Christian Apologetics

[Cephus]

What your going through right now is the very thing I go through in my faith and it's happened a dozen times. I critically think and come to different conclusions, often that God doesn't exist. You act like its easy to have faith dude.

If you're committed to logic and reason, it certainly is not because logic is neither logical nor reasonable.

 

[savagewind]

Then you have no rational reason to believe it is real. You can't have it both ways. Believing in something for which you have no good reason to think it is real is foolish and the more that you argue that nobody can evaluate it intelligently, you just reveal that you haven't done so yourself. If it's impossible to do, then you shouldn't be believing in it.

You're making things up. I was talking about objectively vs subjectively. Spirit isn't an object. DUH

 

[Cephus]

You're making things up. I was talking about objectively vs subjectively. Spirit isn't an object. DUH

No I'm not making things up. Spirit is a concept, it takes a massive leap of irrationality to leap to it being real.

 

[savagewind]

Happiness comes from many things like family, fortune, friends, health, talent, occupation, entertainment, and more real stuff of this world. But all that can be lost. It is RATIONAL to believe something greater that all that is always near and can never be lost. GOD.

 

[Cephus]

Happiness comes from many things like family, fortune, friends, health, talent, occupation, entertainment, and more real stuff of this world. But all that can be lost. It is RATIONAL to believe something greater that all that is always near and can never be lost. GOD.

How is believing in a god rational? What objective evidence leads to that conclusion? It seems to me that you're just relying on pure emotion and wishful thinking to believe in an all powerful being. Just wanting it to be so doesn't make it so.

 

[savagewind]

Maybe you do not know psychology. Belief is a powerful thing so believing God is true and God is true are not different. Believing God will do something is irrational. Believing in God is rational because believing is a good thing.

 

[Bunyip]

What's that suppose to mean? I am sure most scientists go home and do what they do apart from science. My relationship with God is all the time. Everyday. No weekends. No vacations. No 9-5.

Scientists apply critical thinking to their field , you can not apply critical thinking to your faith. Saying that you apply more critical thought to your faith (to which critical thought can not be applied) than any scientists do is just disengenuous.

 

[Cephus]

Maybe you do not know psychology. Belief is a powerful thing so believing God is true and God is true are not different. Believing God will do something is irrational. Believing in God is rational because believing is a good thing.

Why is it a good thing? Is believing in unicorns a good thing too? Why?

 

[savagewind]

Scientists apply critical thinking to their field , you can not apply critical thinking to your faith. Saying that you apply more critical thought to your faith (to which critical thought can not be applied) than any scientists do is just disengenuous.

And how would you know that? I do not apply critical thinking to my faith. My faith is just one thing. I apply critical thinking to every thought, word and deed as each relates to my faith.

 

[savagewind]

Why is it a good thing? Is believing in unicorns a good thing too? Why?

That just proves to me you talk about critical thinking but you haven't got any.

 

[Bunyip]

And how would you know that? I do not apply critical thinking to my faith. My faith is just one thing. I apply critical thinking to every thought, word and deed as each relates to my faith.

I know that because faith is the alternative to critical thinking. Faith and critical thinking are mutually exclusive. And yes, I believe that saying you apply more critical thinking to your faith than any scientists is just a little disengenuous.

 

[Cephus]

That just proves to me you talk about critical thinking but you haven't got any.

In other words, you had no answer. It was a simple, straightforward question. Go ahead and give it a shot.

 

[savagewind]

You equate belief in a solitary physical creature which is good for one thing - eating - with Almighty God who dwells above Heaven and Earth, Who Is The Beginning and The End, who possesses perfect wisdom, knowledge, understanding, justice and loves us. I see nothing similar between the two. Can you help me out here please?

Oh. I forgot God's household of angels. Them too. They all come with belief.

 

[savagewind]

I do not know if I would eat a unicorn. I suppose it is better to eat than eating my own child. I could say that a lot of ways.

It would better to eat the last unicorn than it would be to eat my own child as some people have been tempted to eat their own children.

So.....tell me about unicorns. Or actually unicorn.

With no help from you I can now see the similarity between The One God and a unicorn. There's only one. Right?

 

[Cephus]

You equate belief in a solitary physical creature which is good for one thing - eating - with Almighty God who dwells above Heaven and Earth, Who Is The Beginning and The End, who possesses perfect wisdom, knowledge, understanding, justice and loves us. I see nothing similar between the two. Can you help me out here please?

Oh. I forgot God's household of angels. Them too. They all come with belief.

But you're simply making a claim, without support, that gods or angels or any of the rest of that is real. How do you know? Where did you get this information? How have you verified it? If you tell me that it's true, why should I take you seriously? I can go get a hamburger, for lack of a better example, and eat it. I can give you one and you can verify that hamburgers are real. There's no faith involved, you, and anyone else who wants to, can know that hamburgers are real, whether they had a pre-existing belief in one or not. So how do we do the same thing with gods? And if we can't, why should anyone take gods seriously? You're trying to have a double standard, I'm pointing out that a double standard is unnecessary, if gods are real, there needs to be some reason to think that they are. If there isn't, why should anyone take them seriously?

 

[Cephus]

I do not know if I would eat a unicorn. I suppose it is better to eat than eating my own child. I could say that a lot of ways.

Maybe both taste like chicken.

 

[savagewind]

But you're simply making a claim, without support, that gods or angels or any of the rest of that is real. How do you know? Where did you get this information? How have you verified it? If you tell me that it's true, why should I take you seriously?

I think I have never said it's true.

 

[Cephus]

I think I have never said it's true.

Granted, I don't know that you've ever said that it's true but lots of people around here seem to think it's true and have likewise never produced a shred of objective evidence showing that it is.

 

[savagewind]

I can go get a hamburger, for lack of a better example, and eat it. I can give you one and you can verify that hamburgers are real. There's no faith involved, you, and anyone else who wants to, can know that hamburgers are real, whether they had a pre-existing belief in one or not. So how do we do the same thing with gods? And if we can't, why should anyone take gods seriously? You're trying to have a double standard, I'm pointing out that a double standard is unnecessary, if gods are real, there needs to be some reason to think that they are. If there isn't, why should anyone take them seriously?

Before you said giving me a hamburger would prove you ate one I thought you might say what comes from digestion proves you ate it.

You're at it again. hamburger vs. God. I have to guess you're playing with us.

 

[Cephus]

Before you said giving me a hamburger would prove you ate one I thought you might say what comes from digestion proves you ate it.

You're at it again. hamburger vs. God. I have to guess you're playing with us.

No, I said that I could prove that hamburgers exist but you cannot similarly prove that gods exist. Given that disparity, people should accept the existence of hamburgers but should not accept the existence of gods.