Author Topic: Questions for Christian appologetics  (Read 3578 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Contradiction

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Questions for Christian appologetics
« on: July 14, 2011, 01:54:11 AM »
I have a few questions you,
1) Why are there apparent contradictions? Surely if God was all-powerful and all-knowing he wouldnt make a book with contradictions.
2) Why appologetics v. appologetics?
I thought God was not the author of confusion? Yet you just need two books on Bible contradictions to realise that the appologetics contradict themselves!
3) Why all the effort? Isn't it easier to say
Quote
There are contradictions in the Bible and God doesn't exist
or to find loopholes?
4) What if there was a contradiction that cannot be explained?
5) If I were to give you that there are no contradictions, what does that prove?

Thanks,

Contradiction.
ps. forgive me if this is in the wrong category.
God created Adam and Eve; not Adam and Steve! Hmmm, who created Steve?

Offline Karl

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 393
  • Darwins +3/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2011, 02:07:38 AM »
I have a few questions you,
1) Why are there apparent contradictions? Surely if God was all-powerful and all-knowing he wouldn't make a book with contradictions.
He didn't.
Quote
2) Why appologetics v. appologetics?
I thought God was not the author of confusion? Yet you just need two books on Bible contradictions to realise that the appologetics contradict themselves!
Same remark, God was not an author, basically he was, is and never will be anything because he doesn't exist.
Quote
3) Why all the effort? Isn't it easier to say
Quote
There are contradictions in the Bible and God doesn't exist
or to find loopholes?
Apparently that doesn't represent the present situation.
Quote
4) What if there was a contradiction that cannot be explained?
There are a lot of things that cannot be explained. More important is looking for a way to explain them. Failing to do so doesn't prove anything.
Quote
5) If I were to give you that there are no contradictions, what does that prove?
Nothing at all.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2011, 02:09:22 AM by Karl »

Offline globalvalue

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 84
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Fry the Jesus Fish with Facts, Evidence, and Logic
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #2 on: July 23, 2011, 11:54:25 AM »
One of the Big Bible problems is God's promise to Abraham.

Genesis 17:8
8 I will give to you and to your descendants after you, the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.”

Notice that God promises to give to Abraham personally the "promised land."
Of course, Abraham never received the "promised land."
The New Testament recognizes that Abraham never received the promise.

Acts 7:5
5 But He gave him no inheritance in it, not even a foot of ground, and yet, even when he had no child, He promised that HE WOULD GIVE IT TO HIM AS A POSSESSION, AND TO HIS DESCENDANTS AFTER HIM.

With Christianity shifting away to a heavenly reward there doesn't seem to be any chance that poor Abe will ever get the land that was promised to him.

How can Christians believe that they will ever receive any reward if God hasn't made good on his promise to Abraham?
Science Climbs the Ladder of Discovery
Christianity Kneels at the Altar of Superstition

Offline BigV

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2011, 06:28:57 AM »
...

How can Christians believe that they will ever receive any reward if God hasn't made good on his promise to Abraham?

When I was more of a fundamentalist, I struggled with the fact that a Christian could never be sure they are truly saved and are heaven bound.  "You can be sure tonight", Billy Graham used to say, but that assurance only lasted until new questions came up.

Ezekiel 33:13 If I tell a righteous person that they will surely live, but then they trust in their righteousness and do evil, none of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered; they will die for the evil they have done.

Now, with a promise like that, how can you ever be sure of anything God says?

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7275
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2011, 06:39:08 AM »
You can be sure that everything attributed to this god, was said by some goat herding, wannabe manipulator of ancient people.

Offline mram

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5604
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • DON'T PRESS THAT BUTTON!
    • Freeclassicflix
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2011, 06:49:38 AM »
This is the same alleged god who allegedly decided to arbitrarily punish all of the human race for an undetermined time all because a woman was gullible and wanted to know what was going on..
This is the first contradiction. Don't touch that tree!
Why not?
That's it..pain and suffering forever and ever..
DON'T EVER QUESTION ANYTHING!
If we had gone the way of the garden story and not eaten from the tree where would be be? Famine, starvation, disease, suffering because eventually someone would have eaten from that tree.
Imagine gaining favor with "Darwin's"...kind of like praying, huh?

http://freeclassicflix.co.cc

Offline Nick

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10294
  • Darwins +177/-8
  • Gender: Male
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2011, 07:59:24 AM »
It must be really really hard to be a Christian.  You have to figure out all this bible stuff, jump through so many hoops, and try so hard to believe what you really know deep down is a bunch of BS.  Maybe they need to go on strike until God can clarify what the hell He wants.
Yo, put that in your pipe and smoke it.  Quit ragging on my Lord.

Tide goes in, tide goes out !!!

Offline curiousgirl

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
  • Darwins +22/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Inquisitive agnostic atheist
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #7 on: August 15, 2011, 04:56:09 PM »
If we had gone the way of the garden story and not eaten from the tree where would be be? Famine, starvation, disease, suffering because eventually someone would have eaten from that tree.

I absolutely agree with you. Christians never seem to be able to answer me when I ask them why it says in Genesis that God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree, and then did not intervene when he saw that they were about to do so. In other words, they were curious and they were given open access (by their supposedly benevolent creator) to something fatal. Now IF that account is true, I am appalled as a parent because I would not tell my child not to touch the stove, then step back and let them get burned because of their "freewill". Also, how would it even make sense to begin with that eating a piece of fruit makes you know things, and therefore makes you die???
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."-Carl Sagan

Offline Penman

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2011, 02:15:59 AM »
I absolutely agree with you. Christians never seem to be able to answer me when I ask them why it says in Genesis that God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree, and then did not intervene when he saw that they were about to do so. In other words, they were curious and they were given open access (by their supposedly benevolent creator) to something fatal. Now IF that account is true, I am appalled as a parent because I would not tell my child not to touch the stove, then step back and let them get burned because of their "freewill". Also, how would it even make sense to begin with that eating a piece of fruit makes you know things, and therefore makes you die???

Let's try to clarify a few things and take it one at a time. If God is interested in genuine love via free will and our choice to love/reject Him, why would He intervene on our decision to obey or disobey Him? As a parent, you instruct your children and expect them to follow your guidance because you are the parent and they are the child. However, forcing your child to obey you negates their ability to truly choose what they want to do. Keep in mind, also, that Adam and Eve were rational adults, not toddlers. The free will decisions made were done while fully understanding the implications of the choice (whereas a toddler touching the stove does not understand the implication of being burned).

I like to use the idea that God created the potential for sin (free will) and it was man who actualized sin. If I leave my car door unlocked, I've created the potential for a car theft to occur. With that being said, if it does indeed end up stolen, it was the decision of the thief to steal the car that actualize the car theft.

Offline changeling

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 663
  • Darwins +15/-0
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #9 on: August 16, 2011, 05:55:43 AM »
Penman, try using that logic when a small child drowns in
your unguarded swimming pool.
Ever heard of an attractive nuisance?

Are you saying that you would not stop your child from shooting himself in the head
because you had already told them not to pick up the gun?
That is what disgusts me about Christian thinking.
The level of dumb they have to sell, is only made remotely possible by the level of flocking their sheep are willing to do in the name of rewards for no thought. quote: Kin Hell

"Faith is the enemy of evidence, for when we know the truth, no faith is required." Graybeard

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #10 on: August 16, 2011, 07:58:25 AM »
If God is interested in genuine love via free will and our choice to love/reject Him, why would He intervene on our decision to obey or disobey Him?
If he were interested in genuine love, he would make it clear that he existed in the first place.  You cannot love someone you do not believe exists.

Keep in mind, also, that Adam and Eve were rational adults, not toddlers. The free will decisions made were done while fully understanding the implications of the choice

Rubbish.  Until they ate of the fruit, they had no concept of good or evil.  They could make no moral choice whether to obey god or not.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2011, 08:17:45 AM »
I absolutely agree with you. Christians never seem to be able to answer me when I ask them why it says in Genesis that God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree, and then did not intervene when he saw that they were about to do so. In other words, they were curious and they were given open access (by their supposedly benevolent creator) to something fatal. Now IF that account is true, I am appalled as a parent because I would not tell my child not to touch the stove, then step back and let them get burned because of their "freewill". Also, how would it even make sense to begin with that eating a piece of fruit makes you know things, and therefore makes you die???

Let's try to clarify a few things and take it one at a time. If God is interested in genuine love via free will and our choice to love/reject Him, why would He intervene on our decision to obey or disobey Him? As a parent, you instruct your children and expect them to follow your guidance because you are the parent and they are the child. However, forcing your child to obey you negates their ability to truly choose what they want to do. Keep in mind, also, that Adam and Eve were rational adults, not toddlers. The free will decisions made were done while fully understanding the implications of the choice (whereas a toddler touching the stove does not understand the implication of being burned).

I like to use the idea that God created the potential for sin (free will) and it was man who actualized sin. If I leave my car door unlocked, I've created the potential for a car theft to occur. With that being said, if it does indeed end up stolen, it was the decision of the thief to steal the car that actualize the car theft.

I too am curious if they did not have the knowledge of what was good and evil, nor even of death itself, how could they be considered to be rational adults? God issues a warning, the sign provided temptation stating he was a liar, without a knowledge of Good and evil, how could they distinguish betwixt the two as to which one was lying?

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2011, 10:05:09 AM »
I absolutely agree with you. Christians never seem to be able to answer me when I ask them why it says in Genesis that God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree, and then did not intervene when he saw that they were about to do so. In other words, they were curious and they were given open access (by their supposedly benevolent creator) to something fatal. Now IF that account is true, I am appalled as a parent because I would not tell my child not to touch the stove, then step back and let them get burned because of their "freewill". Also, how would it even make sense to begin with that eating a piece of fruit makes you know things, and therefore makes you die???

Let's try to clarify a few things

You mean, let's try to qualify the problem by reinterpreting an entirely different analogy that has nothing to do with the biblical myth.  Offer no reason to be believe, other then your own presumed authority on nonsense.

Quote
If God is interested in genuine love via free will

This is a premise.  How is this premise derived?  Why would we ever consider it?

The problem with this premise is that it is not derived from anything.  It is a cultural ideological belief related to specific interpretation of a specific set of texts for the sole purpose of benefiting on arbitrarily selected dogma.  Those texts are arbitrarily chosen to suit the dogma, not actually derived from the texts themselves, and thousands of differing/contradicting beliefs are arrived to the same way from the same religious books.  So, you immediately begin my imposing your own ideological beliefs as if they were the only ones worth considering or the only ones relevant to the problem at hand, not to mention that it is the beginning of an argument from authority you simply do not possess.

Quote
and our choice to love/reject Him

This is a premise.  How do I love something I do not have any reason to believe in?  How do you 'choose' to reject or accept something you have no reason to believe in?

At face value this premise is a blatant contradiction, imposing a dichotomy of choices that do not logically follow into the reasonableness of the ability to choose.  Not to mention where it imposes a distinct adjective to describe not knowing if a position is true, but instead 'rejecting' that position as if it were known.

Quote
why would He intervene on our decision to obey or disobey Him?

Actually, she's already addressed this problem:

I am appalled as a parent because I would not tell my child not to touch the stove, then step back and let them get burned because of their "freewill".

Her analogy quite rightly fits the genesis narrative, as god has the ultimate ability to not only prevent what's going to happen but also has the forethought to know it will happen inevitably.  That's why we send adults to jail who leave loaded guns in a baby cribs.

Quote
. However, forcing your child to obey you negates their ability to truly choose what they want to do.

This is irrelevant.

Its a qualification, inserted without explanation, as if to impose a standard or objection to an inherent contradiction.  Ignoring that 'free will' isn't actually mentioned biblically and is imposed by apologetics later to account for inherent contradictions, how is this relevant to a parent preventing a child from harming themselves horrifically?

Quote
Keep in mind, also, that Adam and Eve were rational adults, not toddlers.

This is special pleading, like before it is meant to insert a pleaded qualification without explanation, as if to impose a standard or objection to any inherent problem.  It is also dishonest in that we already know that adam and eve lack knowledge, is it the tree of knowledge after all.

It is also a non-argument, because in all situations adam and eve lack the forethought of god.  They cannot know, because they are imperfect and child like.

Quote
The free will decisions made were done while fully understanding the implications of the choice (whereas a toddler touching the stove does not understand the implication of being burned).

This is a conclusion that does not follow from any of your previous premises, all of which are contradicted and have to be made up in the absence of a rational explanation.

So let's see, you insert free will, you insert that adam and eve are rational mind, yet.. you don't expect anyone to point this out?

Quote
I like to use the idea that God created the potential for sin (free will) and it was man who actualized sin.

Irrelevant.

Demonstrate why I need to engage in the intellectual dishonesty and blatant compartmentalization you just demonstrated for me above in order to make a religious myth less irrational/illogical?

As a former believer, I would identify what you just did in this thread as a textbook example of a christian engaging in an irrational/illogical action that only encouraged my own questioning of beliefs I held at that time, what do you think about that?
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 10:07:39 AM by Omen »
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline curiousgirl

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
  • Darwins +22/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Inquisitive agnostic atheist
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #13 on: August 16, 2011, 10:40:23 AM »
However, forcing your child to obey you negates their ability to truly choose what they want to do. Keep in mind, also, that Adam and Eve were rational adults, not toddlers. The free will decisions made were done while fully understanding the implications of the choice (whereas a toddler touching the stove does not understand the implication of being burned).

If forcing my child to obey me in a potentially fatal situation negates their ability to choose, then I would negate their ability to choose. I would rather have them alive and well, which is more loving to me than letting them destroy themselves. Also, I don't accept your premise that Adam and Eve fully understood the implications of the choice because that implies that they already knew right from wrong, and that they should be punished for picking the wrong choice. How could that be the case if they had not eaten from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil yet? How could they possibly know if they could trust God when God was letting Satan lie to them and they had no past experience with which to interpret who was telling the truth?
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."-Carl Sagan

Offline Truth OT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1452
  • Darwins +88/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #14 on: August 16, 2011, 10:44:38 AM »
Christians never seem to be able to answer me when I ask them why it says in Genesis that God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree, and then did not intervene when he saw that they were about to do so. In other words, they were curious and they were given open access (by their supposedly benevolent creator) to something fatal. Now IF that account is true, I am appalled as a parent because I would not tell my child not to touch the stove, then step back and let them get burned because of their "freewill". Also, how would it even make sense to begin with that eating a piece of fruit makes you know things, and therefore makes you die???

I seems rather obvious that if the story is factual that God planned on man's disobedience and somehow may have needed it to occur otherwise why place the tree of knowledge in the mist of the garden?
At this point, I believe there must be a backstory the scriptures do not speak of (with the exception possibly of the Book of Enoch). It would seem that man's creation was necessary in order to acheive something beyond man or that man was created in response to something that transpired prior to us.

One reason why I think like this is because the scriptures really don't address much God's reasoning as it pertains to creating us. Why would He do it and for what purpose? To think that we represented the beginning as well as the endgame God had in mind does fit well when one considers all of scripture.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 01:52:57 PM by screwtape »

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2011, 10:48:43 AM »
At this point, I believe there must

You mean you're going to arbitrarily make something up in the complete absence of all information in order to suppose a new condition to rationalize a presupposed notion of how it should be interpreted?

How is this different from random make believe?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline curiousgirl

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
  • Darwins +22/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Inquisitive agnostic atheist
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #16 on: August 16, 2011, 10:52:01 AM »
Christians never seem to be able to answer me when I ask them why it says in Genesis that God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree, and then did not intervene when he saw that they were about to do so. In other words, they were curious and they were given open access (by their supposedly benevolent creator) to something fatal. Now IF that account is true, I am appalled as a parent because I would not tell my child not to touch the stove, then step back and let them get burned because of their "freewill". Also, how would it even make sense to begin with that eating a piece of fruit makes you know things, and therefore makes you die???

I seems rather obvious that if the story is factual that God planned on man's disobedience and somehow may have needed it to occur otherwise why place the tree of knowledge in the mist of the garden?
At this point, I believe there must be a backstory the scriptures do not speak of (with the exception possibly of the Book of Enoch). It would seem that man's creation was necessary in order to acheive something beyond man or that man was created in response to something that transpired prior to us.


What kind of a God would plan on man's disobedience, only to have to send his only son to die on the cross later? I'm sorry, but whatever you call "rather obvious" is not obvious to me, and not because I suffer from a lack of understanding. Also, why would God "need" anything to happen? Isn't he supposedly omnipotent? I am not trying to be rude, but your musings with regard to a "backstory" sound rather vague to me. Care to elaborate?
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."-Carl Sagan

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #17 on: August 16, 2011, 10:59:18 AM »
I'm sorry, but whatever you call "rather obvious" is not obvious to me, and not because I suffer from a lack of understanding.

Presume that its a glorified message from an invisible undetectable supernatural agent and because of that it can't possibly be as stupid as it is at face value, then insert whatever you want to make it sound better.  Insist that your presupposed conditions are as obvious as the presupposition that there is a glorified message from an invisible undetectable supernatural agent.

Remember, this is very important: Never explain and always expect to be taken seriously.  Dismiss anyone who doesn't accept it at face value, dehumanize them if need be to justify doing it to yourself.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Truth OT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1452
  • Darwins +88/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #18 on: August 16, 2011, 11:07:27 AM »
You mean you're going to arbitrarily make something up in the complete absence of all information in order to suppose a new condition to rationalize a presupposed notion of how it should be interpreted?

How is this different from random make believe?

Well, the narrative of the Garden, the possible description of creation of Job 38, as well as how the scriptures speak of Heavenly Messengers (angels), and of course God's qualities (power, knowing the end from the beginning, etc.), lead me to conclude that there was likely something of significance that prompted man's creation. 

This conclusion is simply one man's opinion based on the factors listed above and thus of course could be wrong.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #19 on: August 16, 2011, 11:16:40 AM »
You mean you're going to arbitrarily make something up in the complete absence of all information in order to suppose a new condition to rationalize a presupposed notion of how it should be interpreted?

How is this different from random make believe?

Well, the narrative of the Garden,

Ok, so we're at genesis and then we are going to jump too:

Quote
the possible description of creation of Job 38

A completely different book, why would we ever do that?

Quote
,  lead me to conclude

Be more specific.  Why would we ever bother to go to a different text in the first place?

Unless of course.. we've already imposed a presuppositional about an underlying message, without any supportive logical reason to do so and are rationalizing everything towards that presupposition.

Noticed what I asked you:

How is this different from random make believe?

Quote
This conclusion is simply one man's opinion based on the factors listed above and thus of course could be wrong.

None of it logically follows without presupposing conditions for which to do so in the first place.

So again, how is this different from random make believe?

Also, using the same process, could I do this with any text and for any presupposed condition?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Truth OT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1452
  • Darwins +88/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #20 on: August 16, 2011, 11:40:57 AM »
What kind of a God would plan on man's disobedience, only to have to send his only son to die on the cross later?
 Also, why would God "need" anything to happen? Isn't he supposedly omnipotent? I am not trying to be rude, but your musings with regard to a "backstory" sound rather vague to me. Care to elaborate?

CG, I honestly do not know, nor do I fully understand the "whys" of it all.

What I do recognize is that man (at least according to scripture) plays a huge role in not only in our world but also in that of "higher beings." That factor leads me to believe that perhaps our creation was influenced by and in response to those beings in some way.

As far as Jesus' death is concerned, I found the following passage to be of some interest
 as it relates to the subject we are discussing.

Quote
Colossians 1:
19 [God] saw that it was good for him to be complete in everything, 20 and used [Jesus] to bring everything back into a good relationship with Himself, by making peace through his blood [that was shed] on the pole, regardless of whether these things are heavenly or earthly.

Offline Truth OT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1452
  • Darwins +88/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian apologetics
« Reply #21 on: August 16, 2011, 11:51:38 AM »
The reason I jumped from Genesis to Job is because both discuss the world's creation. Anyone reading the texts will see that both Genesis 1 & 2 along with a portion of Job 38 describe God's creative activity, so to say: "you arbitrarily make something up in the complete absence of all information in order to suppose a new condition" is not exactly correct.

As far as the conclusion I advocate though admitting it could be wrong being based on presupposition; I beg to differ. I reached the conclusion I did because of the circumstances of the written account.

Offline curiousgirl

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
  • Darwins +22/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Inquisitive agnostic atheist
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #22 on: August 16, 2011, 11:54:23 AM »
What kind of a God would plan on man's disobedience, only to have to send his only son to die on the cross later?
 Also, why would God "need" anything to happen? Isn't he supposedly omnipotent? I am not trying to be rude, but your musings with regard to a "backstory" sound rather vague to me. Care to elaborate?

CG, I honestly do not know, nor do I fully understand the "whys" of it all.



Well, thank you for at least admitting that you do not know, rather than trying to cram some illogical argument down my throat.  However, my questions regarding "God's plan" still stand for anyone who wants to attempt to answer them. I mean, look at this:

Quote
Genesis 6:
6 The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. (NIV)

What kind of omnipotent, omniscient God would create creatures that are flawed, and as a result grieve himself? Don't you think he could have done a little better?
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."-Carl Sagan

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Questions for Christian apologetics
« Reply #23 on: August 16, 2011, 12:09:02 PM »
The reason I jumped from Genesis to Job is because both discuss the world's creation.

Only in the vaguest sense, that one text describes genesis as a literal event ( genesis ) and the other is god listing off various things god created.  Its laced with poetic metaphors that do not have the same literal context of the presentation of genesis itself.  Its only purpose is self serving rhetoric to gods own ability.

This also doesn't explain WHY you would even bother to move between the two text genesis, or in the vague sense such as this, is talked about elsewhere.

Quote
Anyone reading the texts will see that both Genesis 1 & 2 along with a portion of Job 38 describe God's creative activity

That isn't the problem.

The problem is why is it invoked at all?

Why don't you explain it step by step, why its invoked, how you reached the conclusions you reached?

Quote
so to say: "you arbitrarily make something up in the complete absence of all information in order to suppose a new condition" is not exactly correct.

Is not only the correct summary, but the method of apologia your practicing is used in every single religion on earth.  I can pick up anything I want and read it in the exact same manner, reaching completely contradictory beliefs.. because its only requirement is that I make it up as I go.

Quote
As far as the conclusion I advocate though admitting it could be wrong being based on presupposition; I beg to differ. I reached the conclusion I did because of the circumstances of the written account.

What circumstances? Where? When? How?

You cited nothing other then your own vague conclusions then avoided explaining why one would ever do it in the first place, where is this magical answer you seem to have that is absent in this thread?

Again, how is this different from random make believe?

If I can cite anything I wish, whenever it serves my purpose to do so, without explanation and for the tacit reason to rationalizing towards an assumption I've presupposed without explanation..how would I ever tell someone doing that from someone else just randomly making up everything they conclude?

How could there be any contradiction, when you can make up not only the presupposition but the context of material on a whim in order to appease that presupposition?
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 12:13:59 PM by Omen »
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Penman

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #24 on: August 16, 2011, 12:15:31 PM »
If he were interested in genuine love, he would make it clear that he existed in the first place.  You cannot love someone you do not believe exists.

Rubbish.  Until they ate of the fruit, they had no concept of good or evil.  They could make no moral choice whether to obey god or not.

Clarity of God's existence is subjective. I find evidence for God in Biblical writings, personal experience, the creation of all things around us, and so forth. What you mean to say here is that if He was interested in genuine love, He would make it clear according to your requirements so that you personally can be satisfied. For some, there is no amount of proof that will ever be enough, for others, very little is required. Then there are those in between. You'll have to decide what amount of evidence is satisfactory and understand that there will always be an element of faith involved.

They had no knowledge of good and evil experiencially and from the acute understanding that God posesses. However, God does tell them that by eating the fruit they will surely die. There's no reason to assume (unless you're an atheist interjecting opinion in order to frame an argument) Adam and Eve aren't intelligent, rational human beings. Just because they didn't understand the knowledge of good and evil from God's point of view does not mean they were completely ignorant of it altogether. God makes it clear later in Genesis 3:22 that man had become like God in his knowledge of good and evil. When God explains to them not to eat of it because they will die, death had not existed yet. We have to assume based on what God told them that there was much more discussion and conversation involved than simply what is recorded in the Genesis account. Operating under this assumption and the fact that we are made in God's image, there is no reason to believe Adam and Eve were two completely ignorant fools who had no clue they were disobeying God and that severe consequences awaited them if they did.


Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #25 on: August 16, 2011, 12:25:11 PM »
Clarity of God's existence is subjective.

Agreed, it is as if it is inseparable from random make believe.

Quote
I find evidence for God in Biblical writings, personal experience, the creation of all things around us, and so forth.

All of which consists of circular fallacies, but since you admit that the only context to be understood is that which is inseparable from make believe it doesn't really matter does it?

Quote
What you mean to say here is that if He was interested in genuine love, He would make it clear according to your requirements

Logic's requirements.  Anfauglir was quite clear:

You cannot love someone you do not believe exists.

How do I love a marflarg?  What's a marflarg you say? No clue, it doesn't exist.  I'm just going to insist that it does and that it wants your love, without explanation and expect to be taken seriously.

Quote
For some, there is no amount of proof that will ever be enough,

Zero proof is not convincing enough, but for some zero proof is convincing enough.

Quote
for others, very little is required. Then there are those in between. You'll have to decide what amount of evidence is satisfactory and understand that there will always be an element of faith involved.

There is only faith involved and nothing else, well that is.. besides poor education and intellect.

Quote
They had no knowledge of good and evil

Correct.

Quote
experiencially

Incorrect.  This is what you're trying to insert as your arbitrary rationalization.  It doesn't say this, doesn't lend itself to this conclusion, and absolutely no reason is submitted to explain why one would ever bother.  If you're on your way to be a theologian you already have magnificent start on rationalizing towards presuppositional apologetics.  It doesn't take much really, just arrogance and intellectual dishonesty.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Penman

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #26 on: August 16, 2011, 12:27:11 PM »
If forcing my child to obey me in a potentially fatal situation negates their ability to choose, then I would negate their ability to choose. I would rather have them alive and well, which is more loving to me than letting them destroy themselves. Also, I don't accept your premise that Adam and Eve fully understood the implications of the choice because that implies that they already knew right from wrong, and that they should be punished for picking the wrong choice. How could that be the case if they had not eaten from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil yet? How could they possibly know if they could trust God when God was letting Satan lie to them and they had no past experience with which to interpret who was telling the truth?

First, the example you supplied was touching the stove. Touching the stove is not fatal. If a child was about to fatally hurt themself, than of course a good parent will intervene as parents are entrusted with keeping the child safe. Would you be doing your child a favor or disservice if you completely protected them from all physical and emotional harm throughout their life until they reached adulthood? Why or why not? If not, what would you allow to harm them and how do you decide?

Please see my response to Anfauglir about the knowledge of good and evil. Again, Adam and Eve are intelligent, rational beings who  had a personal relationship with God in the garden of Eden. They had plenty of experience and understanding to know who to trust and who would tell them the truth.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #27 on: August 16, 2011, 12:28:32 PM »
First, the example you supplied was touching the stove. Touching the stove is not fatal.

You will allow a child to come to harm by its own actions as long as its not fatal?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Truth OT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1452
  • Darwins +88/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Questions for Christian appologetics
« Reply #28 on: August 16, 2011, 12:29:19 PM »
Quote
Genesis 6:
6 The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. (NIV)

What kind of omnipotent, omniscient God would create creatures that are flawed, and as a result grieve himself? Don't you think he could have done a little better?

This passages along with others that speak of God searching and learning lead me to believe that the God depicted by the scriptures is not in fact the "omni-everything" God thought of by religionists and atheists alike. The idea that God is omnipotent may in fact be lacking in scripture.

My bad, I said omnipotent when I should have said omniscient.

As I have said before, I'll repeat here. In scripture we are given a God that we are told will have His ultimate will accomplished (we are not given the specifics as to what that is so we speculate). We are told that He knows the end (or ultimate outcome) and has known it from the beginning. For the most part since man's creation we have been left to our own devices, however God does intervene from time to time for apparently but a few reasons which are: a.) To insure that His ultimate will is accomplished, b.) in response to the fervent prayers to Him, and c.) To carry out acts of judgment.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 12:53:45 PM by Truth OT »