The Case For A Creator

Isn’t that the one where Strobel goes to Intelligent Design people instead of actual experts? That was obvious even for Strobel.Sandage seems more reasonable.But there is something missing in the quote you give. There is no reason why the “church's claim to explain the world at the very deepest level” should be accepted.My other objection would be that “why” is ambiguous - there are senses of it that science can answer. And it is far from clear that the “why” questions he raises do have answers in a sense that science cannot address (or have much of an answer at all - I have addressed ”why is there something instead of nothing before” and come to the conclusion that it isn’t likely to have a satisfying answer)

quote:

---

Differing events produce different degrees of eyewitness testimonies. If the observers themselves are unaffected by the event and it merely seems exciting or interesting to them,then yes there will be many versions of what happened

---

Well it appears that we have no eyewitness testimonies for Jesus’ ministry.

quote:

---

But what I am trying (unsuccessfully) to get through your thick skulls is that the event and events that I am describing are in fact life changing events for every single one of us. None of you are uninvolved. None of you are detached observers milling about the mall of ideas.

---

We were not there. The events themselves are remote, likely touch us less than, say, the Battle of Actium. We are not even observers.

quote:

---

The fact that you are unimpressed nor moved by the book and its contents is also noted. You are digging your own grave. The book itself is relatively simple. Pulling up contradictions and inconsistencies is simply human attempts at manipulation of interpretation of reality.

---

The odd thing is that I heard that the Christian God is not a great fan of idolaters. Why should we unquestioningly believe what the Gideons say ? Why are we not allowed to study the Bible and find out that things are not quite as they would have us believe ?

quote:

---

My argument is ongoing. It is true that you often expose it for being weak or incomplete, but keep in mind that concerning goals and goalposts you and I have different goals. You seek to expose the purpose of organized religion as a sham, scam, and fraud. I seek to defend the statement that the Gideons say above, concerning the Bible:
CHRIST is its grand subject, our good the design, and the glory of God its end.

---

You are doing a very good job of making it look like a scam.

quote:

---

While many apologists and CCoI Christians continue to speak from willful ignorance, it is hardly evident that all apologists do

---

Not all apologists are Biblical Inerrantists either. However jar has a valid point - there are real contradictions in the Bible. Why some people deny it - there’s a question.

quote:

---

Granted. Perhaps a valid line of questioning is to the motives as to why the books were written in the first place

---

That is a question that must be settled on a book-for-book basis. And even then some books have major additions that need to be considered separately.

quote:

---

Have people really belived that they interacted with God and that Jesus was more than simply a prophet? Or were the motives less honorable?

---

Obviously the OT authors had no view on Jesus at all. Many do not claim to have personally interacted with God. Most of them were promoting a view that they likely believed.

quote:

---

Personally I believe that there is a sort of ongoing spiritual war between Truth and Lies.

---

If so, you don’t seem too careful about which side you are serving.

quote:

---

how careful can we be? How do we really know which side is which?

---

If you see writings full of falsehood - falsehoods that could be seen at the time of writing - it’s pretty clear that the writer is not in the side of truth. Check. Do your due diligence. Don’t go trying to invent bad motives for writers who say things you don’t like.