Christian Arguments for God’s Existence - Refutations
-
Amituofo! Happy Vesak Day!
-
Here is a new book that refutes Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion and effectively dismantles the arguments of the new atheists. It is freely downloadable as a PDF file at the present time. I urge resident atheists here to take up the challenge to respond to this book. Click here http://thedawkinsproof.com/TheDawkinsProof.pdf
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
EXCEPT that you are merely begging the question here to claim that the Bible is silly.
BIC
I thinnk (and most logical people will) if people take unicorns, dragons, and talking animals and magic as literal truths, then its quite silly.
Even catholics (who are also christians) dont take these things literally.
But you do, well maybe selectively.
So arent you making the bible look silly by taking these things literally/
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC
I thinnk (and most logical people will) if people take unicorns, dragons, and talking animals and magic as literal truths, then its quite silly.
Even catholics (who are also christians) dont take these things literally.
But you do, well maybe selectively.
So arent you making the bible look silly by taking these things literally/
Should the fear of being branded "silly" be a factor when it comes to matters of truth?
Either what the Bible says is true or it is not. Whether people think it is silly or not is irrelevant. In any case, what you are doing is distorting the Bible and not treating it with respect and with fairness. For example, you think dragons are just myths, but creationists believe that is simply one of the words used BEFORE the word "dinosaur" was invented in 1841 by Sir Richard Owen. I doubt you knew this, right?
But here's the fact, the Bible always have the habbit of being right after all. You would have think that the Bible was silly in stating that time, space and matter had a beginning. But with modern discoveries we know the Bible is right, and those who think the Bible was silly and believed in an eternal universe proved to be fools themselves.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Should the fear of being branded "silly" be a factor when it comes to matters of truth?
Either what the Bible says is true or it is not. Whether people think it is silly or not is irrelevant. In any case, what you are doing is distorting the Bible and not treating it with respect and with fairness. For example, you think dragons are just myths, but creationists believe that is simply one of the words used BEFORE the word "dinosaur" was invented in 1841 by Sir Richard Owen. I doubt you knew this, right?
But here's the fact, the Bible always have the habbit of being right after all. You would have think that the Bible was silly in stating that time, space and matter had a beginning. But with modern discoveries we know the Bible is right, and those who think the Bible was silly and believed in an eternal universe proved to be fools themselves.
BIC,
Yes yes, certain things are silly. Like if i expect my pet kitten to talk to me today just because i wished for it, thats silly!
Or if I expect a fairygodmother to talk to me, when i cant even see her or detect her, then i am silly!
Or like if i know my gf will never come back and i still wait for her everyday outside her house, thats silly!
There ARE silly things in life.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC,
Yes yes, certain things are silly. Like if i expect my pet kitten to talk to me today just because i wished for it, thats silly!
Or if I expect a fairygodmother to talk to me, when i cant even see her or detect her, then i am silly!
Or like if i know my gf will never come back and i still wait for her everyday outside her house, thats silly!
There ARE silly things in life.
Yes, you are indeed silly to expect your cat to talk to you just because you wished for it.
BUT no Christian is expecting their pets to talk to them anytime. Neither does the Bible teach us that we live in Narnia world. So get a grip on reality. The Bible only recorded two incidents of animals talking to man and both involved supernatural intervention, and you wanna make it into a normal part of life? See how again your FRAUDLENT claim of being a Christian is exposed again?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Yes, you are indeed silly to expect your cat to talk to you just because you wished for it.
BUT no Christian is expecting their pets to talk to them anytime. Neither does the Bible teach us that we live in Narnia world. So get a grip on reality. The Bible only recorded two incidents of animals talking to man and both involved supernatural intervention, and you wanna make it into a normal part of life? See how again your FRAUDLENT claim of being a Christian is exposed again?
BIC,
Talking animals isnt silly? Are you sure?
Scientifically speaking, animals cannot speak the human language. But well, of course you will argue that but "god" anything is possible.
Then when i ask you if god can cure all hiv people, you come up with all kinds of silly excuses!
See your double standards?
Oh "god has his plans and he chooses what to do".
Sure. DOnt you think you are always trying to explain for your god?
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC,
Talking animals isnt silly? Are you sure?
Scientifically speaking, animals cannot speak the human language. But well, of course you will argue that but "god" anything is possible.
Then when i ask you if god can cure all hiv people, you come up with all kinds of silly excuses!
See your double standards?
Oh "god has his plans and he chooses what to do".
Sure. DOnt you think you are always trying to explain for your god?
EXPECTING animals to talk is certainly silly. But give me a Bible teaching that supports such an expectation. Or that Bible characters have a habit of actually having a mutual intelligible conversation with an animal as though it is normal.
Of course I can say that "God did it", or "the devil did it" as in the case of the serpent in Eden, because this answer is ALLOWED under the Biblical world view. I am not at all being inconsistent or contrary to the Biblical worldview. You are just saying it is silly because you dismiss the Bible flat out.
Can God cure all HIV people? Of course God can. He is God mah! But again the Biblical worldview allows the answer that this is a fallen world, and many people are suffering the consequences of their own rebellion. A man reaps what he sows. Furthermore the Bible did not teach that in this fallen and cursed world God will heal everyone of any sickness in their life, regardless of whether they are Christians or not. Sickness and death comes upon all. It is by God's grace that some people are healed. And even if God chooses not to heal for reasons only He knows, what is that to you? Consider God's servant, Job. So you see, I am not making any excuses at all.
Why are you so upset that I would speak up for God? The apostles command us to contend for the faith. God chooses to use human vessels to preach the Good News and to defend it when required. With some common sense and Bible knowledge I believe it is more than adequate to refute your objections.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
EXPECTING animals to talk is certainly silly. But give me a Bible teaching that supports such an expectation. Or that Bible characters have a habit of actually having a mutual intelligible conversation with an animal as though it is normal.
Of course I can say that "God did it", or "the devil did it" as in the case of the serpent in Eden, because this answer is ALLOWED under the Biblical world view. I am not at all being inconsistent or contrary to the Biblical worldview. You are just saying it is silly because you dismiss the Bible flat out.
Can God cure all HIV people? Of course God can. He is God mah! But again the Biblical worldview allows the answer that this is a fallen world, and many people are suffering the consequences of their own rebellion. A man reaps what he sows. Furthermore the Bible did not teach that in this fallen and cursed world God will heal everyone of any sickness in their life, regardless of whether they are Christians or not. Sickness and death comes upon all. It is by God's grace that some people are healed. And even if God chooses not to heal for reasons only He knows, what is that to you? Consider God's servant, Job. So you see, I am not making any excuses at all.
Why are you so upset that I would speak up for God? The apostles command us to contend for the faith. God chooses to use human vessels to preach the Good News and to defend it when required. With some common sense and Bible knowledge I believe it is more than adequate to refute your objections.
Lol. Cant he speak for himself?
"Oh he can of course he can, but he chooses not to" OR "Oh yes, you just got to pray":
Lol. Seems like alot of reasons for a supposedly all-powerful god whos everywhere.
-
A CEO can also speak for himself but he usually gets his secretary or managers do the toking.
-
Originally posted by despondent:
A CEO can also speak for himself but he usually gets his secretary or managers do the toking.
A typical CEO gets people to do the talking because he's too busy, or he's not a very "on the ground person". Are you saying your god is also too busy or that hes not a very "on the ground person"?
A good CEO is one who is with the people on the ground, as much as he can, while still doing the things he's supposed to.
Are you telling me that he was on the ground once 2000 years ago, and thats sufficient?
-
Haha. It's ok, u r taking it literally again? Nvm
-
Originally posted by despondent:
Haha. It's ok, u r taking it literally again? Nvm
despondent
I am not taking it literally.
But if you use an ANALOGY, people are supposed to compare.
You mean you didnt know that?
I am just trying to tell you: You used a bad analogy to describe your god.
-
BIC,
What say u? U agree its a poor analogy?
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
Lol. Cant he speak for himself?
"Oh he can of course he can, but he chooses not to" OR "Oh yes, you just got to pray":
Lol. Seems like alot of reasons for a supposedly all-powerful god whos everywhere.
It is God's prerogative how He chooses to communicate His message or who He chooses to use. And like it or not, God has chosen to communicate primarily through His Word, the Bible. And He has also commanded us to preach and teach His Word which It is sufficient to address all our needs and useful for teaching and equipping (See 2 Tim 3:16). Of course you can refuse to accept a perfectly reasonable and Biblical answer.
-
Originally posted by despondent:
BIC,
What say u? U agree its a poor analogy?
I don't think the CEO analogy is flawed.
Tcmc failed to note that you were only trying to make the point that the CEO can speak through those below him. When she tries to stetch the analogy too far it becomes absurd. But then again, most of her points are pretty much bordering on absurdity.
In any case all analogies to God are always limited so care must be taken not to press the analogy too far beyond what it was just intended to convey.
-
BIC,
its interesting i didnt have to explain further and u knew wad i was saying...:)
-
but then again, i understand how atheists consider if evidence is good/sound enuff...Tcmc is not alone in accepting analogies to be relevant only if they are exactly or very close to the actual issue that is being proven...
so while i was juz trying to make a single point, tcmc will require all other attributes of the CEO to be equal/close to God before the analogy can be accepted...
-
Originally posted by despondent:
BIC,
its interesting i didnt have to explain further and u knew wad i was saying...:)
It's basic common sense really. Scientists use analogies all the time. Most of us also use analogies when we try to explain more difficult things in a simple way. But that's just helping the hearers to easier grasp a point we are making. We know that the analogies are less than perfect to capture the full picture, but they are helpful in limited ways. Of course, using the appropriate analogy also goes a long way.
-
i tink natural analogies to explain natural things are more effective than natural analogies to explain supernatural things...which is why when explaining the holy trinity, i often use a basket of natural analogies, each explaining one characteristic of the holy trinity...of cuz the analogies shld not be stretched beyond the single point each of them is trying to explain...
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
It is God's prerogative how He chooses to communicate His message or who He chooses to use. And like it or not, God has chosen to communicate primarily through His Word, the Bible. And He has also commanded us to preach and teach His Word which It is sufficient to address all our needs and useful for teaching and equipping (See 2 Tim 3:16). Of course you can refuse to accept a perfectly reasonable and Biblical answer.
He seems to be choosing all the unconvincing ways to speak to people, like through arrogant christians, through a bible that is mostly out of date and filled with errors etc.
-
"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6
God bless you all.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
He seems to be choosing all the unconvincing ways to speak to people, like through arrogant christians, through a bible that is mostly out of date and filled with errors etc.
The meek/timid Christian would be a floor mat for those of your ilk, Tcmc.
Me arrogant? Maybe, but usually when dealing with those of your ilk. For the sincere seeker who genuinely displays a humble spirit desiring to understand, I would gently entertain the most frustrating of questions. Different strokes for different folks, I'd say.
But village atheists who without restraint bash the faith are least qualified to complain about "arrogant Christians". They are just upset that some Christians can take their objections and demolish them, and lacking a comeback argument they go whining about how arrogant or unChristian their opponents are.
In the NT we have Jesus and the apostles occasionally employing sarcasm, wit, riposte and yes, even insults when dealing with certain groups of people. See http://www.tektonics.org/lp/madmad.html
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Here is a new book that refutes Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion and effectively dismantles the arguments of the new atheists. It is freely downloadable as a PDF file at the present time. I urge resident atheists here to take up the challenge to respond to this book.
why do you need even a book to refute that? there are plenty of books out there that reject the creator concept. the bible is full of loopholes and fanciful tales of tall stories. anyone with a common sense will know that it is full of paradox and irrational.
-
Originally posted by Jacky Woo:
why do you need even a book to refute that? there are plenty of books out there that reject the creator concept. the bible is full of loopholes and fanciful tales of tall stories. anyone with a common sense will know that it is full of paradox and irrational.
Truth is, one doesn't need the Bible to demolish atheism. But one needs the Bible to get the right worldview and to provide Biblical answers. Sure there are those who reject God, but that should not be confused with refuting the arguments for God. And you have for the umpteenth time failed to substantiate your polemical assaults on the Bible.