Questions for a Christian?

Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
Questions for a Christian?

Got any? When I say questions I mean doctrinal questions. Like "why does God allow epole to starve" or "explain you wacky view of three Gods in one"....not science stuff and not debate stuff. This is for people who would actually like to learn more about the people they have come to disagree with. I don't want this to be a debate...just Q & A. Later I will post a questions for athiest topic, where I will ask you questions and you will answer them for me...no debates, just Q & A.

 

So, any questions???????

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Kemono
Posts: 137
Joined: 2006-08-13
User is offlineOffline
I have one: please explain

I have one: please explain what you mean by 'God'.


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
Kemono wrote: I have one:

Kemono wrote:
I have one: please explain what you mean by 'God'.

 

Can you clarify what you mean by that? Do you mean the character of God, who he is, what he did, or just a broad idea of who God is? 

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Why hasn't anybody walked on

Why hasn't anybody walked on water since Jesus did it?


zntneo
Superfan
Posts: 565
Joined: 2007-01-25
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: Why hasn't

wavefreak wrote:
Why hasn't anybody walked on water since Jesus did it?

 

Ha according to my local news station a month or so back a few kids walked on water and "broke the laws of physics".  

They had floatation devices on there shoes. 


zntneo
Superfan
Posts: 565
Joined: 2007-01-25
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote:

[MOD EDIT - duplicate post removed]


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
I have no questions for the

I have no questions for the Abrahamic religions. You've had thousands of years to make your case, yet you have to rely on indoctrination and tautology (believe first, then you'll have the proof you don't really need because you've already decided to believe) to survive. 


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
It would be nice if you

It would be nice if you would answer the question: "why do you believe?"

Preferably with something other than: "you can't understand" 

 


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1196
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
I posed a question here and

I posed a question here and have been underwhelmed by the christian response. 


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: Why hasn't

wavefreak wrote:
Why hasn't anybody walked on water since Jesus did it?

Because that was one of those "Jesus miracles". Like, no one tells water to turn to win, and it happens any more. No one says "cast you nets on that side of the boat" and alot of fish are caught any more. It was a miracle that Jesus did. I guess that some one else could figure out a way to walk on water without flotation devices, but that still wouldn't take away from the ipact of Jesus walking on the Sea of Galilee in a storm.

 

p.s. there was a great significance as the what water he walked on to...the emphasis is usually just put on that act, but the sea of Galilee had great significance to.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: wavefreak

Crossover wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
Why hasn't anybody walked on water since Jesus did it?

Because that was one of those "Jesus miracles". Like, no one tells water to turn to win, and it happens any more. No one says "cast you nets on that side of the boat" and alot of fish are caught any more. It was a miracle that Jesus did. I guess that some one else could figure out a way to walk on water without flotation devices, but that still wouldn't take away from the ipact of Jesus walking on the Sea of Galilee in a storm.

 

p.s. there was a great significance as the what water he walked on to...the emphasis is usually just put on that act, but the sea of Galilee had great significance to.

With all due respect, that is a weak answer. Assuming all that is said of Christianity is true, then it follows that the power of god has not diminished in any way since Christ was among men. Jesus said something to the effect that his followers would do greater things than he did. Moses parted the Red Sea. The sun stopped in the middle of a battle somewhere in the OT. Now that Christ's work has reunited humanity with the fullness of god why have major miracles ceased? If Christians are closer to god now than at any point in history, why is the manifestation of god's power at it's lowest ebb? 

 


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
Fish wrote: It would be

Fish wrote:

It would be nice if you would answer the question: "why do you believe?"

Preferably with something other than: "you can't understand" 

 

Me personally, it is because I have a relationship with God. I suppose its fair to assume the next question is 'how do you know that?' and the answer to that is not one you will like, but it is "because in my heart I know He is there. I have felt his presense and I see His glory." you pobably will not like that answer as proof there is a God, but That's not what you asked me I guess. So, there's your answer.

 

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: Crossover

wavefreak wrote:
Crossover wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
Why hasn't anybody walked on water since Jesus did it?

Because that was one of those "Jesus miracles". Like, no one tells water to turn to win, and it happens any more. No one says "cast you nets on that side of the boat" and alot of fish are caught any more. It was a miracle that Jesus did. I guess that some one else could figure out a way to walk on water without flotation devices, but that still wouldn't take away from the ipact of Jesus walking on the Sea of Galilee in a storm.

 

p.s. there was a great significance as the what water he walked on to...the emphasis is usually just put on that act, but the sea of Galilee had great significance to.

With all due respect, that is a weak answer. Assuming all that is said of Christianity is true, then it follows that the power of god has not diminished in any way since Christ was among men. Jesus said something to the effect that his followers would do greater things than he did. Moses parted the Red Sea. The sun stopped in the middle of a battle somewhere in the OT. Now that Christ's work has reunited humanity with the fullness of god why have major miracles ceased? If Christians are closer to god now than at any point in history, why is the manifestation of god's power at it's lowest ebb? 

 

Well:

1. Christians now aren't closer to God than ever. In fact, I can see the opposite being argued. In general, Christians have fallen away. I find it hard to believe that even I am closer to God that say, Charles Spurgeon.

2. The answer may sound weak, but it's not about how weak it is.

3. I said no scince, but NASA says they can proove that the sun did stop. I wont post it because I dont understand what htey say. And if I cant understand it, I can't defend it!

4. Miracles haven't stopped, they have just shifted. Miracles like parting the Red Sea accomplished something. We don't need the REd Sea to be parted, or some one to walk on water. The miracles we need now are miracles worke in peoples lives...ie. salvation.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: [ 3. I

Crossover wrote:
[

3. I said no scince, but NASA says they can proove that the sun did stop. I wont post it because I dont understand what htey say. And if I cant understand it, I can't defend it!

Could you at least prove NASA said they can prove it? 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote:

Crossover wrote:

3. I said no scince, but NASA says they can proove that the sun did stop.

This is an urban legend. Take a look:

http://www.snopes.com/religion/lostday.asp

 

Note for the board: Crossover has been an exceptionally pleasant fellow, willing to change arguments when you demonstrate that they are not sound. I mean it that simply: show him a flaw in an argument and he can say "Ok, I see that."

If only everyone: theist and atheist included, could follow his role model this board would be a nicer place. He might not leave her an atheist, but he'll leave wherever he goes a smarter person, that's for sure.

 

[MOD EDIT - fixed link] 

 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: it is

Crossover wrote:
it is because I have a relationship with God.

This doesn't tell me anything that isn't already assumed from the fact that you're a Christian.

Crossover wrote:
"because in my heart I know He is there."

This is the equivalent of "becuase I say so"

Crossover wrote:
I have felt his presense and I see His glory."

We're getting closer. So, how have you seen his presence and how have you seen his glory?

Crossover wrote:
So, there's your answer.

The only answer you've provided so far is basically "I believe because I believe." In my opinon, that's not really an answer.

To give you an example, I know you don't like science, but as a relatively simple example:

If you lived in space and didn't experience gravity all that much, I could still explain to you my experiences with gravity by telling you how things fall when I drop them. I could then go on to explain how I can set up a device to measure torque when one mass is brought next to another one attached to a rod. In this way, even if you have no direct experience, you can gain an understanding from someone else's experience.

Note that this isn't necessarily proof of gravity, since you (being unfamiliar) might suggest that there is another force at work, and more investigation is required. But in this case you could at least see where I got the idea that it might exist.

A real answer would explain what experiences you've had and how a god is required to explain them.

For example: "I feel humble" isn't really a convincing experience, since lots of people feel humble without god.


Kemono
Posts: 137
Joined: 2006-08-13
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: Can you

Crossover wrote:
Can you clarify what you mean by that? Do you mean the character of God, who he is, what he did, or just a broad idea of who God is?

Just a broad idea. Is it alive? Is it intelligent? What is it made of? Where is it? How big is it? How did it get here?

If it is alive, how does its metabolism work? What does it eat?

If it is intelligent, how does it process information?

...Et cetera.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Kemono wrote: If it is

Kemono wrote:

If it is alive, how does its metabolism work? What does it eat?

If it is intelligent, how does it process information?

...Et cetera.

These are red herrings. If god is alive, then he may or may not have a metabolism. You are restricting life to what we call life on this planet. Is that restriction even justified?

Same for intelligence. What is the relevance of how god processes information? Especially since we are just beginning to understand how we processs information ourselves. 


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote:   4.

Crossover wrote:

 

4. Miracles haven't stopped, they have just shifted. Miracles like parting the Red Sea accomplished something. We don't need the REd Sea to be parted, or some one to walk on water. The miracles we need now are miracles worke in peoples lives...ie. salvation.

Salvation is a manifestation of god's grace, not god's power. The apostles performed miracles even after the ascension. And, IMHO, a few bona fide miracles would go a long way towards showing the truth of the gospel. 


Kemono
Posts: 137
Joined: 2006-08-13
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: Kemono

wavefreak wrote:
Kemono wrote:

If it is alive, how does its metabolism work? What does it eat?

If it is intelligent, how does it process information?

...Et cetera.

These are red herrings. If god is alive, then he may or may not have a metabolism. You are restricting life to what we call life on this planet. Is that restriction even justified?

Metabolism is by definition a necessary condition of life. To say that god is alive but has no metabolism is like saying god is a rectangle that has no corners.

wavefreak wrote:
Same for intelligence. What is the relevance of how god processes information? Especially since we are just beginning to understand how we processs information ourselves.

I am not asking for details. I'll happily take "it has a brain" or "it has a CPU" for an answer. The bottom line is that if this god is intelligent it must process information and that processing has to take place somewhere.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Kemono wrote: wavefreak

Kemono wrote:
wavefreak wrote:
Kemono wrote:

If it is alive, how does its metabolism work? What does it eat?

If it is intelligent, how does it process information?

...Et cetera.

These are red herrings. If god is alive, then he may or may not have a metabolism. You are restricting life to what we call life on this planet. Is that restriction even justified?

Metabolism is by definition a necessary condition of life. To say that god is alive but has no metabolism is like saying god is a rectangle that has no corners.

wavefreak wrote:
Same for intelligence. What is the relevance of how god processes information? Especially since we are just beginning to understand how we processs information ourselves.

I am not asking for details. I'll happily take "it has a brain" or "it has a CPU" for an answer. The bottom line is that if this god is intelligent it must process information and that processing has to take place somewhere.

 

How is god's metabolism and information processing mechaninsm relevant? If you are standing in the middle of a highway and I tell you to get out of the way because a big truck is coming are you going to ask me if it has wheels? In the context of this thread, god is both alive and intelligent.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
How is god's metabolism and

How is god's metabolism and information processing mechaninsm relevant? If you are standing in the middle of a highway and I tell you to get out of the way because a big truck is coming are you going to ask me if it has wheels? In the context of this thread, god is both alive and intelligent.

 

Well, it's relevant in that we were told we could ask specific questions that confused us about this "God". He's simply wondering how god is alive and capable of thought.

 

No disrespect, but we can't help it if the answers to God questions prove that he's self-defeating. That's why we're atheists.

 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: Well: 1.

Crossover wrote:

Well:

1. Christians now aren't closer to God than ever. In fact, I can see the opposite being argued. In general, Christians have fallen away. I find it hard to believe that even I am closer to God that say, Charles Spurgeon.


4. Miracles haven't stopped, they have just shifted. Miracles like parting the Red Sea accomplished something. We don't need the REd Sea to be parted, or some one to walk on water. The miracles we need now are miracles worke in peoples lives...ie. salvation.

Your fourth point is a direct contradiction to your first point.  If people are falling away, then wouldn't it stand to reason that those same types of miracles are exactly what is needed?  Why would the 'miracles' now be more abstract?  Why wouldn't god make sure that the miracles happening are understood by all to defy logical, natural reasoning in order to ensure salvation? 


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
PAUSE   Alright. It will

PAUSE

 

Alright. It will take me a while to answer these posts. So if you could bear with me. I should have them all adressed by today, but please do not post anyhting further until I have said its ok. I would like to adress everyone's questions, and for that I will need some time to type and think. Thank you for your patience and I will resume it soon!

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Archeopteryx wrote: How is

Archeopteryx wrote:

How is god's metabolism and information processing mechaninsm relevant? If you are standing in the middle of a highway and I tell you to get out of the way because a big truck is coming are you going to ask me if it has wheels? In the context of this thread, god is both alive and intelligent.

 

Well, it's relevant in that we were told we could ask specific questions that confused us about this "God". He's simply wondering how god is alive and capable of thought.

 

No disrespect, but we can't help it if the answers to God questions prove that he's self-defeating. That's why we're atheists.

 

How is god's metabolsim self defeating? 


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote: I posed

zarathustra wrote:
I posed a question here and have been underwhelmed by the christian response. 

I am sorry that the Christians did not respond to that question, since (as it sems to me) to be an easy one for any Christian to answer. However, on here I have never seen an easy question, so please correct me if I do not answer fully, or answer something way off what your original point was.

 

Quote:

Why are they then cobbled together in this catch-phrase?

Mostly because people see the moral ideals of the two, combined with the similar traditions and the fact that Christianity sprung from Judaism, and group the two together. In fact, the two are so closely grouped together many Christians assume Jewish people to be Christians! Although there are Jewish sects that agdhere to Christian theology (such as the Messaonic Jews), most Judaism is far from Christianity.

 

Quote:

So what is "judeo-", what is "christian", and what is "judeo-christian"?

What is Judea?

Jewish tradition (ie. circumcision). Jewish theology (which I am by far no expert on) is far different from Christian theology. Jews do not beleive in the 66 book Bible Christians have, but only the first few books. They do not believe in the Trinity, or Godhead. Some Jews believe in heaven and hell, most do not. I have heard JEws explain their view of heaven and hell like this "everyone goes to heaven, but it's like we are all candles. Some shine brighter than the others, but they all shine." Some Jews disagree with that, some don't. It is rather hard for me to distinguish what is Jewish since I am no Jewish expert, and their beliefs are as varying and Christian beliefs.

 

What is Christian?

Christianity claims the one view of the Trinity (other than Catholicism). The Trinity is ONE God, in thre divine beings. Like a triangle, one shape...three sides. That example has some flaws, but its a basic explination. Christians believe in Jesus Christ as God...also as man. he was God, and man, at the same time while he was on earth. There are debates about his divinity, and his being a man, and them being at the same time; but that is amost groups that get called Christian, but are not (like Pentacostals and Jehovas Witnesses). Christians believe in a literal hell, and a literal heaven. Christians believe in the Bible as teh word of God, therefore the laws of God should be followed. Christians have almost the same laws as Jews, however SALVATION is the key difference between them. Jews can break the law and they rely on works for their attonement. Christans break Gods law, and faith is the only thing that forgives (ie. there is no work, no offering, no nothing that can forgive sins, only faith in God).

 

What is similar?

The laws are extremely similar. The 10 Commandments are the base for both of their laws. That is what REALLY gets Christians and Jews grouped together in the same moral ideal, which in turn gets confused with the same theological beliefs. Since Christianity and Judaism are the same religion until Jesus came along (seeing as JEsus was Jewish) taht often creates teh idea that they are the same religion. ALSO, in the Bible you can see early Christians telling others that JEws can be saved (meaning that early Christians, didn't consider themselves a religion, but rather a body...some JEws were Christians and still considred themselves JEws...some Gentiles were Christians and still considered themselves Gentile).

 

Extra note:

The people you mentioned under the Christian section...CRAZY. Pat Robertson is a flase prophet, Ted HAggerd is a dummy, and so are the other guys. That is not to say that they aren't still saved, because God does forgive...but I doubt that Ted and the mreally are. Pat maybe, cause he's just off his rocker.

You want a realmodern Christian example, chekc up on John Piper, Paul Washer, and R.C. Sproul. Those are great guys who PRACTICE what they preach...unlike Ted Haggard.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote: Crossover

todangst wrote:
Crossover wrote:

3. I said no scince, but NASA says they can proove that the sun did stop.

This is an urban legend. Take a look:

http://www.snopes.com/religion/lostday.asp

 

Note for the board: Crossover has been an exceptionally pleasant fellow, willing to change arguments when you demonstrate that they are not sound. I mean it that simply: show him a flaw in an argument and he can say "Ok, I see that."

If only everyone: theist and atheist included, could follow his role model this board would be a nicer place. He might not leave her an atheist, but he'll leave wherever he goes a smarter person, that's for sure.

 

[MOD EDIT - fixed link] 

 

You are right. I said I did not even look at the article past the first paragraph...and once I did, I saw that they didn't. NASA as a group doesn't claim to have proven the story correct, but in the 70's one employee said he did. There has been no proof on his part that he is right. In fact, I read from a Christian website that says "lets not get so excited about something that we ignore the truth." so, one employee does claim proof, but he never showed that proof.

 

And thank you for your kind words. While I haven't seen where I have shown a flaw in your agruement yet, I'm sure you would be willing to admit if you thought you were wrong to. You are very smart. And I know if I were to leave the boards today (only a week after I joined) I would be a smarter person.

 

Flowers for everyone!!! YAY!!!! haha

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
fish wrote: This doesn't

fish wrote:

This doesn't tell me anything that isn't already assumed from the fact that you're a Christian.

I should hope that you do not assume that some one has a relationship with God just based on themselves claiming to be Christian. Don't be so quick to think that just because some one says tey are Christians that means they actualy ARE.

 

Quote:

We're getting closer. So, how have you seen his presence and how have you seen his glory?

I have not seen His presense. When I die I will, but probably no sooner. God isn't Morgan Freeman, he doesnt mop floors in a building and give his job away to Jim Carey! As much as I like Morgan Freeman, he isn't quite God...haha. But seriouslly, how have I seen hHis glory? This answer won't EVER fly with an athiest, but I have seen His glory in everything. In nature, and in humans. The human eye can comprehend more in a second than a computer can in years. He has taken me, cleaned me, made me new, and filled me with life.

I say that won't ever fly talking to an athiest because athiests explain those things away, which is wh ultimately I do not try to scientifically argue a God...because when it al boils down, it's all about faith.

I suppose the example you are looking for has something to do with "I do this, and God does this...". When the best example I can give you of that is prayer. I pray this....and usually it happens. The reason that is actually a bad example is because there are many problems with it. you could say "well pray taht God gives me the wining lottery numbers". And you'd buy a ticekt, and probably loose. Also, the problem with that is on the Christian end, because they pray for things like "give me a raise"..."a new car"..."a boat". God aint Bob Barker, he don't just say "c'mon down......you've won a new car!!!!!!" That's fooloshness. The bible says "what ever you ask in my name you shall recieve." That is twisted to mean "end your prayer with 'in Jesus name'." When in reality, Jesus means, whatever we pray for to further His kingdom and to magnify His glorfy in our lives will be done.

SO, knowing that, I can give you an exampl.e I prayed that a friend of mine would come to see God. That that freind would be humbled and come to God. Because the way he was living his life was aweful. Death could have come at any second. One month after I prayed that prayer (though I prayed in every night through that month) he called me up and told me he was at church because he went to flirt with a girl...and he told me about what happened that night and how he felt. It was 3 am so I was just like "ok, thats life....hope you and her have fun..." Well, a week later I was talking to a girl, who told me that my friend got saved. You'll notice long periods of time between me talking to people in this story, because I had moved away and I didnt talk to them much.

 

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
Kemono wrote: Crossover

Kemono wrote:

Crossover wrote:
Can you clarify what you mean by that? Do you mean the character of God, who he is, what he did, or just a broad idea of who God is?

Just a broad idea. Is it alive? Is it intelligent? What is it made of? Where is it? How big is it? How did it get here?

If it is alive, how does its metabolism work? What does it eat?

If it is intelligent, how does it process information?

...Et cetera.

God is a spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.od is unlike any being in the world. He has certain attributes (or characteristics) that make him different from anything or anyone else in existence.

First thing we must know is that God is a Spirit. As Jesus said "God is spirit..."(John 4:24). By Spirit, the most important thing to remember is that God does not have any material substance. God does not have a body. God is invisible to humans.

He has two types of attributes. Communicable and incommunicable.

 

Incommunicable Attributes
There are certain attributes that belong to God and to God alone. He does not "share" these characteristics with man at all. For example, God is infinite. He has always existed. Man is finite, meaning that there was a time when man did not exist. Another example would be that God is unchangeable. He cannot change anything about Himself because He is already perfect. But man on the other hand is not unchangeable. Man can and does change over time. We get older and our appearance looks different than it did a few years ago. This is not so with God.

Communicable Attributes
But there are also characteristics that God has that man has as well. Some of these are that God has wisdom and man has wisdom. Another is that God has power and man has power as well. The thing that we must remember here when we look at characteristics that we "share" with God, is that there is still a difference between God and his image (man). Think of it as looking into a mirror. When you look into a mirror, are those eyes that you see in the mirror your eyes? Or are those eyes you see "the image" of your eyes?

Of course, those eyes you see are just an image. Same with the attributes we share with God. Me may have wisdom, but it is just a tiny reflection of the wisdom of God. Where our wisdom can change (for example, it can increase), God's wisdom cannot change because He already knows everything there is to know. We cant confuse the fact that God is God alone, and we are just an image bearer of Him here on earth.

 

To sum all of that up and include a few more things:

He is love. He is wrathful. He is just. He is only Omnibenevolent in that he loves everyone with a benevolent love, but not all with a saving love. He is Omnipotent, Omniscient, eternal, omnipresent, righteous, sovereing, and truthful. He is 3 beings, in one God. As BB Warfield put it "There is only one true God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance, but not subsistence".

 

Thats a basic description of God.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Crossover, there are a few

Crossover, there are a few pointers that may help you here.  I realize that you do not want to debate, but the statements you have made constitute several logical fallacies.  Among them are "No True Scotsman" and "Argument from Emotion".  Even in an intellectual discussion (not debate) it is important to remember that your opponent will point these out as flaws and use them against you. 

I understand that you are seeking simple discourse on questions regarding religion so there is no need to throw these things in your face.  You feel the way you feel, you believe what you believe and it sounds as though you are trying to educate yourself on the topic.  Below is a link to logical fallacies if you would like to review them in the event you want to debate.

Logical fallacies

This is a tough group and an intellectual one.  You were smart to start out saying you wanted a discussion, not a debate, but it never hurts to understand the rules of debate.

Now, on to your post above - why do you think some prayers are answered and some are not?

 


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: Crossover

wavefreak wrote:
Crossover wrote:

 

4. Miracles haven't stopped, they have just shifted. Miracles like parting the Red Sea accomplished something. We don't need the REd Sea to be parted, or some one to walk on water. The miracles we need now are miracles worke in peoples lives...ie. salvation.

Salvation is a manifestation of god's grace, not god's power. The apostles performed miracles even after the ascension. And, IMHO, a few bona fide miracles would go a long way towards showing the truth of the gospel. 

Not true. Salvation is through God's grace, and you are right about that...HOWEVER, it is God's power that chose who should be saved. It is God's saving power (what we call grace) that saves.

 

Also, in response to the miracles thing...no. The reason God preformed miracles back then was to prove that His revelation was divine. But, now that He has preformed centuries of outward technical miracles, and we have seen His revelation...he doesn't have to do that any more. And as far as God prooving Himself through miracles, I HARDLY think God has to prove Himself to anyone. Who are you o man to tell God to prove Himself, when it is clear he has actually done so? Just read my signature.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote: Crossover

jce wrote:
Crossover wrote:

Well:

1. Christians now aren't closer to God than ever. In fact, I can see the opposite being argued. In general, Christians have fallen away. I find it hard to believe that even I am closer to God that say, Charles Spurgeon.


4. Miracles haven't stopped, they have just shifted. Miracles like parting the Red Sea accomplished something. We don't need the REd Sea to be parted, or some one to walk on water. The miracles we need now are miracles worke in peoples lives...ie. salvation.

Your fourth point is a direct contradiction to your first point.  If people are falling away, then wouldn't it stand to reason that those same types of miracles are exactly what is needed?  Why would the 'miracles' now be more abstract?  Why wouldn't god make sure that the miracles happening are understood by all to defy logical, natural reasoning in order to ensure salvation? 

By no means! I was comenting on the numbers of peple as they fall away, because he said people were turning awawy from Christianity. I was not talking about the substanse of Christians who are true Christians. Thats why I said "in general".While Charles spurgeon and Johnathan Edwards may be gone, we still have the John Piper's, the Paul Washer's, the R.C. Sproul's, the Lecrae Moore's, the Tedashii Anderson's......they are still here. They are discipling a group that will step up when they are gone and be strong in the faith, as they were. I was simply commenting on the numbers falling away, not the numbers that stay. And I sure DO NOT consider myself to be on the level of a Charles Spurgeon, but then again at his peak he still had a few years on me!

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
I do beleive I have gotten

I do beleive I have gotten to all of the questions. So, RESUME.

 

If I missed your question, repost it, tell me how blind I am, and I will answer it.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote:

Crossover wrote:

 

Not true. Salvation is through God's grace, and you are right about that...HOWEVER, it is God's power that chose who should be saved. It is God's saving power (what we call grace) that saves.

This feels like a word game. I said salvation is grace not power and you redefined it to be power.

 

Quote:

Also, in response to the miracles thing...no. The reason God preformed miracles back then was to prove that His revelation was divine. But, now that He has preformed centuries of outward technical miracles, and we have seen His revelation...he doesn't have to do that any more. And as far as God prooving Himself through miracles, I HARDLY think God has to prove Himself to anyone. Who are you o man to tell God to prove Himself, when it is clear he has actually done so? Just read my signature.

 

I'm not sure wht you mean by a technical miracle.

God does not have to prove himself but Christians have the requirement of proving the truth of their faith. What separates the "true" Christianity from all of the pretenders? "By their fruits you shall know them" . Fruits implies something tangible. If all you have that differentiates you is that your words are different than the false Christs then you have nothing tangible.


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: fish

Crossover wrote:

fish wrote:

This doesn't tell me anything that isn't already assumed from the fact that you're a Christian.

I should hope that you do not assume that some one has a relationship with God just based on themselves claiming to be Christian. Don't be so quick to think that just because some one says tey are Christians that means they actualy ARE.

Certainly someone could lie about being Christian. I had no reason to believe that you were lying though, so I assumed that you were a Christian, and the fact that you have a relationship with god necessarily follows.

Every Christian has a relationship with god, even if you personally wouldn't call that person a Christian or their relationship a relationship. 

Crossover wrote:

I have not seen His presense.

Ok, sorry. So how have you felt his presence?

Crossover wrote:

But seriouslly, how have I seen hHis glory? This answer won't EVER fly with an athiest, but I have seen His glory in everything. In nature, and in humans.

Crossover wrote:
I do not belive you will like the answer I will give, so i will give you two. one is the answer you will hear all the time (which is a worng answer), the other is the answer that you probably may never have heard of and is IMPOSSIBLE for you to really comprehend as of this point in your life.

 

1. Because I see trees and stars and such.

 

2. Because I have had an experience with a living God. i have experienced his saving grace, and seen him work in me and in my life.

 

the first anser is the generic one and I can't stand to see it. Just because one thing exists doesn NOT mean that another thing exists. I can not say I belive in god because I see His planet. That is illogical. I can not tell you God exists because I see something...who am I as a human to tell you how the world was created.

Emphasis added.

Now I'm really confused. First you said that you can't see god from the world around you, and now you say you can. Which is it?

Crossover wrote:

The human eye can comprehend more in a second than a computer can in years.

First, what do you mean by comprehend? Are you aware of what computers are capable of comprehending? What about the fact that we can make infrared and ultraviolet detectors, things which can't be seen by the human eye?

Further, what does this have to do with the presence of god? When people create computers that can comprehend in seconds more than a human eye can in years, will god stop existing?

Crossover wrote:
He has taken me, cleaned me, made me new, and filled me with life.

What does this mean? How do you know that he's taken you, cleaned you, made you new (new from what?) and filled you with life? I have no idea what you're referring to.

Crossover wrote:
I say that won't ever fly talking to an athiest because athiests explain those things away, which is wh ultimately I do not try to scientifically argue a God...because when it al boils down, it's all about faith.

Regardless of what you say, I would imagine that these arguments don't fly with athiests mainly because they're not really arguments.

What do you mean by "explain those things away"? Aren't you attempting to "explain away" by saying "god did it"? For example, I assume that your human eye comment is supposed to be referring to evolution v. intelligent design. How is saying "god did it" different from saying "it was a result of evolution"? Is it just because there's evidence for one and not the other?

Crossover wrote:
I suppose the example you are looking for has something to do with "I do this, and God does this...". When the best example I can give you of that is prayer. I pray this....and usually it happens. The reason that is actually a bad example is because there are many problems with it. you could say "well pray taht God gives me the wining lottery numbers". And you'd buy a ticekt, and probably loose. Also, the problem with that is on the Christian end, because they pray for things like "give me a raise"..."a new car"..."a boat". God aint Bob Barker, he don't just say "c'mon down......you've won a new car!!!!!!" That's fooloshness. The bible says "what ever you ask in my name you shall recieve." That is twisted to mean "end your prayer with 'in Jesus name'." When in reality, Jesus means, whatever we pray for to further His kingdom and to magnify His glorfy in our lives will be done.

So god will only grant your prayers when you pray for things that he wants? Why do you need to pray then? Can't he just do the things he wants anyway?

If it only "usually" happens, how do you know that it has anything to do with your prayer?

How do you explain people who cast spells (a wiccan, for example) and usually get their desired results. Is that god's work as well?

Crossover wrote:
SO, knowing that, I can give you an exampl.e I prayed that a friend of mine would come to see God. That that freind would be humbled and come to God. Because the way he was living his life was aweful. Death could have come at any second. One month after I prayed that prayer (though I prayed in every night through that month) he called me up and told me he was at church because he went to flirt with a girl...and he told me about what happened that night and how he felt. It was 3 am so I was just like "ok, thats life....hope you and her have fun..." Well, a week later I was talking to a girl, who told me that my friend got saved. You'll notice long periods of time between me talking to people in this story, because I had moved away and I didnt talk to them much.

Yes, I agree that if god answers your prayers that would be a good reason to believe.

However, it doesn't really seem very likely that he answered your prayer in this scenario. It seems much more likely that the girl is the one who got him to go to church, since she's the reason he went in the first place.

Why did it take a month for god to save your friend?

Why did god need you to ask him before he saved your friend?


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
Quote: This feels like a

Quote:

This feels like a word game. I said salvation is grace not power and you redefined it to be power.

Because His saving power combined with His love is what we know as grace.

 

Quote:

I'm not sure wht you mean by a technical miracle.

Technical miracle...like walking on water!

 

Quote:

God does not have to prove himself but Christians have the requirement of proving the truth of their faith. What separates the "true" Christianity from all of the pretenders? "By their fruits you shall know them" . Fruits implies something tangible. If all you have that differentiates you is that your words are different than the false Christs then you have nothing tangible.

MASSIVE twist of scripture. I reccomend you go back and read ALL of Mathew 7 in its full context and in light of Galatians 5:22.  The word used in Mathew 7 karpos. The word used in Galatians 5:22, karpos. So don't even try to say they aren't in the same context, or that they refer some a different type of fruit other than spiritual one...because the scripture will prove you wrong.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: MASSIVE

Crossover wrote:

MASSIVE twist of scripture. I reccomend you go back and read ALL of Mathew 7 in its full context and in light of Galatians 5:22. The word used in Mathew 7 karpos. The word used in Galatians 5:22, karpos. So don't even try to say they aren't in the same context, or that they refer some a different type of fruit other than spiritual one...because the scripture will prove you wrong.

Whether the "fruits" are material or spiritual seems irrelevant. It is still incumbent on the Christian to offer more than words in order to demonstrate their truth is THE truth.


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
fish wrote: Ok, sorry. So

fish wrote:

Ok, sorry. So how have you felt his presence?

Here is where I can not tell you. It may not really be so much that you can not understand (cause, I guess maybe you can), but rather, I do no know how to describe a feeling of conviction brought upon by the Holy SPirit that is so strong it breaks your very soul. I can not describe to you the feeling of regeneration taht you get from having the Son come in to your life. And I can not describe the feeling of sheer you get from being made holy and without blame in the sight of the Father. I am sorry, but here is where my words fail me.

I can only hope that you do not count the fact that I am short on words to describe the presence of God against me or Him. But here is the man who gave it his best shot to describe God:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=66tt1tDfD1k

 

That is more of a description of God than it is a description of his presense...but I do fel in the presence of god hearing it. If that helps. 

Quote:

Now I'm really confused. First you said that you can't see god from the world around you, and now you say you can. Which is it?

Both. I NEVER said you can not see God from the world. What I was trying to say was just because you see the world doesn't mean there is a God. That is not to say that I do not see God in the world around me. It is to say that no logical arguement can be made (that I know of) just based on the fact that there is a world. 

 

Quote:

Further, what does this have to do with the presence of god? When people create computers that can comprehend in seconds more than a human eye can in years, will god stop existing?

Nothing. It has nothing to do with the presence of God. I wasn't describing the presence of God.

Quote:

What does this mean? How do you know that he's taken you, cleaned you, made you new (new from what?) and filled you with life? I have no idea what you're referring to.

IT's a feeling. Not a mental or physical feling, but a spiritual feeling. When it comes to spiritual things, wors can not be used...at least not by me. I am not tht great with words. In almost al of these questions you are asking you will not get an answer that you can literally see, or take to the bank, or play with. Need I remind you that the prupose of this is for you to learn, and not for you to debate by asking questions. It feels as if that is what you are doing...simply asking questions to question my faith.

Quote:

Regardless of what you say, I would imagine that these arguments don't fly with athiests mainly because they're not really arguments.

 

Or maybe they are arguements that a few people have shut out of their heads becaue it is something they can not comprehend. One thing I have learned throught life is that athiests who never become Christians tend to like numbers, solids, things they can touch, feel and smell...but when it comes to stepping out on a limb and grasping a concept that is so much bigger than them it actually requires them to actively give up numbers, the reject it. Numbers do not prove everything, and ideas do no prove everything. That is why it all boils down to where you put your faith. Do you put it in numbers, or the idea that you can not grasp?

 

Quote:

What do you mean by "explain those things away"? Aren't you attempting to "explain away" by saying "god did it"? For example, I assume that your human eye comment is supposed to be referring to evolution v. intelligent design. How is saying "god did it" different from saying "it was a result of evolution"? Is it just because there's evidence for one and not the other?

That is a matter of perspective statement. I see you as trying to explain thins away, and you see me as trying to explain the things away. its a matter of perspective. Maybe I shouldn't have put that statement up there because it does seem biased, but then again the original topic of this all is Christian beliefs. Antime you talk about any belief or idea there will be biased statements in there because it is all a matter of perspective. You can only see the world as good as the lens you look through it with.

Quote:

So god will only grant your prayers when you pray for things that he wants? Why do you need to pray then? Can't he just do the things he wants anyway?

If it only "usually" happens, how do you know that it has anything to do with your prayer?

How do you explain people who cast spells (a wiccan, for example) and usually get their desired results. Is that god's work as well?

The first question falls under the Sovereignty of God. I wil quote to you a man named R.C. Sproul.

"Can our requests change God's severeign pla? Of course not. When God declares He is going to do something, all of the prayer's in the world aren't going to change His mind. But God not only ordains the ends, but He ordains the means to those ends, and part of the process He uses to bring His sovereign will to pass are the prayers of His people. And so we pray."

I beleive the second question is answered in here also.

As for wickens. I can no more comment on them than I can on the prayers of the Zulu. I have no idea how often they even get a result to comment on the ones they get, let alone do I know anything about why.

 

Quote:

However, it doesn't really seem very likely that he answered your prayer in this scenario. It seems much more likely that the girl is the one who got him to go to church, since she's the reason he went in the first place.

Why did it take a month for god to save your friend?

Why did god need you to ask him before he saved your friend?

 

Don't just focus on the ends, but focus on he means. I prayed that god owuld move in His life...I didnt say how, when why..I just prayed for it to happen. How God does it is His business. Whether he uses a girl to get Him to go to church or He slaps Him in the face while my friend is in his room alone, the prayer is answered.

Why did it take a month to save him? i really don't know that it did. It ttok a month for me to talk to him. But I assume the question isnt so much focused on the lenght of time but the fact that it took time. So I will refer you back to my anser to your first question. I said "I didn't say how, when, or why"....and I didn't. I said move. When, why, how, all God's stuff that he takes care of...none of my concern.

And, God didn't need me to do anything. He commands me to pray. But I shall refer you back to the R.C. Sproul quote.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
    I would like to ask,

    I would like to ask, what do you mean by technical miracle? such as walking on water, it is really an old trick, not performed by jesus only, as there are various people throughout history that have performed this illusion (yes it is an illusion) from recent (Chris Angel) to various people throughout history, including monks, some saints, buddhists monks, various magicians from time, egyptians were very good at illusions as well, I think i will have to dig up some more, but to say technical miracle would have to mean it would have to defy all forms of laws of nature, and not be reproducable, at least that's my definition, if it can be reproduced, then it's not a miracle.


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
I'm not really going to

I'm not really going to comment on the video, except to say that civilization was around long before Christianity.

Crossover wrote:

Fish wrote:

Further, what does this have to do with the presence of god? When people create computers that can comprehend in seconds more than a human eye can in years, will god stop existing?

Nothing. It has nothing to do with the presence of God. I wasn't describing the presence of God.

Ok, sorry. So how does this show his glory?

Crossover wrote:

Need I remind you that the prupose of this is for you to learn, and not for you to debate by asking questions. It feels as if that is what you are doing...simply asking questions to question my faith.

Your original post asked for questions to "learn more about the people [athiests] have come to disagree with." These are my questions. If they make you question your faith, then I'm sorry.

The reason I ask these questions is because I don't care about the trinity or whatever. What I don't understand about "the people" is what actually makes them think there is a god. Are all of your reasons simply personal? Do all of them stem from internal experiences that only affect you? Are there any things that aren't "spritiual" or that you can put into words that demonstrate why it makes sense to believe in god?

Crossover wrote:

Or maybe they are arguements that a few people have shut out of their heads becaue it is something they can not comprehend. One thing I have learned throught life is that athiests who never become Christians tend to like numbers, solids, things they can touch, feel and smell...but when it comes to stepping out on a limb and grasping a concept that is so much bigger than them it actually requires them to actively give up numbers, the reject it. Numbers do not prove everything, and ideas do no prove everything. That is why it all boils down to where you put your faith. Do you put it in numbers, or the idea that you can not grasp?

Why do you think that it takes faith to "believe" in "numbers"? Do you think that the advances of modern technology rely on math and science?

Have you shut out science as a means of explaination because you "cannot comprehend" it? (I say this not as a personal attack but because you often say that you don't want to "debate" about math and science)


As for the rest of the post, I'm going to refrain from making comments to avoid the appearance of debate.

Just one more question:

How do you know that it was your prayer that saved your friend?


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Quote: God is a spirit,

Quote:

God is a spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.od is unlike any being in the world. He has certain attributes (or characteristics) that make him different from anything or anyone else in existence.

First thing we must know is that God is a Spirit. As Jesus said "God is spirit..."(John 4:24). By Spirit, the most important thing to remember is that God does not have any material substance. God does not have a body. God is invisible to humans.

I'm sorry, but that is completely ridiculous and impossible. That very notion is what I spent incalculabe lengths of time refuting. I suggest you start by reading this:

 

And then read this series of articles by me (which means you should read the links):

 On the Problem of Interaction and the Concluding Piece of the Series: The Absurdity of an Immaterial Mind

 

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


DrTerwilliker
DrTerwilliker's picture
Posts: 151
Joined: 2007-08-06
User is offlineOffline
Question:

Question:

Why do you personally think God created the earth and the human race? God is assumed to be omniscient, and so he would have forseen that Adam and Eve would go against his wishes and eat the forbidden fruit. However, he created us anyway, presumably full well knowing that we would be doomed to a fallen creation and that the majority of us would end up in eternal damnation. Why create a bunch of living, feeling creatures who will suffer forever? Wouldn't a merciful, loving god have simply refrained from creating us?

The only conclusions that make sense to me, respectively, is that:

1) God is not omniscient, and therefore not all-powerful.

or

2) God is cruel and uncaring and created us despite his knowledge that many of us would suffer.

Do you agree with one of these options, or do you have an alternative? I realize you can't know for sure what your god's motives were, but please, take a stab at it. I've never gotten a straight answer from any Christian to this question, probably because they've never really thought about it.


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: fish

Crossover wrote:

fish wrote:

This doesn't tell me anything that isn't already assumed from the fact that you're a Christian.

I should hope that you do not assume that some one has a relationship with God just based on themselves claiming to be Christian. Don't be so quick to think that just because some one says tey are Christians that means they actualy ARE.

Woah, there. So do you get to decide who's a Christian and who isn't? If not, who does?

Quote:
Quote:

We're getting closer. So, how have you seen his presence and how have you seen his glory?

(snip)

I say that won't ever fly talking to an athiest because athiests explain those things away, which is wh ultimately I do not try to scientifically argue a God...because when it al boils down, it's all about faith.

Are you talking about you, atheists or both in this sentence?

Quote:

I suppose the example you are looking for has something to do with "I do this, and God does this...". When the best example I can give you of that is prayer. I pray this....and usually it happens. The reason that is actually a bad example is because there are many problems with it. you could say "well pray taht God gives me the wining lottery numbers". And you'd buy a ticekt, and probably loose. Also, the problem with that is on the Christian end, because they pray for things like "give me a raise"..."a new car"..."a boat". God aint Bob Barker, he don't just say "c'mon down......you've won a new car!!!!!!" That's fooloshness. The bible says "what ever you ask in my name you shall recieve." That is twisted to mean "end your prayer with 'in Jesus name'." When in reality, Jesus means, whatever we pray for to further His kingdom and to magnify His glorfy in our lives will be done.

So when you pray for something and it doesn't happen, why is that? Are you a believer in the "three answers to prayer" explanation? Does intent in prayer affect the outcome?

What do you think will happen if you prayed for the severed limb of an amputee to be made whole?

Quote:

SO, knowing that, I can give you an exampl.e I prayed that a friend of mine would come to see God. That that freind would be humbled and come to God. Because the way he was living his life was aweful. Death could have come at any second. One month after I prayed that prayer (though I prayed in every night through that month) he called me up and told me he was at church because he went to flirt with a girl...and he told me about what happened that night and how he felt. It was 3 am so I was just like "ok, thats life....hope you and her have fun..." Well, a week later I was talking to a girl, who told me that my friend got saved. You'll notice long periods of time between me talking to people in this story, because I had moved away and I didnt talk to them much.

I'm not sure what the point of this anecdote is, other than that sometimes people change their life for the better. Are you saying that none of this would have happened if you hadn't prayed for it?

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
fish wrote: Ok, sorry. So

fish wrote:

Ok, sorry. So how does this show his glory?

It shows His glory through his creation

Quote:

 our original post asked for questions to "learn more about the people [athiests] have come to disagree with." These are my questions. If they make you question your faith, then I'm sorry.

NO NO NO. They do not make me question my faith at all. I'm simply saying it feels as if you are debating through questions.

Quote:

 The reason I ask these questions is because I don't care about the trinity or whatever. What I don't understand about "the people" is what actually makes them think there is a god. Are all of your reasons simply personal? Do all of them stem from internal experiences that only affect you? Are there any things that aren't "spritiual" or that you can put into words that demonstrate why it makes sense to believe in god?

These reasons are simply personal...because personally I am BAD at science and math. There are Christian scientists who study and use science for proof of God...but thats for them to do. Me, no no no.

 

Quote:

Why do you think that it takes faith to "believe" in "numbers"? Do you think that the advances of modern technology rely on math and science?

I don't think it takes faith to believe in science. And yes, I do think modern technology relies on math and science. You missed the point of what I was saying in all of that.

Quote:

Have you shut out science as a means of explaination because you "cannot comprehend" it? (I say this not as a personal attack but because you often say that you don't want to "debate" about math and science)

Nope. I have not shut out math and science. I do not debate it because I do not comprehend it. There are Christians scientist who can debate it all day long..l.but I am not one. It's like football...and I consider them the deffensive linemen (I say taht because  I am 6'0 145).

Quote:

How do you know that it was your prayer that saved your friend?

It wasn't. It was God's prayer that saved my friend. My prayer was sijmply that God would. 

 

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
shikko wrote:Woah, there.

shikko wrote:

Woah, there. So do you get to decide who's a Christian and who isn't? If not, who does?

No. But just look at the facts, folks are going to claim to be Christian when they really aren't. It's even in the Bible.

 

Quote:

Are you talking about you, atheists or both in this sentence?

Both. Though some athiests don' like to think of putting faith i nanything, the way I see it we all put faith in things...just different ones.

Quote:

So when you pray for something and it doesn't happen, why is that? Are you a believer in the "three answers to prayer" explanation? Does intent in prayer affect the outcome?

What do you think will happen if you prayed for the severed limb of an amputee to be made whole?

 

I do believe that intent is the entire key to prayer. Some one who is close to God and is asking for something to happen not for his own sake, but for the sake of glofying God, then he shall recieve. However, some one who enters a prayer selfishly and asks God fo a new house, isn't really praying to God so taht God may get His glory, he is praying to God so that he can get what he wants. If we know the scriptures cleary, there are certain things we KNOW not to ask for.

 Ahh, what would happen if I prayed for the severed limb of an amputee to be made whole. Well, if you look at the my last paragraph here, you will see. What would I really be asking if I were to ask God to heal an amputee? I would be asking one of two things..."God, prove yourself to me, cause everything else you've done isn't enough." or "God, make this guys physical life better...who cares about his spiritual well being."

Now, if you wanted to ask why doesn't God heal amputees, there are a million different answers I could give you...all of which I believe, and all of which I think to be true based on my knowlege of God and scripture. But, no one can give you a deffinative answer on that because who knows why God doesn't do something?

 

 

And to the last question, I would refer you to the following posts.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck wrote:     I

latincanuck wrote:
    I would like to ask, what do you mean by technical miracle? such as walking on water, it is really an old trick, not performed by jesus only, as there are various people throughout history that have performed this illusion (yes it is an illusion) from recent (Chris Angel) to various people throughout history, including monks, some saints, buddhists monks, various magicians from time, egyptians were very good at illusions as well, I think i will have to dig up some more, but to say technical miracle would have to mean it would have to defy all forms of laws of nature, and not be reproducable, at least that's my definition, if it can be reproduced, then it's not a miracle.

 

By technical miracle I mean something tangible that is a miracle. Like feeding 5,000 with a few loaves of bread and a few fish. Healing sickness, raising people from the dead. That stuff that JEsus did....ALTHOUGH, by a Christian deffinition of miracle you are wrong to say that if a miracle can be reproduced then it isnt a miracle. Jesus told the apostles they would preform miracles, some of the same ones He did...but they were still miracles. If a miracle becomes regular (like expecting the postman) it is NOT a miracle.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
DrTerwilliker

DrTerwilliker wrote:

Question:

Why do you personally think God created the earth and the human race? God is assumed to be omniscient, and so he would have forseen that Adam and Eve would go against his wishes and eat the forbidden fruit. However, he created us anyway, presumably full well knowing that we would be doomed to a fallen creation and that the majority of us would end up in eternal damnation. Why create a bunch of living, feeling creatures who will suffer forever? Wouldn't a merciful, loving god have simply refrained from creating us?

The only conclusions that make sense to me, respectively, is that:

1) God is not omniscient, and therefore not all-powerful.

or

2) God is cruel and uncaring and created us despite his knowledge that many of us would suffer.

Do you agree with one of these options, or do you have an alternative? I realize you can't know for sure what your god's motives were, but please, take a stab at it. I've never gotten a straight answer from any Christian to this question, probably because they've never really thought about it.

Well, before I go into answering the question let me tell you why I believe the second explination is wrong. We can not blame God for the punishment of anyone. He gave us laws, and we broke them. So He gave us a second chance by telling us we could do certain things to be saved...but we didn't. S ofinally he said "ok, just believe in my and have faith and you'll be saved"...and some still don't. He's given us 3 chances to avoid punishment...that hardly sounds unfair. But now to the question.

 

First, God created man to glorify Him. Why did he create us with the forknowlege that we would sin (not only that, but with the forknowlege of knowing whom he would choose to save!)? My personal belief is that God did that because that glorifies Him more. Christians dont (or shouldnt) say that God is merciful for creating us...but rather he is merciful for offering us a way of salvation. I can only say that God sees that He can get more glory out of the way He did it than any other way.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: fish

Crossover wrote:

fish wrote:

Ok, sorry. So how does this show his glory?

It shows His glory through his creation

Do you think the statements:

"It shows his glory through his creation"

"I know he created it because it shows his glory"

create a circular argument?

or, in the alternative,

How do you know he created it? 

Crossover wrote:
That is why it all boils down to where you put your faith. Do you put it in numbers, or the idea that you can not grasp?
Crossover wrote:

I don't think it takes faith to believe in science. And yes, I do think modern technology relies on math and science. You missed the point of what I was saying in all of that.

Clearly I missed the point somewhere. Could you explain how it doesn't take faith to believe in science, but it depends on if you put your faith in science (numbers) or in an "idea that you can not grasp"?

Quote:
It wasn't. It was God's prayer that saved my friend. My prayer was sijmply that God would.

The distinction you're making is not at all clear to me.

Either:

a) your prayer caused or convinced god to save your friend, through whatever means, and for whatever reason, and so was responsible for your friend being saved

or

b) your prayer did not cause god to save your friend because he did it completely independent of you, and so it didn't matter if you had prayed or not

Right?

If a, how do you know that your prayer caused god to act?

If b, why does it matter that you prayed?

Finally,

How do you know that your faith is more valid than everone else's?


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote:   First,

Crossover wrote:

 

First, God created man to glorify Him. Why did he create us with the forknowlege that we would sin (not only that, but with the forknowlege of knowing whom he would choose to save!)? My personal belief is that God did that because that glorifies Him more. Christians dont (or shouldnt) say that God is merciful for creating us...but rather he is merciful for offering us a way of salvation. I can only say that God sees that He can get more glory out of the way He did it than any other way.

Am I understanding this correctly?

You believe the god created man just so he would have someone to glorify and worship him?

That sounds pretty arrogant and self-centered to me.

The only analogy I can think of is someone having children for the sole purpose of keeping the children focused only on obeying and worshipping the parents. 

That would be a good recipe for kids that need therapy for years. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Kemono
Posts: 137
Joined: 2006-08-13
User is offlineOffline
Crossover wrote: God is a

Crossover wrote:

God is a spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.od is unlike any being in the world. He has certain attributes (or characteristics) that make him different from anything or anyone else in existence.

First thing we must know is that God is a Spirit. As Jesus said "God is spirit..."(John 4:24). By Spirit, the most important thing to remember is that God does not have any material substance. God does not have a body. God is invisible to humans.

What is a spirit? If a spirit has no material substance, what kind of substance does it have? In what sense can it be said to exist? What is the difference between a being that does not exist and one that has no material substance?

Crossover wrote:
Another example would be that God is unchangeable.

How is it possible to perform any action without having different states? I think you (and indeed any reasonable person) will find this problem insurmountable. An unchangeable thing cannot (by definition!) interact with anything in the universe.


Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
fish wrote: Do you think

fish wrote:

Do you think the statements:

"It shows his glory through his creation"

"I know he created it because it shows his glory"

create a circular argument?

or, in the alternative,

How do you know he created it? 

Well, I'm not saying I KNOW He created the world through his creation. That is partially it, but the circular arguement is totaly unrelated to god creating the wrold. The question was "how does this show His glory?" It's like asking "how can I see the glory of DaVinci?"...through his art, and inventions, and everything else the guy did.

As for the "how do I know..." I answered that in other posts to you. You've asked it and I've ansered it.

Quote:

Clearly I missed the point somewhere. Could you explain how it doesn't take faith to believe in science, but it depends on if you put your faith in science (numbers) or in an "idea that you can not grasp"?

I was clearly out in some other planet when I posted the "it doesn't take faith to believe in science" thing. You'll see in about 3 different topics and about 5 or 6 different posts that I say it does. What was I thinking?

But yes, it DOES take faith to believe in science and numbers. It isn't a divine faith, but yes it is a faith.

Quote:

If a, how do you know that your prayer caused god to act?

If b, why does it matter that you prayed?

Niether A nor B. I did not change God's mind, and He did not do it free from me. I refer you back to my R.C. Sproul quote earlier where he said "God not only ordains the ends, but He ordainsthe means." Put simply, God saysthis will happen, and heres how. God said "he'll be saved" and "he'll pray for me to soften his heart." Some Christians (Arminians) disagree with that and would say yes to part a. And say that God "looked through time and saw that I would pray so he saved my friend."

 

Quote:

Finally,

How do you know that your faith is more valid than everone else's?

By what do you mean "my faith". Do you mean "the Christian faith" or my personal faith more valid than another Christians? Well, I will asnwer them both.

 

1. Its seems that the question is alittle off. I have told you why I believe in my God in the other previous posts. But as to what makes that faith more VALID than another, I can't say. Validity is not relative...and as God draws me closer to Him, I know more about Him. The only way I can say why the Christian faith is more valid, is to say why it is more valid TO ME...and since validity is not relative, it seems pointless to tell you why it is mroe valid to me. BUT, I have told you why it is more valid to me already in this post and others. Everything I say about what I believe in God IS what I believe makes my faith more valid. But ultimately what I believe makes my faith valid is useless...it is only that my faith is valid.

I hope that makes sense, but that is a hard question...since it is more of a personal thing that any one person is not fit to answer.

 

2. I would never say that my personal faith is more valid that any other Christians faith. I'm not qualified to say that. I can talk about their doctrine, but not faith.

 

2.

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon