The Ever Present Problem of Atheism (HOF thread)

[Aimiel]

Hope You don't Mind if I Tackle Both

Hope You don't Mind if I Tackle Both

Originally posted by Zakath Two questions, take your pick of one.

1. Explain exactly what the term "slave" means in the following passages attributed to Paul: Romans 6:16-18

Well, I never said that Paul did not teach about slavery to obedience. I am always thinking of Jews when I think of slavery. I think of their 400 years of bondage in Goshen, and I think of their nearly 5,000 year history of slavery to the law. When I think of slavery I also remember Romans 6:14, which says, "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." Also, when I think of servitude, I think of John 15:15, which says, "Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you." If I am a slave to God, it is out of love, and not any requirement from Him or from man or from religion or from family or friends. If I do something for God, which is very often, I do it out of love for Him, and not because He 'owns,' me; even though He does own the entire Universe, over which He is King. I have a life that is sweet, due to His Holy Presence inside of me. It is not because I have become a puppet or an automaton. If that were the case, I would be the most miserable man on earth. No, I am not a slave. I am liberated from the slavery of sin:

Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. -- Romans 8:21

2. Explain how he is allegedly "pro-life", yet he killed the entire human race, except for eight people, in Noah's day or why he had the invading Israelites slaugher unborn babies when Joshua destroyed all those Palestinian cities in ancient times?

Well, He is against abortion, which is murder; but I don't think that He has anything to do with the Pro-Life movement, except there might be a few level-headed people who are in the movement. If it were a movement that He started, it would have brought an end to the murder of un-born children by now; which is one of the reasons that He instructed Israel to commit genocide: He knew that if any of the demon-posessed peoples which the enemy had seeded in and around Israel lived that there would be war (constantly) against the State of Israel and that one day they would learn to put high-explosives in their vests along with nails and aluminum bars (which frag into horrendous lethal missiles) and walk into pizza parlors full of young people.

As to the human race, once He began to destroy the children of Israel and start over with just Moses, but Moses talked Him out of it. It was beyond repair, genetically, since the women had relations with demons and produced giants. The women who married Shem, Ham and Japheth (Noah's sons) were obviously still infected, since Goliath, the last of the race of giants was killed by David. It will be no different in the Last Days. Jesus said, in Matthew 24:37, "But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." I also believe that the race of giants which the enemy thinks to hurl at God and overtake Heaven with, will be endowed with supernatural powers. I believe that they are in the earth, right now. I also believe that the restraint that the believers put upon the forces of darkness with prayer and with our presence is the only thing holding them at bay. Once we are taken out of here, which will happen in a moment, the twinkling of an eye; the enemy will be all over the human race like stink on dung. His goals drive him all the time: "Steal, Kill & Destroy." He is out to steal your confidence in the Word of God as supreme authority, to kill your flesh, and / or destroy anything and everything that has anything to do with God. If someone is in his back pocket, he doesn't have to mess them up; since they are already on the highway to hell.

You want a challenge? You want a dare? Why not try Jesus. Being a Christian is the greatest challenge I have ever faced. I have not had an easy life. Jesus has not taken my problems away, but just handed me a bigger, tougher set. New level, new devil. I am always being handed harder problems. If I wasn't, I would stagnate. I challenge you to get on your knees and ask Jesus to save you from your sin. I dare you. I wonder if you have the courage? I tell you the way I feel: I believe that you do; but you are in the same boat as King Agrippa, "Almost, thou persuadest me to be a Christian." -- Acts 26:28

I believe you have the dareing and the courage to get out of that boat and challenge the Lord to make something of your life, instead of leaving you stranded in the midst of your self-gratified lifestyle. You have said that you type on this BBS because you can't find anything decent on the TV. Well, you can find something far better than decent within your own heart, if you dare, if you are willing to take one small step of courage and just say, "Lord, I don't know if you are real or not, but if you are, I want you to save me from my sin."

I dare you.:up:

 

[mindlight]

Zakath,

As our little survey of the non Christians references to Christ has demonstrated the evidence is neither entirely convincing for or against the Christian understanding of Jesus as someone who performed paranormal acts. So also you could not use these sources to refute the scriptures as they lack the consistency and credibility required for such an argument. There are references however to a debate about this man going back to the first century and there are affirmations fo the historicity of the Biblical documents in numerous ways as characters and events described in scripture are referred to elsewhere also. We also have glimpses of truth here e.g. Thallus reference to the darkness at the time of Christs resurrection in these sources. You read this evidence with the presupposition of unbelief and sckepticism and I read with the presupposition of faith. But my faith is not founded on these evidences and it is perhaps misleading and distracting to debate your unbelief in these terms when the eyewitness reports of scripture, the historical community of Christs Body and creation are the more primary and helpful evidences in this case.

1) Scripture is written by more than one author attesting to events that it claims these authors witnessed or compiled from reliable first hand eyewitness reports. It has its own quality and is written in an historical and honest style concerning the events it describes. The writings of one author can be checked against he writings of another. Furthermore the scriptural content describing Jesus and salvation and the other aspects of relationship with God match the experience of millions of Christians of God Himself.

2) The Church - the growth of the church for 2000 years and the testimony of its billions of members down the years to transformed lives, cultures and to a new hope and a direction means that the Christian view carries a weight of numbers by comparison to other religious positions. The credibility of its testimony is futher enhanced by the sheer range of positiosn held by its adherents before they met Christ. We have converted atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Hindus etc in our ranks and each has a different slant on how they came to know Christ and how He proved Himself real to them. This is more so than any other faith. Islam for example is a missionary faith but most of its growth has occurred by birth rather than by conversion and this is the same for Hindus, Sikhs and Jews also. Christianity has converted whole peoples as the example of Africa and Asia in the last century attests. The Gospel at the heart of this appeal and growth must have something going for it if it can appeal to such a rich and diverse range of people and to the extent that it does by comparsion with any other world view.

3) Again the beauty , power and apparent design of creation attests to a Creator. These things are evident even to those who choose to ignore the One who made them but they are not understood except by those who recognise the source of the wonder and awe and sheer amazement that Gods creation can stir is in the Creator Himself.

 

[RogerB]

Great cosmic events and powers manifest continually without one iota of faith on my part.

The God who created these cosmic events and powers is far greater than His creation. You can't define or prove Him in terms of what He created. You have faith in the sunrise and sunset and electricity.....yawn.....have you ever gone out on a limb and put your faith in a person? Did they ever do anything unexpected for you (or against you)? Quite a pleasant (or sobering) experience, eh?

Zakath, your mind is made up on this issue. You know full well that you are not going to find the answers to your questions here. THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL PROOF OF GOD'S EXISTENCE - SO STOP ASKING FOR IT....OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. You win.

So why are you here (at theologyonline.com)?

1. The proof you seek does not exist - that's one thing we can all agree on! So there's no reason to look for it here.

2. Do you want to influence seekers to become atheists?

3. Do you want to influence believers to switch sides and become atheists?

4. Is this really "entertaining"? Asking the same questions over and over and over again....to which there is no answer? Forgive me if I picture a mouse of a treadwheel.

Every point of view has another angle
And every angle has its merit
But all comes down to faith
That's the way I see it

You can say that love is not divine and
You can say that life is not eternal
"All we have is know"
But I don't believe it

There's a God-shaped hole in all of us
And the restless soul is searching
There's a God-shaped hole in all of us
And it's a void only He can fill

Does the world seem gray with empty longing
Wearing every shade of cynical
And do you ever feel that
There is something missing?

That's my point of view...

Good luck filling your hole.

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by RogerB

THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL PROOF OF GOD'S EXISTENCE - SO STOP ASKING FOR IT....OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. You win.

Thank you for conceding the point, RoberB.

NEXT!

So why are you here (at theologyonline.com)?

I post here primarily for entertainment.

4. Is this really "entertaining"?

As a student of human behavior I find it entertaining to watch how people react when encouraged to deal with the inconsistencies in their belief systems.

Good luck filling your hole.

Sooren Kirkegaard, you're not, RogerB!

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by itsjustdave1988
Zman,

For when the Gentiles who do not have the law by nature observe the prescriptions of the law, they are a law for themselves even though they do not have the law. They show that the demands of the law are written in their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even defend them on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge people's hidden works through Christ Jesus (Romans 2:14-16).

Paul speaks of the Romans who have God's will written in their hearts. They are neither Jew or Christian, yet Paul say that even these are judged by their "hidden works through Christ Jesus."

I don't think this is fishy at all.

God bless,

All I get from the above scripture is this:
All gentiles, though not educated about God and His law, by nature observe the prescriptions of the law, and are therefor displaying how God's moral code is manifested in humans hearts. It says Christ will judge them for the "good things" they may do, but it says nothing of the sort about salvation.

 

[RogerB]

I find it entertaining to watch how people react when encouraged to deal with the [atheist manufactured] inconsistencies

How man truly unique reactions have you seen here?

I find it entertaining to watch atheists:

- ask questions to which they already know the answer

- ask these questions over and over and over again

- impose restrictions on what the answer may or may not include

- disagree with personal accounts of God's work

- show what they're truly made of

- treat God like a Rubik's cube

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Mindlight:
As our little survey of the non Christians references to Christ has demonstrated the evidence is neither entirely convincing for or against the Christian understanding of Jesus as someone who performed paranormal acts.

Thank you for being honest. I think we agree on this point.

So also you could not use these sources to refute the scriptures as they lack the consistency and credibility required for such an argument.

I need only use the scriptures themselves. They perform this job quite adequately, thank you.

There are references however to a debate about this man going back to the first century and there are affirmations fo the historicity of the Biblical documents in numerous ways as characters and events described in scripture are referred to elsewhere also.

That's two points and I have dealt with them both previously. First, the claim that mere antiquity is a support for your argument is an example of a logical fallacy called "argumentum ad antiquitatum" or "argument from antiquity". This is the fallacy of believing that a belief is correct because that belief is ancient. If this were true, then Hinduism is a stronger candidate for correctness than Christianity, since it is the older religion.

Your second point, the historicity of certain biblical characters is a weak argument at best and this has been dealt with in a previous post.

We also have glimpses of truth here e.g. Thallus reference to the darkness at the time of Christs resurrection in these sources.

I apologize for missing the previous reference to Thallus, and will deal with it now. Thallus allegedly wrote a set of documents referred to as his "Histories". Since none of the documents survived to modern times, the most only references we have to their Christological content exist as third-hand mentions in Origen (3rd century) and George Syncellus (10th century) (as they describe what Julius Africanus (3rd century) was alleged to have written about Thallus (date uncertain – either 1st century BCE or late 1st century CE.) and proceed to argue against it. Again, this has all the earmarks of an apologetic foil used by the religious teachers to illustrate a particular point.

You read this evidence with the presupposition of unbelief and sckepticism and I read with the presupposition of faith.

Truly stated.

But my faith is not founded on these evidences and it is perhaps misleading and distracting to debate your unbelief in these terms when the eyewitness reports of scripture, the historical community of Christs Body and creation are the more primary and helpful evidences in this case.

But you aren't you merely substituting one sort of historical evidence for another?

1) Scripture is written by more than one author attesting to events that it claims these authors witnessed or compiled from reliable first hand eyewitness reports. It has its own quality and is written in an historical and honest style concerning the events it describes. The writings of one author can be checked against he writings of another. Furthermore the scriptural content describing Jesus and salvation and the other aspects of relationship with God match the experience of millions of Christians of God Himself.

As previously mentioned, the inconsistencies between the books of the Christian Bible are fertile ground for disbelief in the idea of some alleged single spiritual agency behind the text itself. I contend that the biblical content regarding "Jesus and salvation" are sufficiently vague and ambiguous to have generated tens of thousands of sects of Christianity worldwide, many claiming to have exclusive access to the true "revelation of God".

2) The Church - the growth of the church for 2000 years and the testimony of its billions of members down the years to transformed lives, cultures and to a new hope and a direction means that the Christian view carries a weight of numbers by comparison to other religious positions.

This is an example of the logical fallacy "argumentum ad numerum" or argument according to numbers. Merely because many people believe something is correct is not a valid reason to assume it is so. For centuries humans believed in power of "bad air" from swamps to cause malaria and that all the material necessary for human procreation was carried in the sperm and the woman was merely a fertile shell. Neither of these views has stood the test of scientific investigation.

The credibility of its testimony is futher enhanced by the sheer range of positiosn held by its adherents before they met Christ. We have converted atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Hindus etc in our ranks and each has a different slant on how they came to know Christ and how He proved Himself real to them. This is more so than any other faith.

Do you have an authoritative source for this claim? To the best of my knowledge, all the world religions take converts from other faiths or the ranks of infidels.

Islam for example is a missionary faith but most of its growth has occurred by birth rather than by conversion and this is the same for Hindus, Sikhs and Jews also.

So also, the largest group of Christians, the Roman Catholics. The vast majority of Roman Catholics today were born into RC families (so called "cradle Catholics") and brought into the Church as infants by through their baptismal rites. Many of the major Protestant denominations have similar patterns of membership with the majority of members coming from already-Christian households.

Christianity has converted whole peoples as the example of Africa and Asia in the last century attests.

Since this is such a recent phenomena, perhaps you would be so kind as to demonstrate several examples of "whole peoples" that were converted to Christianity in the last century.

The Gospel at the heart of this appeal and growth must have something going for it if it can appeal to such a rich and diverse range of people and to the extent that it does by comparsion with any other world view.

Judging by the growth of adult adherents of Islam in the United States (209% between 1990 and 2001) compared to adult Christians (5% growth between 1990 and 2001 – half of that was Roman Catholics alone) , the same might be said for the Muslim message. (Source for figures)

3) Again the beauty , power and apparent design of creation attests to a Creator. These things are evident even to those who choose to ignore the One who made them but they are not understood except by those who recognise the source of the wonder and awe and sheer amazement that Gods creation can stir is in the Creator Himself.

I agree that I can indeed discern the physical universe. Unlike you I do not require that it be a "creation" of a "creator."

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by RogerB
I find it entertaining to watch atheists:

- ask questions to which they already know the answer

- ask these questions over and over and over again

- impose restrictions on what the answer may or may not include

- disagree with personal accounts of God's work

- show what they're truly made of

- treat God like a Rubik's cube

Whatever floats your boat, RogerB.

 

[Aimiel]

Re: Re: Dohhh...

Re: Re: Dohhh...

Originally posted by Zakath
Yes, that's putting it mildly. So far past that his followers can't figure out any way to demonstrate him or his alleged power to the ignorant.

Aren't you glad that He did not decide to come to the earth in the full power of His Glory and force everyone on earth to bow down before Him because of His Power? Instead, He decided to show us Himself through the demonstration of His Love, and so He could use those who respond to that love to distribute His Power through? If He were to do as you wish, and reveal Himself, there would be no more mystery, we would be like Him, because we would see Him as He is.

 

[RogerB]

Quiter.

 

[Gerald]

Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Originally posted by famousGandalf7
Aren't you glad that He did not decide to come to the earth in the full power of His Glory and force everyone on earth to bow down before Him because of His Power?

Well, that would've been a far more honest approach...

 

[Gerald]

About your avatar...

About your avatar...

RogerB:

You forgot to add horns and a tail...

 

[Zakath]

Re: Hope You don't Mind if I Tackle Both

Re: Hope You don't Mind if I Tackle Both

Originally posted by famousGandalf7
Well, I never said that Paul did not teach about slavery to obedience.

I did not imply that you handn't. I was merely trying to illustrate my "slave" comment.

No, I am not a slave.

Christian orthodoxy teaches that you are the slave of your deity or you are damned. One or the other. The scriptures I cited in my prior post demonstrate this point plainly. Paul taught that his followers were, like him, slaves of the deity they served.

I am liberated from the slavery of sin:

The Christian faith teaches that you trade one form of slavery for another.

He knew that if any of the demon-posessed peoples which the enemy had seeded in and around Israel lived that there would be war (constantly) against the State of Israel and that one day they would learn to put high-explosives in their vests along with nails and aluminum bars (which frag into horrendous lethal missiles) and walk into pizza parlors full of young people.

So you believe that the Palestinians are "demon-possesed peoples"? That's a pretty outrageous statement.

(snipped excerpts from eschatology a la Tim LaHaye... )

You want a challenge? You want a dare? Why not try Jesus...I challenge you to get on your knees and ask Jesus to save you from your sin. I dare you. I wonder if you have the courage?

Been there, done that, for almost four decades. It didn't work.

 

[Aimiel]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Originally posted by Gerald Well, that would've been a far more honest approach...

No one (with the exception of Enoch and Elijah) would have ever made Heaven their home. Why do you think He is being 'dishonest?' He is being as plain and simple as possible. He cannot possibly lie. The first thing we have recorded that He said, "Let there be light," became Truth because He spoke it by faith. If he were to say, right now, "Let it be dark," everything that produces light everywhere would stop doing so.

 

[Zakath]

Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Originally posted by famousGandalf7
Aren't you glad that He did not decide to come to the earth in the full power of His Glory and force everyone on earth to bow down before Him because of His Power?

No. Perhaps that would be clearer than the incredible muddle that the Christian Church approach has produced.

If He were to do as you wish, and reveal Himself, there would be no more mystery, we would be like Him, because we would see Him as He is.

And the problem with that would be what, again?

 

[Zakath]

Re: About your avatar...

Re: About your avatar...

Originally posted by Gerald
RogerB:

You forgot to add horns and a tail...

And the pitchfork, don't forget the pitchfork!

But don't let them see the cloven hooves when he puts on his sneakers...

 

[Zakath]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Originally posted by famousGandalf7
No one (with the exception of Enoch and Elijah) would have ever made Heaven their home.

Why not? Do you believe they made it there somehow?

 

[Aimiel]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Dohhh...

Originally posted by Zakath And the problem with that would be what, again?

Just because we are able to see His Perfection does not give it to us, only the Blood of the Lamb can do that.

Why not? Do you believe they made it there somehow?

The only two to have done so, so far.

 

[Gerald]

Warning: Obnoxious Nitpicking Ahead

Warning: Obnoxious Nitpicking Ahead

Originally posted by Zakath


And the pitchfork, don't forget the pitchfork!

But don't let them see the cloven hooves when he puts on his sneakers...

Why is it that folks have Satan pictured with a pitchfork? I have this image of a guy with horns and cloven hooves prancing around and singing "Green Acres".

It is a trident, folks.

This concludes today's Obnoxious Nitpick.

 

[Zakath]

But if he's going to parody my avatar, I'd prefer he use a pitchfork.