Pretend with me for a moment.Let's just say that I stump you all with powerful arguments, using archaeological and scientific evidence. I have even intellectually dwarfed you.
Now all I have to do is convince you that Noah actually built an ark and brought in the animals two by two and lived over 900 years, that Jonah was swallowed by a whale, that Samson killed a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass, that Daniel was really in the lions' den, that Moses really did divide the Red Sea, and that Adam and Eve ran around naked...and ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Do you really think I can prove all of that to you?
Look at what Paul said about how he persuaded men about God: "And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God." (1 Corinthians 2:1) Why didn't Paul dazzle his hearers with eloquent speeches and intellectual wisdom? Bible scholars who have studied his letters tell us that he was extremely capable intellectually. First Corinthians 2:5 tells us why he deliberately stayed away from worldly wisdom: "That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God."
If sinners are converted by the intellect (the wisdom of men), they will fall away by the intellect. If they are merely argued into the faith, they will just as easily be argued out of it whenever a respected scholar reports that 'the bones of Jesus" have been found. However if sinners are converted by "the power of God," they will be kept by the power of God. No intellectual argument will cause them to waver because they will know the life-changing reality of their conversion, and their faith will be secure in the eternally solid and secure Rock of Ages. (taken from WOTM)
tinyurl.com/Manintellect
In short, if you accept it and turn off your brain, nothing will dissuade you.
ReplyDeleteIt is, of course, quite true that those of us who come to conclusions based on evidence must be prepared to alter those conclusions when the evidence changes. But the literal of many of the biblical claims would not be relavant to worship. Actual relevant points are whether a deity exists, whether Jesus was said deity, and whether a being who gives commands like those found in the bible can be regarded as good. This is what you must sustain with evidence.
Pvblivs welcome,
ReplyDeleteIt's just a matter of faith. Look, if we had all the answers we would be like God. Maybe, because of our rebellious nature that stems from Adam, God wants us not to know all things for right now, that he only wants us to go to Him in faith, not knowledge. Knowledge will come later but for now we must simply have faith in Him that He knows what He is doing. He might know something about our nature and knowledge and how boastful we might be with it. So far we built nuclear weapons to destroy everyone on the earth many times over and we are trying to clone humans to use them for fuel (or was that Matrix), wait Hitler tried to breed apes and humans to make a superior race, anyway God know better then us. I trust Him.
Dan:
ReplyDeleteYou will find that my level of faith is quite low. This expects me to trust a group of people who say they are speaking on behalf of a god. I have serious troubles with hearsay accounts.
So, Dan, following your line of reasoning, all we need is faith, not evidence, to bring us to the truth. What if I tell you that faith has brought me to believe in the divinity of John Frum? Or that I am the only sentient being in the Universe, and that all of you are merely characters in my dream? Seems to be a mighty hit-and-miss way of doing things...
ReplyDeleteAn interesting line of argument. But let's keep it simple. Instead of trying to rationalise ALL those crazy stories try to sort out just ONE of them. Just fix the nonsense of Noah and I'll sit up and take notice. Leave aside Adam & Eve, Jonah, unicorns, talking donkeys, walking talking snakes and the rest. Just sort out the Noah thing.
ReplyDeleteInteresting too to cite Paul's avoidance of the miraculous. Take it further - Paul doesn't ever, ever talk of Jesus' miracles. He's right there within decades of it all happening and not a peep about loaves, fishes, or dead raised.
Paul's writings are the best evidence we have for the non-existance of the man Jesus
Faith. Not evidence.
ReplyDeleteEvidence. Not faith.
Why not a little of both?
Take the Flat Earth Society, for instance. Their position relies on intuitive evidence of the flatness of the earth, which should be readily identifiable to anyone who ventures outside. They also have at their disposal the indisputable evidence of the sun meandering across the sky, clearly revolving around the earth. The moon's behavior, of course, also fits this model quite easily.
The faith a member of the FES requires is in the truth and validity of the Flat Earth Theory, in the face of "evidence" provided by the current nay-saying scientific community. Their doctored pictures of earth from space, the hoax of the Apollo moon landings, etc. -- they merely add more and more lies to hide the truth.
--Oops!--
This isn't so different from the position of a "plain reader" such as yourself. The contrarian evidence is overwhelming and constantly growing. Your feeble position must constantly retreat to a more ambiguous interpretation in order to maintain even the barest semblance of credibility (a false sense of security, that).
Sure, sure, you deny that your True Christianity™ has changed, or that the Correct Interpretations™ have changed, but this is a hollow argument, and even you can recognize that.
You were not here when prevailing Christian thought suggested that geocentrism favored heliocentrism. You were not here when proponents of the Theory of Evolution were against the Big Bang Theory due to its implications of a 'creation event'. You were not here when the world collectively admitted that no, the earth is not flat (FES members notwithstanding).
Had you been present during any of these times, your current behavior belies the fact that you'd staunchly have held to the prevailing "plain reading" interpretation of the day -- one which is today quite different.
Your whole philosophy -- especially your approach to discovering its "truth", is a logical paradox.
You require that a person drop his presuppositions regarding the bible's truth, to the point that he accepts what he hasn't yet read as wholly true, and then read it. You would claim that believing the bible before reading it leads naturally to accepting everything it says as true -- which is of course necessary if we presuppose its "truth" -- but you seem oblivious to the logical nonsense this sort of unskeptical thinking brings.
If we apply your approach to any text, we are logically impotent. Our objectivity is lost, our ability to reason is lost, and our ability to note inconsistency is lost. If we take a specific example and apply it to, say, George Lucas' Star Wars saga, we find ourselves believing a fiction.
"A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away..."
Nevermind that ample evidence can show that these movies were fictional productions -- we can say that Lucas et al were divinely inspired, and that the movies are historically and spiritually accurate depictions of actual events.
Perhaps a better example is the movie Galaxy Quest, in which an actual alien culture learns of the mythical Commander Jason Nesmith by intercepting television signals. Their naïveté kept them from recognizing the TV show as fiction, so they constructed a working spacecraft modeled exactly on the TV show's version.
These fools, like you, blindly believed a specific fiction (from amongst a whole host of other available fictions), and built a society based on their reconstruction of those fictional events.
The only difference is that your fiction has been bandied about for a few thousand years (in whole or in part), whereas these more recent fictions are necessarily far younger. Given a few thousand years of their own, they could easily, and not too implausibly, develop into full religions in their own rights.
Humans, being the dumb cows they generally are, will believe anything that is even slightly plausible, and are even less skeptical when the proposed "truth" appeals to their emotions.
Don't believe me? Ask someone why they thought Signs was a good movie (it wasn't), and before they reply, offer them the following possible responses:
1) Because an alien race so brilliant as to have the ability to get here was nonetheless so stupid as to prance around naked when they got here
2) Because these same aliens, despite hovering in low orbit (or within the atmosphere), were unable to navigate our complicated planet without the use of "crop circles"
3) Because these same aliens, despite their vastly superior technology, sent scouting parties to the surface without so much as a fucking radio
4) Because these same aliens, despite the apparent ability to jump over ten vertical feet -- from a standing position to a standing position -- were nonetheless unable to escape a farmer's pantry, which door had been locked by a chair wedged under the doorknob
5) Because these same aliens, despite that wonderfully invisible superior technology (how suspenseful, indeed), were unable to determine that a substance able to boil away their flesh is the same substance which permeates our entire atmosphere, and covers 75% of the planet's surface (yet still they traipsed about nude)
Oh yeah -- I hated that stupid movie.
Anyway, the point is that many people were somehow impressed by that awful movie. They were evidently so able to suppress their skepticism that they could ignore all of the above obvious inconsistencies (logical, physical, or other), and enjoy what was billed incorrectly as a suspenseful thriller (it was a comedy).
You are the person who ignores the nonsens in that movie and claims to enjoy it. I am the guy snickering the whole time in the theater, saying, "Really? When we go SCUBA diving, we take a wetsuit, an oxygen tank, and many times a speargun, but these aliens are nude without so much as a radio, when the very atmosphere is caustic to them?"
Thank you, but no. I can suspend disbelief to a point, which may well include a few of the biblical stories, but the continual insertion of unbelievable event after unbelievable event renders the whole thing as ridiculous as the premise for the movie Signs -- which, without the aliens, would have been a very good movie.
--
Stan
Dan,
ReplyDeleteAre you sure this is what you intended to post as a "proof" of something?
All I see is blabbering, but no reasoning anywhere to be seen.
G.E.
"Are you sure this is what you intended to post as a "proof" of something?"
ReplyDeleteQuite the opposite, did you read what I wrote or do you need to get_education? (you saw it coming, just playing around)
Be specific, and I will elaborate if necessary.
My theory [ http://sagargorijala.blogspot.com/ ] proves that God(s) can not exist and therefore God(s) do not exist.
ReplyDeleteSimply trusting God all we need right now.Having faith and have courage.I agree with you.I trust Him too.In every area of my life I let God be in the middle of it.
ReplyDeleteSmiley,
ReplyDeleteWelcome and thanks for the helping me smile today, what a breath of fresh air.
Smiley,
ReplyDeleteI only wish I could of spent more time in your country then the 4-5 days there. I didn't make it far past Subic Bay's vicinity when I was there in the late 80's, though I tried. It was just before the volcanic eruption which in turn closed the base forever. Blessings.
How about converted by the love of God? It worked for me..
ReplyDeleteBecause if you believe that there is no god then you can not be loved by it.
DeleteDan,
ReplyDeleteI agree with Pvblivs. Our beliefs ought to be rationally grounded. This will make our beliefs more likely to be true. And we should want that. As a Christian myself, I wholeheartedly disagree that we need to just "have faith." We need to seek the truth so our "faith" is well grounded in experience and/or rational thought. Demonstrating the power of God is itself a kind of experiential evidence. Note also that Paul did reason with non-believers on Mars Hill. Moreover, Jesus invited people to believe in him on the basis of his miracles. John wrote about signs so that people would believe. I myself came to believe in God on the basis of nuanced cosmological arguments among other evidences. If those arguments are shown to fail, my belief in God will be weakened -- as it should be.
To attract atheists to Christ, we must make a commitment to honest truth-seeking.
Josh,
ReplyDelete>>I myself came to believe in God on the basis of nuanced cosmological arguments among other evidences.
So you decided to place God on trial, by placing yourself in the judges seat, and he was found innocent and trustworthy?
Let me ask you, do you believe someone can convince a nonbeliever to become a Christian?
If belief cannot be taken on faith or reason then what else can it be taken on? I think 'God's power' would have to constitute as evidence or good reasons to convert people (which stands in the category of accepting a belief based on reason/intellect) otherwise 'God's Power' is some sort of lobotomy that switches people into 'belief mode'. Though I could be wrong. Does anyone have nay thoughts?
ReplyDeleteGabe,
ReplyDeleteWell faith is the point. Its not "blind" as some Atheists claim, its trust. As an example, my YEC belief is a consequence of my accepting Biblical authority. Its a healthier understanding.
Today, my blade is a little more sharp and I try to reveal, as evidence of God, is exposed with every truth claim, every knowledge claim, and even every rational thought you have.
"If they are merely argued into the faith, they will just as easily be argued out of it."
ReplyDeleteThis is very true. Sadly, I've seen it time and time again in many denominations, including my own. The scriptures are clear; the only true source of conversion is the testimony of the Spirit, not man's reasoning. Intellect and reason may help faith grow, but it cannot plant the seed.
This post cements the position of atheism. By denying logic, reason, evidence etc, you are putting Christianity outside of reality. If no rules apply, theists can make up new stories and new rules to fit their own personal world views, (as they have and do). At the same time, you mention "God's Power", if it were real and demonstrable, it would be evidence. But it's not real, so it can't be evidence, therefore Christians don't need evidence. The ideas in your post are deeply flawed, but they do accomplish something for Christians; they remove the ability of atheists to argue with you. You've ended the debate, you've declared yourselves unaccountable to reality, so arguments based in reality do not address the roots of your misconceptions.
ReplyDeletePops,
ReplyDelete>> By denying logic, reason, evidence etc, you are putting Christianity outside of reality.
Who is denying logic, reason, and evidence? Its a purdy straw man though. These "rules" or laws cannot be accounted for in an atheistic worldview. It certainly can in a Christian worldview.
>>At the same time, you mention "God's Power", if it were real and demonstrable, it would be evidence.
Erm, 'evidence' also presupposes ‘logic, knowledge, and truth” care to tell me how you account for them according to YOUR worldview?
Anyway, the claim is that God has revealed Himself to EVERYONE, and that this is exposed with every truth claim, every knowledge claim, and even every rational thought you have.
Assuming that your reasoning is not evidence for God, is question begging though, as you start with the presupposition that God does not exist in order to conclude that your ability to reason is not evidence of God. Also, assuming that the Bible is not evidence for God, because you do not believe God exists, is question begging.
>> But it's not real, so it can't be evidence, therefore Christians don't need evidence.
How do you know that your reasoning about this or ANYTHING is valid?
What question begging? Of course, we "assume" that the bible is not true, that it is no proof for god. We have no burden of proof, people are born atheists, it's up to the religious to prove that the bible is true and valid and that we should listen to it. Of course, you need evidence. I'm not even going to bother to respond to that. If you can't accept the fact that we need evidence for god, that believing in it just cause of faith is no reason at all, then you are just dumb.
ReplyDeleteRandom dude,
ReplyDelete>>If you can't accept the fact that we need evidence for god, that believing in it just cause of faith is no reason at all, then you are just dumb.
The claim is that God has revealed Himself to EVERYONE, and that this is exposed with every truth claim, every knowledge claim, and even every rational thought you have.
I don't expect you to like what I write. Your very ability to reason about evidence is evidence of God. Now, assuming that your reasoning is not evidence for God, is question begging though, as you start with the presupposition that God does not exist in order to conclude that your ability to reason is not evidence of God.
How do you account for the universal, abstract, invariant laws of logic, and on what basis you proceeds with the assumption that they WILL hold?
The blog makes a very good point.
ReplyDeleteI remember a guy I worked with years ago every day gave me a hard time about my faith in front of the other workers.
Eventually I said to him "If I give you 100% proofs that the Bible is true and that Jesus and Christianity are 100% correct will you become born again?"
His answer was "Not a chance".
I replied and said "Then I'm not arguing with you any more....you're wasting my time and your own".
anyone who devotes their life to "debunking" other peoples beliefs, has no life...
ReplyDeleteYou may have a point, but:
DeleteThis blog has been created, not with the purpose of debunking Atheists, but proclaiming truth. Atheists have already debunked themselves the very moment they declare their Atheistic Worldview. So with respect, we reveal the Gospel, Biblically. We are Christians, ministers, theologians, and apologists for the Christian faith. We seek our eyes dry for these lost. We depend on "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes. ... grief, crying, and pain will exist no longer,..." ~Revelation 21:4