Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what

03-11-2009 , 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
#1 That "the Bible is inerrant" is an illogical conclusion.

#2 That many of the claims the Bible makes (e.g. God cannot do evil things) are based on illogical conclusions.

#3 To say "atheists do the same thing" is stupid. Non-believers are free to change their minds in light of new information. They always have and always will. Believers don't have that same freedom. They've maintained conclusions like the ones listed above for thousands of years, and MUST continue to do so in order to maintain their faith.
you're right. except #3 is not right. please tell me who is doing this and i will stop them. i want names.
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-11-2009 , 11:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by excellent!
you're right. except #3 is not right. please tell me who is doing this and i will stop them. i want names.
Names? LOL. How about almost every Christian in this forum for starters.

If you don't hold the premise that the Bible is inerrant, there comes a point when you're not even considered a Christian anymore. Your loose definition of "Christianity" does nothing to clarify what is meant by belief. I believe certain parts of the Bible are true. What does that make me?

And that's just the example of inerrancy. What about God being omnibenevolent? If you feel God is capable of evil, can you even call yourself a Christian at all?
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-11-2009 , 11:14 PM
Quote:
"Inerrancy cannot be trusted. Errors can only be corrected if they are first recognized and admitted. Inerrancy makes that impossible. Therefore, errors in an inerrant interpretation of the Bible can never be fixed."
First off it depends on what you mean by inerrancy. Secondly it depends on what it is that you are referring to as inerrant.
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-11-2009 , 11:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
Names? LOL. How about almost every Christian in this forum for starters.

If you don't hold the premise that the Bible is inerrant, there comes a point when you're not even considered a Christian anymore. Your loose definition of "Christianity" does nothing to clarify what is meant by belief. I believe certain parts of the Bible are true. What does that make me?

And that's just the example of inerrancy. What about God being omnibenevolent? If you feel God is capable of evil, can you even call yourself a Christian at all?
the bible is a book of faith. what is written in the bible was written by humans, but with divine inspiration. it is very simple to be a believer in the new covenant(what the world calls Christianity). you have to believe that salvation is thru Jesus. but believing by itself is not enough. you have to prove your faith and beliefs by your actions.
any person that tries to describe God as evil or kind is arrogant, and severely overvalues their importance. God is not a human. God is greater than anything you can imagine, but people want to try to humanize him. worshiping a humanized God would be like worshipping a monarch.
i have never thought of God as good or evil.
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-12-2009 , 12:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by excellent!
the bible is a book of faith. what is written in the bible was written by humans, but with divine inspiration. it is very simple to be a believer in the new covenant(what the world calls Christianity). you have to believe that salvation is thru Jesus. but believing by itself is not enough. you have to prove your faith and beliefs by your actions.
any person that tries to describe God as evil or kind is arrogant, and severely overvalues their importance. God is not a human. God is greater than anything you can imagine, but people want to try to humanize him. worshiping a humanized God would be like worshipping a monarch.
i have never thought of God as good or evil.
lol at god being greater than anything humans can imagine when humans imagined him
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-12-2009 , 01:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by excellent!
but believing by itself is not enough. you have to prove your faith and beliefs by your actions.
This is something I never understood. It seems to me that actions are only good for proving yourself to other humans. The god you describe would see right through actions and only care about your thoughts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by excellent!
any person that tries to describe God as evil or kind is arrogant, and severely overvalues their importance. God is not a human.
Now isn't this convenient for preserving God's omnibenevolence. You spent all that time trying to show why my #3 point was invalid, and now you just strengthened it! If God were indeed evil in any way, how do you suggest we'd ever go about knowing it? You just asserted that trying to find out is wrong. Annnnd, we're back to the ill logic in points #1 & #2.

Quote:
Originally Posted by excellent!
God is greater than anything you can imagine, but people want to try to humanize him. worshiping a humanized God would be like worshipping a monarch.
i have never thought of God as good or evil.
Have you ever thought about the reason why you worship God? Do you even know? If there were no threat of damnation or promise of eternal bliss, would you still worship?
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-12-2009 , 03:17 PM
Assume is the problem word here.
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-12-2009 , 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
This will probably be my last attempt to drive the point home:

In what areas of life is it correct to first draw a conclusion and then defend your conclusion unconditionally?

Notice that I'm not asking where humans do this. I'm merely asking where you feel it's correct to do this.
Mathamatics...

Some problems are solved by asumming a solution first then preforming an iterative process.
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-13-2009 , 12:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
This is something I never understood. It seems to me that actions are only good for proving yourself to other humans. The god you describe would see right through actions and only care about your thoughts.
we all have free will and we all change our minds relative to our experiences. what you believed 10 years ago is not what you necessarily believe now. we also encounter issues that test our generosity, kindness and faith. how can you know if someone truly has faith unless it has been tested. with freewill, in the last moment you can cave in and lose it all.

[/QUOTE]Now isn't this convenient for preserving God's omnibenevolence. You spent all that time trying to show why my #3 point was invalid, and now you just strengthened it! If God were indeed evil in any way, how do you suggest we'd ever go about knowing it? You just asserted that trying to find out is wrong. Annnnd, we're back to the ill logic in points #1 & #2.[/QUOTE]


your morals are relative to your upbringing and culture. God is outside of these things. the definition of good and evil must have an origin. and that origin is God.



[/QUOTE]Have you ever thought about the reason why you worship God? Do you even know? If there were no threat of damnation or promise of eternal bliss, would you still worship?[/QUOTE]


im am luckier than most because i have seen proof of God. while i had forgotten my childhood i still believed in a God. but my faith was put on the back burner. when i remembered what i had seen when i was a child, i realized i had already seen proof of God. something that most people will never see in the entire lives.

im am lucky because i have seen, so my faith is easy to maintain. those that haven't seen or experienced God or the Holy Spirit have it much harder. i am 100% certain there is a God.
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote
03-13-2009 , 03:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
Steve, do you feel you constitute the majority of theists?
This is sort of a strange question for me to answer because I agree with theists on a lot of things. However, my answer is that I probably don't.

Quote:
Do you feel the non-believer that doesn't change their mind in light of new information constitutes the majority of non-believers?
Yes. I believe this because I strongly believe that human beings are irrational. Since I believe that humans are irrational, it's only natural for me to believe that Christians (and of course non-Christians) are irrational.
STEP 1: Assume a conclusion STEP 2: Defend your conclusion no matter what Quote

      
m