Christian Apologetics

[Thruve]

Let's not keep such an open mind that your brain falls out either. There may be things we cannot explain, that doesn't mean that you get to just make something up to fill in the gap in your knowledge. Invented explanations are not explanations but rationalizations. If we don't know what happened, we don't know. We don't get to pretend that we know to get around the discomfort of not knowing.

Quit pretending that "god" doesn't exist then, because you don't know, you'll 'never' know, and its not up for debate. Sorry it gives you discomfort not knowing, to where you have to settle for believing he/it doesn't exist. Also for the record, it may be just you that gets discomfort from not knowing, because I don't know, and Im not uncomfortable at all and it doesn't bother me. I never made god up, instead I just define it differently. Uh duh.

@Bunyip -> sonofasons post -> my owed response to your question a page back. Again dude sorry for the delay lol.

 

[Cephus]

Quit pretending that "god" doesn't exist then, because you don't know, you'll 'never' know, and its not up for debate. Sorry it gives you discomfort not knowing, to where you have to settle for believing he/it doesn't exist. Also for the record, it may be just you that gets discomfort from not knowing, because I don't know, and Im not uncomfortable at all and it doesn't bother me. I never made god up, instead I just define it differently. Uh duh.

I'm stating that gods are unsupported and until they are supported, a rational person should not believe in them. The same goes for unicorns and leprechauns and all other fantasy critters. The time to believe in them is *ONLY* after they have evidence for their existence and anyone who accepts them before that point is being irrational. There's a difference between not knowing and not having evidence. There is a lot we'll never know to any degree of absolute certainty. That doesn't excuse our responsibility to be rational about the world around us.

 

[dgirl1986]

The problem I see with this is that no two Christians see Christianity the same. So you can't help but get inconsisitencies and misunderstandings when it all seems pretty much open to interpretation.

The ones I have heard and interacted with had no interest in even hearing what the non believer was saying and proceeded to insult to them when they werent winning the discussion.

 

[Adstar]

The problem I see with this is that no two Christians see Christianity the same. So you can't help but get inconsisitencies and misunderstandings when it all seems pretty much open to interpretation.

It is not a problem when two different Christians give two different solutions to a questioners problem, it gives the questioner two possible answers to their question. This the questioner is getting more options and more choice.

 

[The Hammer]

It is not a problem when two different Christians give two different solutions to a questioners problem, it gives the questioner two possible answers to their question. This the questioner is getting more options and more choice.

Off topic sort of... But when one Christian says keep the Sabbath on Saturday, and another says keep the Sabbath on Sunday. And the Bible says keep the lord's day holy; only one of the options is correct, is it not? And if not, then it does not matter what day I personally keep as the sabbath, which then means the Bible really is "open to interpretation" which is stated, often, that it is not.

What of the differing opinions on Homosexuality? Or any other number of things? There can only be one right answer, correct? So who is right? Those preaching love and tolerance for their brothers, because the bible does not implicitly forbade it? Or those preaching condemnation and lack of equal rights, due to the horrid abomination that they percieve homosexuality to be?

Those aren't two different opinions/answers to the same problem, those are potential conflictions in doctrine depending on who you talk to.

 

[Adstar]

Off topic sort of... But when one Christian says keep the Sabbath on Saturday, and another says keep the Sabbath on Sunday. And the Bible says keep the lord's day holy; only one of the options is correct, is it not?

Yes the Bible is correct. You should always go with the Bible as the primary authority.

And if not, then it does not matter what day I personally keep as the sabbath, which then means the Bible really is "open to interpretation" which is stated, often, that it is not.

In this case you have 3 options. And you can investigate the 3 for yourself and decide for yourself in what one you believe. The Bible is open to interpretation but there is only one right answer. So people can do what they think is right in regard to the sabbath day and in the End God will confirm what was right.

What of the differing opinions on Homosexuality? Or any other number of things? There can only be one right answer, correct?

Correct. Those who have a mind for the truth will hear it. those who have a mind for sin will latch on to one of the false interpretations that cater to their desire and in the end their choices will be right or wrong.

So who is right? Those preaching love and tolerance for their brothers, because the bible does not implicitly forbade it? Or those preaching condemnation and lack of equal rights, due to the horrid abomination that they percieve homosexuality to be?

Well one has listen to the different positions and read the Bible and come to their conclusion. Once again in the end the truth will become clear to all on the day of the final judgement.

Those aren't two different opinions/answers to the same problem, those are potential conflictions in doctrine depending on who you talk to.

No contradition. Just a difference of opinion. A contradiction is where the same source holds two counter views at the same time. One person might be consistent in holding one view. Another person might be consistent holding a seconf view and the Bible shall be consistent holding a 3rd View.. No contradictions at all.

 

[The Hammer]

Yes the Bible is correct. You should always go with the Bible as the primary authority.



In this case you have 3 options. And you can investigate the 3 for yourself and decide for yourself in what one you believe. The Bible is open to interpretation but there is only one right answer. So people can do what they think is right in regard to the sabbath day and in the End God will confirm what was right.



Correct. Those who have a mind for the truth will hear it. those who have a mind for sin will latch on to one of the false interpretations that cater to their desire and in the end their choices will be right or wrong.



Well one has listen to the different positions and read the Bible and come to their conclusion. Once again in the end the truth will become clear to all on the day of the final judgement.



No contradition. Just a difference of opinion. A contradiction is where the same source holds two counter views at the same time. One person might be consistent in holding one view. Another person might be consistent holding a seconf view and the Bible shall be consistent holding a 3rd View.. No contradictions at all.

Soooo... Everyone more then likely has it wrong, and everyone is doomed except biblical/ theological scholars who spend their life studying this stuff to make heads or tails of it. That' what I got out of that. And I disagree, the bible does not have just one answer. Out of the numerous times I have read it, there are multiple ways the scriptures can be read, and in that regard everyone is wrong at least in part. Kinda of a futile endeavor. I will take my chances elsewhere.

 

[Adstar]

Soooo... Everyone more then likely has it wrong, and everyone is doomed except biblical/ theological scholars who spend their life studying this stuff to make heads or tails of it.

The majority are wrong on most things Biblical because the thinking of mankind is different from God and the way that men think is right is not the same as Gods way as the Bible says:

Proverbs 14: KJV
12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

But not everyone is wrong.. Some people have a mind for the truth and are lead by the Holy Spirit into understanding. Yes some men spend years learning the Bible trying to figure it out but if they do not have a mind for the truth they can seek and study for decades in the end they will not understand it properly without the Holy Spirit leading them into understanding.

Out of the numerous times I have read it, there are multiple ways the scriptures can be read,

YES yes yes indeed and there in lies the design of the Bible. It is a message revealed where people cannot perceive the message unless they are guided by the Holy Spirit. So it is a message revealed and hidden at the same time.

 

[Thruve]

I'm stating that gods are unsupported and until they are supported, a rational person should not believe in them. The same goes for unicorns and leprechauns and all other fantasy critters. The time to believe in them is *ONLY* after they have evidence for their existence and anyone who accepts them before that point is being irrational. There's a difference between not knowing and not having evidence. There is a lot we'll never know to any degree of absolute certainty. That doesn't excuse our responsibility to be rational about the world around us.

Ahem, Yes, thats understood.
The problem is there is evidence to individuals like me, and like Son. Not to you, but to us, yes. So.. what now?
Mind, our definition of 'god' is different, but evidence is furrealz to people like us.

 

[The Hammer]

YES yes yes indeed and there in lies the design of the Bible. It is a message revealed where people cannot perceive the message unless they are guided by the Holy Spirit. So it is a message revealed and hidden at the same time.

So two things then. 1) The bible is not meant to be understood by anyone but the devout (which in turn makes it useless as a piece of guiding literature).
and 2) I don't understand it because I never have ben guided by the Holy Spirit.

Makes sense. Have a great day.

 

[savagewind]

So two things then. 1) The bible is not meant to be understood by anyone but the devout (which in turn makes it useless as a piece of guiding literature).
and 2) I don't understand it because I never have ben guided by the Holy Spirit.

Makes sense. Have a great day.

Good logic!

The message is understood only by devout persons. The reason why is it is about doing and people who aren't devout don't care about doing.

On the other hand there is much wisdom in it which anyone can choose to obey for a better life.

So the whole thing which is communicatiing some THING is for people who are seeking understanding of the WHOLE THING.

But there are parts of it that are communicating plain wisdom which anyone can benefit from.

A person need not be guided by The Holy Spirit to learn from hundreds of lessons in it.

To be able to hear from God about it a person must be devout.

 

[Cephus]

Ahem, Yes, thats understood.
The problem is there is evidence to individuals like me, and like Son. Not to you, but to us, yes. So.. what now?
Mind, our definition of 'god' is different, but evidence is furrealz to people like us.

But that makes no rational sense. Evidence isn't just an individual thing. Either a god exists or a god does not exist. Your opinion on the issue means nothing to whether or not there is actual reality there. People don't walk into a courtroom and define what evidence is, it's laid out, here is what the evidence is, what the facts are and how it all fits together. If the goal it to reach actual reality and accept the most factually true things as possible and reject the most factually untrue things as possible, then just deciding "I feel like accepting that because it makes me happy" is not a rational standard.

 

[savagewind]

I feel like accepting a belief in God because I choose to believe reality exists. I think it would be fair if every person who is positive that there is no GOD must also admit nothing is real. Either nothing is real and so The God does not exist either or everything is real so God is real too.

 

[Thruve]

But that makes no rational sense. Evidence isn't just an individual thing. Either a god exists or a god does not exist. Your opinion on the issue means nothing to whether or not there is actual reality there. People don't walk into a courtroom and define what evidence is, it's laid out, here is what the evidence is, what the facts are and how it all fits together. If the goal it to reach actual reality and accept the most factually true things as possible and reject the most factually untrue things as possible, then just deciding "I feel like accepting that because it makes me happy" is not a rational standard.

To you it makes no logical sense. To us, it makes no logical sense to believe otherwise after having the experiences we've had.

If your looking for physical proof, your not going to find it. Idk what to tell you dude.

 

[Cephus]

To you it makes no logical sense. To us, it makes no logical sense to believe otherwise after having the experiences we've had.

If your looking for physical proof, your not going to find it. Idk what to tell you dude.

Luckily, there are accepted laws of logic and rules for making logical and rational decisions. Those that do so are logical, those who do not, are not. Pick your side.

 

[savagewind]

Can any one prove to God believers that logic is real?

 

[Cephus]

Can any one prove to God believers that logic is real?

Nobody can prove anything to God believers, they're not interested in what's true, only what makes them feel good.

 

[Thruve]

Luckily, there are accepted laws of logic and rules for making logical and rational decisions. Those that do so are logical, those who do not, are not. Pick your side.

Yet religion is still around, now what's logic tell ya?

 

[Thruve]

Nobody can prove anything to God believers, they're not interested in what's true, only what makes them feel good.

I know some schizophrenics that would like to argue that with you.

 

[savagewind]

Nobody can prove anything to God believers, they're not interested in what's true, only what makes them feel good.

Replying with an insult is a strategy for some people with no answer. FYI I notice you didn't answer the question. Can logic be proved? Many things can be proved by logic but can logic be proved?