasked disdain for anyone wearing the label of apologist. You are prejudiced against them. You paint the whole lot of them with one broad brushstroke, yet you have no more of an idea than I do. Why must you always be so negative?

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 55 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 3:06 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 4:07 PM Phat has replied
 Message 72 by Stile, posted 10-30-2019 8:36 AM Phat has replied
 Message 78 by ringo, posted 10-30-2019 3:21 PM Phat has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 58 of 1086 (865709)
10-29-2019 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Tangle
10-29-2019 3:23 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
And you, Mr.Tangle are just as bad. You all always get on Faith for being so set in her ways and yet you are not providing any better arguments than the ones the apologists make. Until and unless you listen to at least one podcast I will likely disregard everything else that *you* say. I swear you guys are as bad as the Populists.
Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.

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 56 by Tangle, posted 10-29-2019 3:23 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Tangle, posted 10-29-2019 6:08 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 59 of 1086 (865713)
10-29-2019 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Phat
10-29-2019 3:32 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Phat writes:
You want to throw anything away that challenges your comfort zone.
Not at all Phat but I do throw away those who make absolutely stupid absurd claims.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 3:32 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 4:17 PM jar has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 60 of 1086 (865715)
10-29-2019 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by jar
10-29-2019 4:07 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
It may be my fault for summarizing it wrong. His arguments are not stupid.
You likely will disagree with some of them, but hre we go:
quote:
If you read the threads of several of the blog entries on this site, you will see both atheists and Christians charging one another with committing logical fallacies. The assumption both sides are making is that there is this objective realm of reason out there that: 1) we all have access to; 2) tells us the truth about the real world; and 3) is something we ought to use correctly if we want to know the truth. I think those are good assumptions. My question for the atheists is how do you justify these assumptions if there is no God?
If atheistic materialism is true, it seems to me that reason itself is impossible. For if mental processes are nothing but chemical reactions in the brain, then there is no reason to believe that anything is true(including the theory of materialism). Chemicals can’t evaluate whether or not a theory is true. Chemicals don’t reason, they react.
This is ironic because atheists— who often claim to be champions of truth and reason— have made truth and reason impossible by their theory of materialism. So even when atheists are right about something, their worldview gives us no reason to believe them because reason itself is impossible in a world governed only by chemical and physical forces.
Not only is reason impossible in an atheistic world, but the typical atheist assertion that we should rely on reason alone cannot be justified. Why not? Because reason actually requires faith. As J. Budziszewski points out in his book What We Can’t Not Know, The motto ‘Reason Alone!’is nonsense anyway. Reason itself presupposes faith. Why? Because adefense of reason by reason is circular, therefore worthless. Our only guarantee that human reason works is God who made it.
Let’s unpack Budziszewski‘s point by considering the source of reason. Our ability to reason can come from one of only two sources: either our ability to reason arose from preexisting intelligence or it did not, in which case it arose from mindless matter. The atheists/Darwinists/materialists believe, by faith, that our minds arose from mindless matter without intelligent intervention. I say by faith because it contradicts all scientific observation, which demonstrates that an effect cannot be greater than its cause. You can’t give what you haven’t got, yet atheists believe that dead, unintelligent matter has produced itself into intelligent life. This is like believing that the Library of Congress resulted from an explosion in a printing shop.
I think it makes much more sense to believe that the human mind is made in the image of the Great Mind— God.In other words, our minds can apprehend truth and can reason about reality because they were built by the Architect of truth, reality, and reason itself.
So I have two questions for atheists: 1)What is the source of this immaterial reality known as reason that we are all presupposing, utilizing in our discussions, and accusing one other of violating on occasion?; and 2) If there is no God and we are nothing but chemicals, why should we trust anything we think, including the thought that there is no God?
I like that bit about chemicals. Ringo once asked why the universe couldn't originate from chemicals in the beginning...he must be a materialist.

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 59 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 4:07 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 5:29 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 73 by Stile, posted 10-30-2019 9:01 AM 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