Image via WikipediaBrian Auten has posted an audio lecture by Dr. Alister McGrath based on his book Why God Won't Go Away: Is the New Atheism Running on Empty?
Great stuff!Alister McGrath on Why God Won't Go Away MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315
Friday, June 10, 2011
Alister McGrath on Why God Won't Go Away MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315
Image via WikipediaBrian Auten has posted an audio lecture by Dr. Alister McGrath based on his book Why God Won't Go Away: Is the New Atheism Running on Empty? Great stuff!Alister McGrath on Why God Won't Go Away MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315
Faithful Thinkers: Video: Purpose of Hell
Faithful Thinkers: Video: Purpose of Hell
Christianity Today on Adam and Eve | Bible.org Blogs
Christianity Today on Adam and Eve | Bible.org Blogs
ID.Plus: William Lane Craig, Richard Dawkins and the Empty Chair
The descriptipm on the video from YouTube are also worthy of consideration:
Will Richard Dawkins finally engage in a scholarly one-to-one discussion with William Lane Craig when he visits Oxford? It would appear not, and even some fellow atheists seem to think he's making a big mistake. This is the story, so far, but what will come next?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8511931/Richard-Dawkins-accused-of-c...
http://www.premier.org.uk/craig
http://www.bethinking.org/craig
http://www.reasonablefaith.org
http://www.richarddawkins.net
http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/
Material in this video is incorporated either with permission or under Fair Use for independent, non-profit, educational, illustrative and documentary purposes. Happy to discuss with any parties about potential amendments or crediting. This video voices concerns - shared by both theists and non-theists alike - about impediments to the open exchange of academic thought.
ID.Plus: William Lane Craig, Richard Dawkins and the Empty Chair
God's Gracious Gift to Humanity is the "Capacity of Free Will"
Since you believe that God is all-powerful and all-loving, why does God not cause everyone to be saved?Good question. It's not just for the Arminian but also the Calvinist. Both agree that God is all-powerful and all-loving. I think Calvinism answers this question well, however I don't think Arminian salvific theology does as good a job. Kurschner is correct in writing:
I don't see how this can be argued against.
Instead, the Bible affirms that the human ability to resist God's grace is grounded in our sinful rebellious nature. God's grace effects Man to live righteously---not to provide us some anthropological "neutral will."
Glynn's answer doesn't really answer the question. The Bible is clear that without God we can't choose to love him. We are stuck in our hatred of God. And unable to come to Him on our own.
Glynn finally gets to answering my question: "Because He wants us to make a choice."
His answer demonstrates that the non-Calvinist couches the ultimate reason for their salvation in their own will.
“But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name–he has given the right to become God’s children –children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God.” (John 1:12–13)
Next he writes: "This is the nature of love. If you love someone, do you force them to be with you, or do you want them to want to be with you? Hopefully the latter."
We love God because He first loved us - not because we thought it was a good idea at the time!
5 Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6 The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God. - Romans 8:5-8
44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. - John 6:44
18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. 19 We love because he first loved us. 20 Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen. - 1 John 4: 18-20
I thought that this was a great article and I can't recommend it highly enough.
God's Gracious Gift to Humanity is the "Capacity of Free Will"
My Common Sense in Tingling: Debunking Christianity: God cannot know that he is omniscient
Theists, the world over, claim that God is omniscient. However, this is not an easy claim to make for a whole host of reasons, one of which is worth looking into here. I want to look at the idea that in many instances, you cannot know that you don’t know something. If there is a situation where you cannot know something, then if it is claimed that you are omniscient, this would invalidate that claim.
I'm grateful at least that Johnny P is not claiming that there are no instances where you don't know that you don't know something. His argument that we cannot always know when we don't know something. I think that any honest person would admit that sometimes we are ignorant of our ignorance. This is also why no sane human being would claim to be omniscient because the fact that there are a lot of things we don't know - even to the extent that we don't know that we don't know things - does indeed invalidate any claims to omniscience. I think most agree with this. The Bible agrees. It says we don't even know how to pray as we ought.
26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. -Romans 8:26-30
For example, there could conceivably be something that God does not know. Conceivably, perhaps another dimension run by another God exists that does not coincide at all with this dimension. If one eternal God can exist, why not another in an entirely different dimension and unbeknownst to the first God? Now, it is unimportant as to whether this is possible or not. What is important is that God could not know that he did not know this by the very nature of not knowing it!
Here is where Johnny P's logic falls out of the wagon and gets run over by the weight of Common sense. In order to apply this argument you have prove that there is something that God does not know. Here is what a theist means by "omniscience": What does God know? Everything. When did He know it? There wasn't a time God didn't know everything. One cannot prove that God does not know something when one does not know it either. Hypothesizing other dimensions (parallel and otherwise) is all well and good but we can't prove they exist. And if they do exist, what gives us a reason to assume that the God in this Dimension does not know about them? How do we know that He did not create them just as He created this one?! Here is the key point that Johnny P seems to be missing: "Omniscience" does not just mean knowing everything but also that there is nothing that the one who is omniscient does not know.
Where does this leave God? Well, God is in a situation whereby he cannot know that he knows everything. He might think he knows everything. Epistemologically speaking, though, he cannot know it. There's always a chance he's an experiment in an elaborate lab, programmed to think he's omnipotent and omniscient (yes, God could be plugged into the Matrix and he’d never know it!). There's a chance he's one of a trillion gods in a trillion different universes etc. etc.
Where does this discussion leave God? On the throne. Johnny P's speculation means that he redefines what "omniscient" means by pretending that there is knowledge that is hidden from God. Does he prove that there is something God does not know? No. Can he? No. The reason why we understand that God is the supreme being is because there is no one else higher than God. This "logic" does not apply to the God of the Bible because the god that Johnny P is discussing is not in the Bible and of course does not exist.
It only takes one thing you cannot know to invalidate omniscience. God cannot know that he knows everything.
Agreed that it takes only one thing you cannot know to invalidate omniscience, but Johnny P did not show that God cannot know everything. Arguments like these always amaze me because when people raise them they are tacitly saying "Okay, for the sake of arguments let's say your God exist and see if what the Bible says about Him makes rational sense." Then they talk about a god that isn't in scripture and then prance away thinking they have won an argument - but it was the wrong god. It's interesting that God does deal with the possibility of there being other gods in reality right in the scripture. 9 Remember the former things, those of long ago;
I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me.
10 I make known the end from the beginning,
from ancient times, what is still to come.
I say, ‘My purpose will stand,
and I will do all that I please.’
11 From the east I summon a bird of prey;
from a far-off land, a man to fulfill my purpose.
What I have said, that I will bring about;
what I have planned, that I will do. - Isaiah 46:9-11
So apparently God does know if there are any other gods that exist. And not just that, who is it that is running history and making all thing move towards His predetermined purpose? God.
3 I foretold the former things long ago,Recall that an idol is anything that you put ahead of your relationship with God. Atheists have idols too.
my mouth announced them and I made them known;
then suddenly I acted, and they came to pass. - Isaiah 48:3
9 All the nations gather together
and the peoples assemble.
Which of their gods foretold this
and proclaimed to us the former things?
Let them bring in their witnesses to prove they were right,
so that others may hear and say, “It is true.”
10 “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD,
“and my servant whom I have chosen,
so that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me. - Isaiah 43:9,10
7 Who then is like me? Let them proclaim it.
Let them declare and lay out before me
what has happened since I established my ancient people,
and what is yet to come—
yes, let them foretell what will come.
8 Do not tremble, do not be afraid.
Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago?
You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me?
No, there is no other Rock; I know not one.”
9 All who make idols are nothing,
and the things they treasure are worthless.
Those who would speak up for them are blind;
they are ignorant, to their own shame.- Isaiah 44:7-9
4 For the sake of Jacob my servant,
of Israel my chosen,
I summon you by name
and bestow on you a title of honor,
though you do not acknowledge me.
5 I am the LORD, and there is no other;
apart from me there is no God.
I will strengthen you,
though you have not acknowledged me,
6 so that from the rising of the sun
to the place of its setting
people may know there is none besides me.
I am the LORD, and there is no other. Isaiah 45:4-6
Debunking Christianity: God cannot know that he is omniscient
Debunking Christianity: When Atheists Should Side with Jehovah's Witnesses
Give an unbeliever or a heretic enough time, they immediately and never disappoint in refuting themselves. On Debunking Christianity today, TGBaker has really put his foot in his mouth in grand fashion. Again my comments are in red. As an atheist I often quote from the Jehovah's Witness New Testament. Why? Because their translators are not effected by certain doctrines like Trinity. They rely on the most likely version of the Greek text under consideration. Most believers look at John 1:1-4 to argue for Jesus as God.
Jehovah's Witnesses rely on a translation that the consensus of scholars is that it's poorly translated. It's called the New World Translation. And it is untrue that it is influenced the doctrine of the Trinity. Quite the the opposite. The translators who were not experts in Kione Greek or Ancient Hebrew mistranslated the Bible is several instances differently than other great English translations like the Kings James Version so that they could dispense with things like the Trinity. The New World translation is inferior and it's like bringing a dull pocket knife to a gun fight in a scholarly debate.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.Here is where TGBaker shows some dishonesty. He extols the value of the New World Translation but he doesn't point out that it renders John 1:1 differently and side-steps the fact that most translations do not render it into English that way.
1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in [the] beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. - John 1:1 (New World Translation)
But the much neglected verses of John 1:17-18 not only clarifiy these verses but point to how Jesus as a human teacher became a messiah and then became a god.
17 ὅτι ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωϋσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο. 18 θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενὴς θεὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο.We find here in these verses are an elevation of Jesus to a divine person that replaces the law. This is a teaching no different than of Paul. We see a shift from Paul's presentation of Jesus as Wisdom to a Hellenistic function of reason as an agent of creation (Logos). This is already known in Philo of Alexandria's work. http://www.scribd.com/doc/55625043/33/The-Logos-as-Agent-of-Creation
The Law was given through Moses, Grace and Truth came about through Jesus Christ, No one has seen God at any time, but the only begotten god which is in the bosom of god has made him known (exegeted him).
Where does this passage tell us that Jesus replaces the Law? It doesn't. Where does this passage tells us that any of Jesus' first followers considered him just a human teacher. From Matthew to Revelations, Jesus is presented as Messiah and Lord. I know about Philo of Alexander but his description of the Logos does not even compare to a personal being. Paul does not refer to Jesus as a living embodiment of Wisdom.
We also see this term identified as “image” by Philo of Alexandria. Christ as the “image of God” or “form of God” is a way pre-existence enters into the earlier Pauline writings. Verse 17 shows the comparison of the pre-existent Law with the pre-existent Messiah:
Pesachim 54a on the name of the Messiah "Seven things were created before the world was created, and these are they: The Torah, repentance, the Garden of Eden, Gehenna, the Throne of Glory, the Temple, and the name of the Messiah... The name of the Messiah, as it is written, His [sc. the Messiah's] name shall endure forever, and has (Yanun) exited before the sun."The Jewish idea of the pre-existence of the Messiah's name combined with “image” that we see in Philo is a further opening for Jesus, a mortal soul, to be uplifted by metaphor of worship hymns to literal belief. The Name of the Messiah becomes the Image of God in the hymnal passages of Paul. Again we find Philo who equates the Wisdom of Proverbs 8 with Logos, Image and Spirit:
Proverbs 8:22-30 "The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him..."I agree that metaphorically "Wisdom" in Proverb 8 can be mapped to Logos but TGBaker take the analogy much farther than what is warranted. By showing the the idea that the pre-existence of the Messiah was already a part of Jewish thought, shows that the Deity and Messiahship of Christ is not out of pocket in the slightest.
In this we can see a first begotten prior to creation. So the potential already resides in Judaism. The intensification of this belief and its rise to a literal per-existent entity that becomes flesh are readily identifiable elements in external literature. The only flaw of the Arians were they were more conservative theologically than the Trinitarians. They were more routed in the meaning of scripture than theological/philosophical speculation. Their motto, There was a time when He was not” point directly to the translation in the Jehovah's Witness and to there doctrine. Their scholars simply continue the second century line of thought:
I agree that Jehovah's Witness are just carrying on the 2nd Century heresies of the Arians and Gnostics. That is the problem. John 1 speaks against the idea that the Logos ever came into existence. The scriptures do not allow us the luxury of thinking that there was ever a time when the Logos was not and if Jesus is the Logos there was never a time when He was not! The other thing most Protestants, Jews, and Jehovah's Witness agree on is that Sirach is not scripture. Failure all around in this argument.
“Similarly, though Wisdom has had her own independent history within Israelite culture, she has already been identified with the Angel of the LORD long before early Christianity. This is clear from Sirach 24:4 where Wisdom takes up the position of the Angel of the LORD in the cloud of Exodus 14:19 and Wisdom of Solomon 9:1-2, 18:15-16 where Wisdom, Logos and Angel of the Lord are equated. Wisdom and Logos, then, both point to the importance of angelic categories as the common denominator in Jewish mediatorial speculation.” http://tearsofoberon.blogspot.com/2009/09/high-angel-christology-is-jesus-christ.html
Please do not misunderstand my usage of Watchtower research. I do not believe in their presentation of a god any more than normative Trinitarian Christianities. But they are not blinded by the presuppositions that trinitarian doctrine entails. The validity of their observations point to the source of their differences from normative Christianities. They like the Restoration Movement of The Campbell's and Barton W. Stone sought to have Christianity based only with what was in the Bible. Stone in fact debated Alexander Campbell for years contending that Trinity was non-biblical and espoused an Arianism long before the Jehovah's Witnesses existed. ( The Millennial Harbinger and The Baptist volumes). What this biblical research of “non-orthodox” Christian movements do is allow us to circumvent doctrines that have blinded many Biblical scholars unconsciously and see what is actually there in its native environment and original historical context.
TGBaker is wrong. Jehovah's Witnesses are so blinded by their desire to reject the normative Christianity that they have gone as far as twisting scripture to support their ideas. They have not made valid observation about the Bible or scripture. They are blinded by other presuppositions. Their doctrines can't be found in the Bible. What the research of "non-orthodox" Christian movements does is further deceive and distort the truth.
2 Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. - 2 Timothy 4:2-4
Debunking Christianity: When Atheists Should Side with Jehovah's Witnesses
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)