Rational Proofs

Originally posted by KellyJay
God if He didn't want faith would simply reveal
Himself and that would be that, but for whatever reason He choices
not to.

I would agree with what you said except with this statement. If you notice in stories in the Bible, God did reveal himself as plainly as the nose on your face. Adam and Eve come to mind as well as the children of Israel as they witnessed miracles such as the parting of the Red Sea and manna coming from heaven ect. However, they did loose faith. Why? I think this is the lesson we need to learn in this life before we can then live to see our next life. Creation, no matter where or who you are and no matter if you have a "sin nature" or not, will always have to live by faith. This is because only God has the "big picture" and sees all and knows all. We, therefore, must place our faith in him at times to make up for our blind spots, so to speak.

Originally posted by whodey
I would agree with what you said except with this statement. If you notice in stories in the Bible, God did reveal himself as plainly as the nose on your face. Adam and Eve come to mind as well as the children of Israel as they witnessed miracles such as the parting of the Red Sea and manna coming from heaven ect. However, they did loose faith. Why? I th ...[text shortened]... therefore, must place our faith in him at times to make up for our blind spots, so to speak.

I believe we are in agreement, even the statement you quoted where
God reveals Himself. God being the great I AM means to me as I
grapple with that statement that God is ‘reality’ We as the scripture
teaches live our lives viewing life as it were through a glass darkly.
We make our choices; we can due to our desires make it up as we go
to suit ourselves, and what we do and say basically reveals ourselves
for what we are. I do not think with God as an unshakeable reality
would we actually do that, nor would repentance be real too, as people
slow down when they see the traffic cop would as soon as the traffic
cop is believed to be gone, speed back up. Someone who is in deed
really sorry would repent and not speed thinking the cop is there or
not.
Kelly

Originally posted by lucifershammer
If there are certain cases where "standard" evolutionary theory does not appear to work, then I think those should be called out. That's not attempting to discredit evolution - that's good science.

Any examples? I'm sure we can solve it for you!

Originally posted by twhitehead
So how do you explain the whole Inteligent Design movement and the amount of effort and money that goes into trying to discredit evolution?

Couldn't agree more, to be blunt. I'd say that most of that camp are very sincere. Good thing for us, God neither credits nor debits us for sincerity! I am personally appalled at the politics involved by both sides of the 'debate,' but more so by the ID-er's.

If most ID-er's weren't people of faith, it wouldn't be so bad. But when Christians choose to fight worldly fights utilizing wordly weapons, and moreover, choosing to do so over and against waging the true spiritual battle, it is stultifying.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Couldn't agree more, to be blunt. I'd say that most of that camp are very sincere. Good thing for us, God neither credits nor debits us for sincerity! I am personally appalled at the politics involved by both sides of the 'debate,' but more so by the ID-er's.

Although you don't usually like theory of evolution and the concept of natural selection ('It can't be a force'😉, I'm glad you appreciate the frustrations of many scientists who perceive the whole debate as politically motivated. Personnally, I would relish just one debate where the stakes weren't so high as God's existence.

🙂

Originally posted by Conrau K
Although you don't usually like theory of evolution and the concept of natural selection ('It can't be a force'😉, I'm glad you appreciate the frustrations of many scientists who perceive the whole debate as politically motivated. Personnally, I would relish just one debate where the stakes weren't so high as God's existence.

🙂

Dogma's a killer, but dogma is what it is. We just have to determine what that it is.

The it-can't-be-a-force argument is more simple (and profound) than what may appear on the surface. It's one of those things that has to sink in; requires germination and rumination before it yields fruit. But it will yield fruit, given the light of day.

It is evident from the vehemenence on both sides that there is more fear in letting go than exists in embracing the replacement.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Couldn't agree more, to be blunt. I'd say that most of that camp are very sincere. Good thing for us, God neither credits nor debits us for sincerity! I am personally appalled at the politics involved by both sides of the 'debate,' but more so by the ID-er's.

If most ID-er's weren't people of faith, it wouldn't be so bad. But when Christians choos ...[text shortened]... choosing to do so over and against waging the true spiritual battle, it is stultifying.

I could'nt agree more and almost posted the same response.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Couldn't agree more, to be blunt. I'd say that most of that camp are very sincere. Good thing for us, God neither credits nor debits us for sincerity! I am personally appalled at the politics involved by both sides of the 'debate,' but more so by the ID-er's.

If most ID-er's weren't people of faith, it wouldn't be so bad. But when Christians choos ...[text shortened]... choosing to do so over and against waging the true spiritual battle, it is stultifying.

But when Christians choose to fight worldly fights utilizing wordly(sic??) weapons, and moreover, choosing to do so over and against waging the true spiritual battle, it is stultifying.

If you are saying science is a "worldly weapon", I couldn't disagree with you more. Johannes Kepler, one of the great "founding fathers" in astronomy and mathematics supported his pursuit by saying: "I'm thinking God's thoughts after him".

Francis Bacon (died from a cold caught while stuffing a chicken with snow in an experiment with refrigeration), who laid the groundwork for the scientific method was also a committed Christian whose underlying philosophy of a created order qualified his inductive method of experimentation.

IMO science and Christianity are perfectly compatible.

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]But when Christians choose to fight worldly fights utilizing wordly(sic??) weapons, and moreover, choosing to do so over and against waging the true spiritual battle, it is stultifying.

If you are saying science is a "worldly weapon", I couldn't disagree with you more. Johannes Kepler, one of the great "founding fathers" in astronomy and mathemati ...[text shortened]... e method of experimentation.

IMO science and Christianity are perfectly compatible.[/b]

Only if you understand Christ's message. IMHO

Originally posted by whodey
How about a rational proof for abiogenesis on how life came from nonlife or a proof showing how the Big Bang came from nothing. I think the proof would look something like this, 0=0.q

It is not true (I can prove it.) that the options "your god created everything" and abiogenesis does not even come close to exhausting the entire set of possibilities for how life came to be (or "your god created everything" and the Big Bang for how matter came to be as it is in the universe). In fact, "your God did it" is just one of an infinitely countable set of supernatural possibilities. Therefore, even if one could construct a rational proof that both abiogenesis did not occur and the Big Bang did not occur, it essentially gets you no nearer to proof of your god. Consequently, your question, while perhaps a worthwhile inquiry in its own right, has no bearing on the topic of this thread.

Originally posted by 7ate9
** ON THE BUS **

When i was about 11-12 years old, i spent 4 years of my schooling at a private christian school. It's called "the ace system", which comes from America. There are a few of these schools set up around New Zealand. I think this American system has a lot of good points about it, as one can work at their own level of intellect.

From time t ...[text shortened]... o emerge. It was so funny cause he ended up with one of the biggest smiles you ever see.

I bet you most people really didn't care one way or the other about the sign. I know I wouldn't.

Selection bias [and typical xian hyperbole (I saw a lot of that on the mission field)] probably caused you to notice the cases where people responded far more often than the no-response cases. Selection bias can happen in all sorts of cases (especially in anecdotes).

One person's "rationality" is another person's crackpot religion.

Think it over.

-JC

Originally posted by Halitose
But when Christians choose to fight worldly fights utilizing wordly(sic??) weapons, and moreover, choosing to do so over and against waging the true spiritual battle, it is stultifying.

If you are saying science is a "worldly weapon", I couldn't disagree with you more. Johannes Kepler, one of the great "founding fathers" in astronomy and mathematics e method of experimentation.

IMO science and Christianity are perfectly compatible.[/b]

If you are saying science is a "worldly weapon", I couldn't disagree with you more.
I was attempting to say 'worldly,' but there was a temporary shortage of l's. Thankfully, the market has corrected itself and everything is back to norma.

Nonetheless, I did not mean to intimate that physical science is the weapon lacking in spiritual impact. While PS and all other branches of science are lesser fields, a great deal can be gleaned from them. My critique is leveled at the battles Christians choose.

For instance, the vocal majority of Christians are more concerned with making those around them artificially conform to their image than they are in doing what they have been commanded, i.e., grow in grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

It has been said that science is a new religion and there are many similarities which support that stance. In our missionary efforts, we are to be equipped to provide the authentic truth for the purpose of comparison. However, that same vocal majority of Christians takes off on a plethora of red herring issues, vainly striving for the imitation of spirituality instead of simply giving people the truth.

By way of two examples--- and without attempting to start another debate--- abortion and homosexuality are current hot topics. To hear some Christians say it, if these two issues could be resolved to their satisfaction, somehow the world would be a better place. And yet what a contradiction to what the Lord Jesus Christ taught: He specifically said to abstain from whitewashing the devil's world.

I don't take His admonition to mean let the world go to hell in a handbasket, but He certainly was warning us from getting caught up in the trap of thinking that it's all about what happens here.

What many ID-er's are attempting to do is to work in a political manner in order to achieve a supposed spiritual goal, as though their exists some judge, some earthly panel that will be the final ruling for their just cause and they will 'win.'

Hardly the stuff of 'wise as serpents, as innocents as doves,' in my opinion.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]Why do you think there is no logic for their bother? (bother?)
I used 'bother' because it seems to most fit for the activities that said atheists/agnostics busy themselves with in this forum, and (it can be assumed from the posts) in their lives.

Why make a claim if there is nothing to make a claim about? If, in the course of a conversation, so ...[text shortened]... whether you are being amusingly sarcastic, or deluded and arrogant.[/b]
You and me both.[/b]

What if you were surrounded by FSM promoters, and FSM worship buildings were on nearly every street corner? What if the FSM worshippers had lots of money and political connections and lobbied hard to alter your country's government to submit to their FSM religious code? What if everytime you had a discussion about life FSM-botherers would interject with asinine professions of faith to the FSM.

I think the FSM does not bother you because it is not ubiquitous in your daily life and because it is an obvious parody. In the US, xianity is nearly everywhere and a substantial number of it's fervent believers are active evangelizers.

Over the past couple years, I've come to accept this about America and choose my battles now accordingly. I will fight "Jesus Freaks" to protect my country, but if some crazy tells me that the global flood really happened 4000 years ago or that plants were created by an invisible ghost one day before the sun, then I'll usually just snicker and walk away (outside of the internet of course).

Originally posted by telerion
What if you were surrounded by FSM promoters, and FSM worship buildings were on nearly every street corner? What if the FSM worshippers had lots of money and political connections and lobbied hard to alter your country's government to submit to their FSM religious code? What if everytime you had a discussion about life FSM-botherers would interject with a ...[text shortened]... the sun, then I'll usually just snicker and walk away (outside of the internet of course).

What if you were surrounded by FSM promoters, and FSM worship buildings were on nearly every street corner?
In a sense, Christianity has lost civilization already, and the situation you describe is in full swing. For instance, as in my post regarding worldly weapons, the vocal majority of Christianity has it so wrong that it hurts. When I see the crap that's on TBN and the sewage that comes from other media sources, all purporting to be the truth about (and this part is supposed to be said in breathless rapture) "Gee-zus," it makes me want to puke.

Even in the churches today, it's all about how "Gawd" makes us feel, and how much we "love you, Gee-zus," again, all in breathless whispers of supposed adoration. Vomit.

And that doesn't even speak to the rest of the politically-minded garbage that's being spewed from sources supposedly un-spiritual. By way of example, there is much dissention in the evolution camp, but the dissenters are immediately written off as wingnuts, regardless of their bodies of work and their previous contributions.

Or how about my government's ongoing assault on it's citizenry, playing on our sense of patriotic duty and civil obligations, all the while eschewing the very principles upon which we stand?

It ain't about truth, it's about control. To answer your question, only a fool fails to see the machinations and manipulations. I, for one, am no Don Quixote. I attempt to stay within the boundaries of battle that I see as being laid out for me, giving my efforts to the right causes. I don't always succeed, either in the effort or in the restraint. But, I have learned that not all battles can be won, nor should they be fought.