Jay Smith & Shabir Ally Debate: Islam or Christianity - Which Promotes Peace? - Apologetics 315
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Jay Smith & Shabir Ally Debate: Islam or Christianity - Which Promotes Peace? - Apologetics 315
Jay Smith & Shabir Ally Debate: Islam or Christianity - Which Promotes Peace? - Apologetics 315
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Answering Muslims: Hizb ut-Tahrir Conference in Chicago
Answering Muslims: Hizb ut-Tahrir Conference in Chicago
Answering Muslims: Egyptian Sheikh on Killing Muhammad's Critics
Answering Muslims: Egyptian Sheikh on Killing Muhammad's Critics
Pastafarian dawns religious head gear for Austrian driver’s license - National Messianic Jewish | Examiner.com
Pastafarian dawns religious head gear for Austrian driver’s license - National Messianic Jewish | Examiner.com
Debunking Christianity: Dr. Avalos vs. Dr. Weikart: The Rematch
Debunking Christianity: Dr. Avalos vs. Dr. Weikart: The Rematch
FacePalm of the Day #108 - Debunking Christianity: God Cannot be Contrary to his own Predictions.
Here is a criticism about God’s omniscience and omnipotence based upon a point made by John D. Barrow in Impossibility, drawing on the work of cognitive scientist Donald Mackay. To put it into simple terms, it might be easier to state it as follows:
It has long been understood that with God’s omniscience, he cannot be contrary to his own predictions.
Why would anyone who has the power to make a universe and to make a prediction of the future want to change it? A better question is does such a thing make any sense? God doesn't predict the future. He isn't subject to the future. God doesn't just foretell the future. The future happens because God is in control of it. Given that, why would God need to change what He has already decreed.
For example, if you were claimed as being omniscient and omnipotent and you predicted beforehand that you would make yourself spaghetti bolognaise for supper on Friday, then when it came to making Friday’s supper, you would have no choice but to make the spaghetti bolognaise. This is because if you decided to be contrary to your own prediction and cook, say, pizza, then your prediction would have been incorrect. This would render your omniscience faulty, and would leave you with the characteristic of fallibility.
Again the analogy doesn't make sense. If God decided to make a spaghetti bolognaise he decided to make it at that time brought the universe into existence and knew where and when the spaghetti bolognaise would appear and how. No way does his omniscience ever fail. No success to be found in the line of argument but definitely fail and a facepalm comes.
Likewise, God does not have omnipotence, because he cannot do something that would invalidate his infallible predictions.
God's Word only contains things that are predictions from our point of view because we haven't experienced them yet. But to God they aren't predictions. They are just what He is going to do.God created space and time. He is subject to neither.
So, logically, God can never be contrary to his own predictions. This constrains his free will quite significantly. However, it is far more serious than this. If he is creating the universe and knowing every particular outcome (even if one argues that he is somehow still allowing free will), then he has made predictions about every event that will come to pass. His foreknowledge is effectively one long prediction.
If all things are a consequence of God's free will, then why would he be constrained by that will? He isn't. God doesn't just know every possible outcome. The outcome is determined by God's will.
7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace 8 that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, 9 he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.- Ephesians 1:7-12
Thus, from the beginning of time onwards, everything must come to pass exactly as God had predicted at the actualisation of the cosmos. This has far-reaching consequences: God does not have free will, intercessory prayer is pointless, God cannot change his mind, God's own future and interferences on earth are determined, and the passage in the bible where God changed his mind over the fate of Nineveh is patently false.
Not true. Prayer does not change God's plan. Does anyone think that God waits to hear us pray before he makes a decision about what to do with the universe? No proof of that. Did God change his mind about the fate of Nineveh?
(Jonah 3: 10 "When God saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then God relented concerning the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them. And He did not do it.")
What was the declaration God made? What did Jonah understand God to be saying the message to Nineveh was?
1 But to Jonah this seemed very wrong, and he became angry. 2 He prayed to the LORD, “Isn’t this what I said, LORD, when I was still at home? That is what I tried to forestall by fleeing to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity. 3 Now, LORD, take away my life, for it is better for me to die than to live.”- Jonah 4:1-3
Jonah knew that there was a possibility that God would not destroy Nineveh. He didn't want to go to Nineveh because he did not want the city spared. What reason did God give for not destroying Nineveh? God loved them.
10 But the LORD said, “You have been concerned about this plant, though you did not tend it or make it grow. It sprang up overnight and died overnight. 11 And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?” Jonah 4:10-11
Written by Johnny P
I mean does anyone read their Bible anymore?
Debunking Christianity: God Cannot be Contrary to his own Predictions.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Faithful Thinkers: Video: What About Annihilation?
I would think that Annihilism would make atheists happy because they believe that is what is going to happen to them after they die. This answer is important because it deals with either viewpoint that only damned people are going to cease to exist or that everyone will cease to exist. If you are reading this and haven't watched the video yet, here is a clue: It's not true.
Faithful Thinkers: Video: What About Annihilation?
Wicca & the Occult Interview with Craig Hawkins - Apologetics 315
Image via WikipediaBrian Auten recently posted Rob Bowman's interview of Craig Hawkins about the roles of Wicca and the Occult in contemporary culture. In America we often forget that people really do practice these things and should know how to respond. This interview is important because how do you respond to something you don't know about? You can't. Listen to the interview at the following link:Wicca & the Occult Interview with Craig Hawkins - Apologetics 315
FacePalm of the Day #107 Debunking Christianity: Genesis 3-Thank "God" for the Snake
Zach Dills has posted an article on Debunking Christianity in when he attempts to cast Genesis 3 in an opposite manner from what the text actually says. This is a failure of reading comprehension at its best. FacePalm worthy for sue, but let's examine his article further to see where it falls down. My comments are in red.
Genesis 3 is a very important chapter in the bible. It has helped shape and re-shape Christian views on human nature, the state of the world and the relationship between good and evil. It has affected and influenced philosophers, theologians, writers, politicians, historians, artists and the average person on the street. When I examine Genesis 3 I see a story that has been paramount in underwriting the conflict between faith and free thought, which has raged throughout history. This story serves as a precedent for religion’s continuous attempts to suppress reason among its followers and for its attack on anyone brave enough to examine their god and their faith through the lens of rational thought.
Dills makes a fundamental assertion that he as not shown any evidence for: he assumes that there is conflict between faith and free thought. The rest of the article tries to cast the story in the light of God not wanting humanity to freely think for itself. This is a presupposition about God's character that is not supported by the text.
Genesis 3 says:
Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God say. ‘You shall not eat from any tree in the garden’?” The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, nor shall you touch it, or you shall die.’” But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die; for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate…Then the Lord God said, “See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden (Gen 3:1-7, 22-23)
So in this story God creates humans without sin but also without knowledge of good and evil. Humans carry with them a sort of infantile innocence allowing them to be “sinless” simply by being ignorant.
This is a bold assertion and Dills offers no reason why anyone should accept his reasoning.
The one command God gives these naive creatures is to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil lest they die.(1)
Where does the Bible say Adam and Eve were naive. Is being sinless equal to being naive. Does that mean in order to be good you have to be ignorant? I don't think that is what the story suggests at all.
Adam and Eve appear fine with this command and neither of them seems to give the tree much thought until the serpent comes along. It is the serpent that gets Eve to question God’s command and see the value of what he was withholding from them. The serpent assures her she will not die but rather that her eyes will be opened and knowing good and evil she will become like God. Eve then displays one of the most wonderful qualities of humanity; curiosity. She shows the desire to know more about the world around us and thereby better ourselves. Eve uses her senses to examine the tree and finds that the fruit would be good both as a source of food and to make one wise and so like any good scientist she tests it, she eats the fruit. And sure enough, just as the serpent had said, her eyes were opened and she became more aware of the world around her then she had previously been. She then shares with Adam teaching him what she had learned. Then God comes along looking for Adam and Eve. When he finds them he discovers that they have disobeyed him and then speaking to the other gods or himself says that humans have become like “one of us, knowing good and evil” and so he kicks them out of the garden to prevent them from also eating of the tree of life, which would allow them to live forever.
So let me get this one straight: Zach Dills thinks that humanity is better off - death, violence, lying, stealing, depression, oppression, war, famines, and all the kinds of evil we whine and complain about? I mean Dills know that had Adam not sinned we wouldn't be in the messes we are now? Doesn't seem so. There are several things he doesn't get right in his summary of the event and he gets them wrong because of his presuppositions.
1. The serpent used the same argument on Eve that he uses on us today: Trying to get us to question if God really said what we know He says. The serpent could not get Eve to question God's existence as he does people today so he went after what God says.
2. It wasn't curiosity that made Eve eat the fruit. She ate it because she believed what the serpent told her. She was deceived. Adam on the other hand knew exactly what he was doing - disobeying God.
3. Dills points out one of the Old Testament texts that points to the Trinity. In Genesis 1, God said Let US make man in our own image. In Genesis 3, God said man has become like “one of us, knowing good and evil”.
When examining this story and how it is usually taught to people in church what amazes me the most is the very thing that is never even acknowledged, which is the simple fact that everything the serpent said was true while what God said was in fact a lie.
When Adam and Eve ate the fruit they did not die as God had threatened but rather just as the serpent said their eyes were opened and they became like God as God himself admitted saying they “have become like one of us, knowing good and evil.”
The serpent lied because he left out that there would be nothing but misery as a direct consequence of her and her husband sin. If you are going to take the text seriously, then you have to believe that when the creation was called "good" this meant that it was perfect. No decay. No Second Law of Thermodynamics. No death. Had they remained sinless, Neither Adam or Eve would ever die. God didn't tell Adam that if he ate the fruit he would drop dead at that moment. God said Adam would "surly die". And Adam did. No just Adam we will all surely die and that wasn't the original intention. Not to mention God's wondrous love and mercy. What if Adam had stayed in the Garden and at the fruit of the Tree of Life? We would be forever stuck in our decaying bodies sentenced to sin forever with no way out. Yup, that sounds like a better alternative alright.
Duh! Had he never sinned, Adam would never had died! I thought Dills said he used to be a Christian.
Now the reason anyone ever believes this god again after such an obvious lie is strange indeed but they do and throughout the bible this god persists in fighting against humanity’s purist of knowledge constantly calling them to forego their own reason and trust solely in him. This god seems intent on preventing humanity from growing in knowledge trying rather to reestablish humanity’s infantile mind so as to obtain humanity’s absolute submission and their continuous worship and sacrifice.
Now that's just plain slander! And slander of one's creator. Tsk. Tsk. Every discovery. Evey bit of knowledge we have about the universe and how it works comes from the one who made it. He put the desire in us to learn and to find out. He the earth and everything contained in it under our feet. Adam gave it up. Jesus took it back. And denying God the worship God deserves, not just because of what God has done but for who God is, is stupid. No one else deserves humanity's absolute submission and sacrifice. All that God asks for in terms of sacrifice is our lives lived for God's glory. Fair deal. .
So why does the serpent get such a bad rap?
Because our first parents believed his lie and damned us to hell. Oops, was that rhetorical?
Why, if you ask any normal person about the story will they say that the serpent lied when in fact he was correct?
Go to a funeral and then ask the dead person's family if the serpent was right? Or better yet the next time something terrible happens and you want to bring up the "Problem of Evil" to argue against the existence of God, don't forget to thank the serpent.
The serpent told the truth whereas God lied and yet the serpent is the one cursed and God continues on in history unblemished despite his clear sin.
When a parent tells his child not to run across the street, is he sinning? If the parent punishes the child for disobeying such a command is it a sin? If you think it is, it explains much as to what is wrong with society.
Robert G. Ingersoll, a great American orator and writer from the 19th century, astutely notes this and praises the virtue of the serpent. “If the account given in Genesis is really true, ought we not, after all, thank this serpent? He was the first schoolmaster, the first advocate of learning, the first enemy of ignorance, the first to whisper in human ears the sacred word liberty, the creator of ambition, the author modesty, of inquiry, of doubt, of investigation, of progress, and of civilization.” I couldn’t agree more.
I disagree. It is only through obedience to God that we have correct ambitions, gain knowledge, gain wisdom, gain understanding, liberty, and true fulfillment. Otherwise you are wasting your life, chasing the wind.
The serpent has my admiration for where God says “trust me” the serpent said “don’t trust me rather see for yourself”; where God says “listen to me” the serpent says “listen to reason”; and where God says, “fear me” the serpent says, “fear ignorance.”
And where did the serpent say that? The text says that the serpent said:
“Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
“You will not certainly die.”
But we do certainly die just like Eve and Adam.
“For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
When God demanded
Should not a parent nurture and teach their children so that they may one day stand upon their own two feet, make their own decisions and live a good life?
God does exactly that. That is what the Holy Spirit does - lead and guide us to make good decisions and do right. If that is what you want then you want Jesus.
Yet this god would have none of that rather he would have us all be intellectually barren and living in diapers for all of eternity.
Really?
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. - 2 Timothy 3:16,17
We live in a day when religious fundamentalism seems to be growing worldwide at the expense of rationality and sound education.
Evidence?
Dogmas and creeds are regaining the place they had lost as the dominate force in creating and controlling people’s morals, politics and over-all worldview.
Thank the serpent for the need to control people's morals, politics, and worldviews. People do all kinds of evil. We all sin in word, thought, and deed. No amount of control we try to implement is enough fix this. Sin is so terrible and pervasive God had to deal with it.
Reason is once again being viewed with hostility and suspicious in favor of mindless doctrines and ridiculous interpretations of archaic scriptures.
Dills knows a lot about "ridiculous interpretations" just see the one he offered here.
Doubt is again a sin and faith is THE virtue.
Because faith is moving on what you know to me true. No one in the Bible was ever asked to move on blind faith. IT was trust based on relationship with God. In light of that doubt is snubbing your nose at one who has cultivated a relationship with you - your creator himself.
We are told one should have faith; faith in God, faith in you country and faith in your own unexamined beliefs.
Not by God. The Bible tells us to have faith in God and to examine our beliefs.
Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test? - 2 Corinthians 13:5
Sadly this unexamined faith endangers the world as it allows people to maintain their pathetic feelings of superiority over those who do not share their same unexamined beliefs.
Besides not examining your beliefs is a sin and outside of God's commands.
11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. - Acts 17:11
Unfortunately, the fight against fundamentalism is one that is amazingly difficult. Fundamentalism has the advantage of being able to spread itself through birth, bribery, fear, laziness, coercion and violence whereas reason must rely solely on education.
Funny, atheism is much the same way. Given that most atheists can't seem to represents what Christians believe accurately, they don't understand what it is they say they rejects. through the same kind of lies that the serpent fed Eve that day she became a sinner.
As we saw God demanded faith and relied on threats whereas the serpent demanded nothing and offered only information.
If someone tells you something is bad for you and it warns you that it will kill you, how is that a threat? How is it the truth when you are told that that an action will make you as knowledgeable about God and all you get out of it is a cycle of sin terminated in death and no way out. Of course the serpent didn't ask for anything in return because he got what he waned - our downfall.
So let us stand up against the faith of fundamentalism and evangelicalism by following the brave example of Eve.
You mean damning ourselves and all of our children? Too late.
Let us continually take the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil through the process of education and learn to think for ourselves.
Notice how the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil didn't lead to education or Adam thinking for himself. He didn't develop quantum mechanics. Invent the wheel. Or map the universe. He did learn how to sin and rebel against his creator. Fear. Death. Doubt. And Disbelief. Yup, good times.
Let us not waste the gift the serpent pointed us to by ceasing to examine and test the world around us so that we can make it a better place.
It was that "gift" from the serpent that makes it necessary for the world to be made better place. It had been perfect.
It’s time to stop starring at the sky waiting for a god that’s not coming and time to start looking one another in the eye, learning from one another and working together for a better future. And if knowledge makes us like the gods then I say let us dare to be gods.
We don't have to wait for a god to come to save us. Jesus already came and saved us if you put your faith in Him. Knowledge does not make us like the gods. We were already created in the image of God. Funny how the lies the serpent gave Eve becomes even more and more insidious the closer I look at it.
(1)I’ve always wondered; if Adam and Eve did not have the knowledge of good and evil how could they “know” that it was wrong to disobey God?
FYI: One can put superscripts in blog post The tags you want are "" and ". Works like a charm. As for knowing it was wrong to disobey God, they know the same way you knew each and every time you disobeyed your parents. No one skates on ignorance. For every sin we unknowingly commit, there are many we voluntarily commit.
Written by Zach Dills
Debunking Christianity: Genesis 3-Thank "God" for the Snake
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Responding to: Allah is uniquely one (refutation of the Trinity) Part 2
Wait a cotton-pickin' minute! Did anyone notice that the above video doesn't contain everything Dr Craig said.
He makes the argument that if William Lane Craig says that you can't find the Trinity in the Old Testament then you can't find it and therefore the Trinity should be rejected. I think anyone interested in this should hear the whole conversation. Here is the entire conversation:
I don't agree with William Lane Craig on everything. This is an example. There are good examples of the Trinity in the Old Testament. Here are two!
26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”27 So God created mankind in his own image,in the image of God he created them;male and female he created them. Genesis 1:26,27
Verse 26 has "us" and "our" and then verse 27 has "his". Why? God is tri-unity not tri-thesim.
22 And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” - Genesis 3:22
Look "us" again. Why? Trinity. I already hear the objection. "Not all Christians see it that way." Okay Watch this.debate Walter Martin did on the John Ankerberg show.
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBFE9FAD0A6FA53C6
Islam and Christianity A Common Word: Dr. William Lane Craig admits that the Trinity is NOT FOUND in the Old Testament !!
Molinism from the Horse's Mouth: Reviewing Craig's "Only Wise God" - Part 3
Molinism from the Horse's Mouth: Reviewing Craig's "Only Wise God" - Part 3
How to Interpret the Bible by Wayne Grudem - Apologetics 315
How to Interpret the Bible by Wayne Grudem - Apologetics 315
FacePalm of the Day #106 - Debunking Christianity: Who's the Arrogant One?
As an atheist one of the most common and tiring accusations I find myself facing from Christians is that of being prideful or arrogant. At times it seems it is impossible to question a person’s faith without them thinking you are hard headed and arrogant. I was talking with an old friend of mine and she was asking me about pride, in particular mine. She asked me if my current disbelief in the Christian god wasn’t simply a matter of being prideful/arrogant? Basically who am I to judge God? Of course that meant her god and her beliefs about him.
It is not about rejecting my belief or my interpretation. If you claim that the Bible is wrong or if you claim that the Bible doesn't hold any accountability for you or if you claim that the Bible is not the word of God or if you claim that there is no God then you show yourself to be judging God.
Now as always this accusation was annoying but having been a Christian myself I knew why my friend felt this way but let’s look at the accusation a little more closely by examining what I used to believe as a Christian verses what I believe now.
Here we go with the apostasy.
Previously I knew why the earth, in fact the entire cosmos, existed and that was for us. Human beings literally were the center of the universe.
Here is a claim that many atheists make that they say Christians believe. The problem is that Bible does not agree.
All things were created by him. He created everything in heaven and on earth. He created everything that can be seen and everything that can't be seen. He created kings, powers, rulers and authorities. Everything was created by him and for him. - Colossians 1:16
Currently I believe human beings are only a very tiny speck in the cosmos and its existence has no connection to us.
Funny considering the fact that the universe is so finely tuned we wouldn't exist unless the cosmos was structured and designed the way it is.
Previously I believed God had placed us as rulers over the earth and everything in it until its eventual destruction by God.
With great power comes great responsibility. God is holding us responsible for taking care of the earth and everything He has placed under us. Or as Jesus said.
"But suppose the servant does not know his master's wishes. And suppose he does things for which he should be punished. He will be beaten with only a few blows. "Much will be required of everyone who has been given much. Even more will be asked of the person who is supposed to take care of much. - Luke 12:48
Currently I believe human beings are linked and dependent upon the rest of the planet and as the planet goes we go.
Paul agrees.
18 What we are suffering now is nothing compared with the glory that will be shown in us. 1920 The created world was bound to fail. But that was not the result of its own choice. It was planned that way by the One who made it. God planned 21 to set the created world free. He didn't want it to rot away completely. Instead, he wanted it to have the same glorious freedom that his children have. Everything God created looks forward to the time when his children will appear in their full and final glory.22 We know that all that God created has been groaning. It is in pain as if it were giving birth to a child. The created world continues to groan even now. 23 And that's not all. We have the Holy Spirit as the promise of future blessing. But we also groan inside ourselves as we look forward to the time when God will adopt us as full members of his family. Then he will give us everything he has for us. He will raise our bodies and give glory to them.- Romans 8:18-23
Previously I knew what happened to everyone after we died. We would either go to heaven or go to hell.
The only reason Christians know is because of the revelation. It's not because we are smarter or something. It's because we believe what has been reviewed.
Currently I say I do not know what happens after we die but I think we merely cease to exist.
So is it more arrogant to believe what has been reviewed or come up with your own answer?
Previously I knew not only where we went after we die but I also knew who went where. I knew who (generally speaking) would get into heaven and who would go to hell. Those who believed in Christ (the right way of course) would be allowed into heaven while those who “rejected” him would be sent to hell.
Zach Dills failed to explain what the right way to believe is and what rejection means. But given he doesn't know why God made the universe, I wonder if he knows. Therefore let's look at what Christians believe. The right way to believe is to accept that you are a sinner in need of a Savior. We deserve hell, but by believing that Jesus sacrificed himself to pay for your sins you don't have to pay for them yourself. Confess with your mouth and believe with everything that make you a living soul (Romans 8:9,10) As for rejection - this is what atheists do. They ignore and glory in their sin assuming that if they are wrong and there truly is a God their righteousness is enough although God has already said that it is not enough. Romans 3:21-26 says:
21 But now God has shown us how to become right with him. The Law and the Prophets give witness to this. It has nothing to do with obeying the law. 22 We are made right with God by putting our faith in Jesus Christ. That happens to all who believe.
It is no different for the Jews than for anyone else. 23 Everyone has sinned. No one measures up to God's glory. 24 The free gift of God's grace makes all of us right with him. Christ Jesus paid the price to set us free. 25 God gave him as a sacrifice to pay for sins. So he forgives the sins of those who have faith in his blood.
God did all of that to prove that he is fair. Because of his mercy he did not punish people for the sins they had committed before Jesus died for them. 26 God did that to prove in our own time that he is fair. He proved that he is right. He also made right with himself those who believe in Jesus.
Currently I again say I don’t know what happens to us after we die but I believe whatever does happen to us it will likely be the same for all.
The one who made all of us says different. If you don't know why not trust the one who does know? There is no need to guess.
Previously I believed that there was only one way to truth and that was through God’s special revelation (the bible), which I just happened to have.
No one just happens to have revelation. In order to have revelation it must be revealed to you. We shouldn't squander it.
Currently I believe that no religion has a divinely authored text that everyone else in the world must read and follow but that truth is open to all through reason.
So reason is enough to understand what truth is? What do you do when someone else's reason conflicts with your own? How do you know yours is right? It's way more arrogant to tell a pedophile or rapist that his reasoning is wrong because you know your morality is better than his. Without an objective moral standard how do you know yours is better? You cannot. I can tell a rapist or pedophile that his morality is bankrupt and corrupt because God, who created all of us, said so. What argument is left to the atheist? None other than I am right because I am better than you. Argument from arrogance.
Previously I knew that God’s revelation had to be properly understood and interpreted otherwise it would lead to errors and sin and I, of course, knew those proper interpretations, particularly the important ones.
Given the complete misunderstanding sin, salvation, and why we are here from a Christian perspective, I wonder if Dills knew what these were when he called himself a "Christian". Maybe if he understood them, perhaps he never would have left the church.
Currently I believe that through the use of our reason and experience we can all move towards a better understanding of the world we live in.
Using human reason and experience is why the world is in the mess it is in today and spiraling worse.
19 But the way of the wicked is like deep darkness;
they do not know what makes them stumble. - Proverbs 4:19
Who are the "wicked"? Every single one of us at one time fit this description. And even after we get saved from our sins, God describes our righteousness thusly:
All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away. - Isaiah 64:6
Previously I always adapted any new information I learned to fit into the conclusions I had already made (Christianity was true). If something did not fit into the Christian framework properly then it must either be wrong or simply a mystery but either way I knew I still held the truth.
I always hear those who are apostates from Christianity say this but I can never find anything that they can point to that doesn't fit in the Christian framework. Instead I find that they didn't really search and dig for answers. Instead they seem to forget that there isn't a single objection or rebuttal that has not already been raised or refuted.
Currently I allow the evidence to speak for itself. I am no longer afraid to change my beliefs based on what I learn and to openly admit that I was wrong.
I hear many atheist feign open-mindedness and a willingness to follow evidence. But many times the first thing they do is to take the supernatural off the table or include presuppositions such that there is no way that the people who wrote the Bible were telling the truth and assuming collusion or dishonesty without proof.
So I would ask anyone looking at this list, which set of beliefs, is in fact the more arrogant one? I think it’s pretty obvious that it is in fact the Christian set of beliefs that is the more arrogant and self-important set of beliefs.
Definitely the atheist is more arrogant. They are the ones who routinely accuse theists of being deluded and/or mentally deficient. Bible believing Christians don't look at it that way because to become a Christians is to accept your own limitation and depravity and decide to move your will out of the way and let God fix those things you can't fix in yourself. Atheism is built on arrogance and self-importance.
Written by Zach Dills
At least I know who else to pray for while I ask God to continue working in me to make me more like Jesus.
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. - Romans 8:28-29
Debunking Christianity: Who's the Arrogant One?
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Responding to: Allah is uniquely one (refutation of the Trinity) Part 1
Recently while talking to a believer in Tri-theism (the belief in three all powerful gods that join together and work as a unified team) other wise known as 'Trinity' something also occurred to me.
One more time. Say it with me slowly: "Trinity" does not equal "Tri-thesism". Tri-theism is just polytheism and no Christian is into polytheism.
One of the glaring and obvious things one notices about the Trinity is that God is not a singular being that has something that no one or nothing else shares.
God is a singular Being. Given that "Being" and "person" are not the same thing. It's possible to have more than one person in the same being. One person does not have to mean one person.
God is a singular Being. Given that "Being" and "person" are not the same thing. It's possible to have more than one person in the same being. One person does not have to mean one person.
The doctrine of the Trinity is that God is One Team ( a group of three that co exist together). Of course this is a philosophical presupposition about the creator that does not have CLEAR revelation to back it up. It is the product of theological debates and musings about the divine.
Again with the "Team". There is no CLEAR revelation to back up the notion that God is "ONE TEAM" because that is not what Christians are arguing in favor of. We don't believe that either. Do you know what it's called when you are argue against a position that is not being claimed and then pretend to win the argument? It's call a "straw man" and thegrandverbalizer just showed a perfect example.
Again with the "Team". There is no CLEAR revelation to back up the notion that God is "ONE TEAM" because that is not what Christians are arguing in favor of. We don't believe that either. Do you know what it's called when you are argue against a position that is not being claimed and then pretend to win the argument? It's call a "straw man" and thegrandverbalizer just showed a perfect example.
In the Trinity doctrine God is not singularly unique. In fact it makes little sense to speak about 'God' when talking to Trinitarians. They believe in gods. God the Son and God the Holy Spirit and God the Father.
No we don't. The Bible tells us there is only one God. It also tells us the Father is God. The son is God. The Holy Spirit is God. This is 1 X 1 X 1 =1 not 1 + 1 + 1 = 1. 1 + 1 + 1 = 1 is stupid and not what Trinitarians are saying!
The problem with their theological presupposition is saying that God is One Team (a group comprising of three gods that co exist together) is that you could say based upon that same presupposition that God is One Team (comprising a hundred gods that co exist together).
Not three gods. You can't split up the God into components then cry out "It doesn't make sense!" thegrandverbalizers and those who don't understand what we are saying think that. No one is saying anything about a team, but thegrandverbalizer.
Not three gods. You can't split up the God into components then cry out "It doesn't make sense!" thegrandverbalizers and those who don't understand what we are saying think that. No one is saying anything about a team, but thegrandverbalizer.
In the Trinity God is not Singularly Unique. In fact there is nothing singularly unique about the creator. The Creator is not allowed to have a unique oneness that is not shared.
One can argue with another human being all one likes. The bottom line is that God is that God is bigger and more complex than just our simple understanding of what being and personhood are. In Christian Trinity, God is not a team of God but a single being such that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all God at the same time and neither one is more or less God than the other at any time. It's a unique oneness that can't be duplicated nor experienced completely. Marriage - the union of a man and a woman - is the only thing anywhere close to that sort of union we can experience in the here and now and that more closely mirrors Jesus and the Church . See Ephesians 5:22-24
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.What ever the Father has the Son also has. What ever the Son has is also shared by the Holy Spirit.
and 1 Corinthians 11:3
But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
For example you could have two black shoe boxes. They could be exactly identical in shape and volume. However, the only thing that makes one unique from the other is the space that the other occupies. That would be 'unique' to it as a shoe box.
Bad analogy. Jesus said
Just how much space do you think God takes up?
Bad analogy. Jesus said
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
However, with in the Trinity there is no way to define God as one without immediately bringing another number into the picture; the number three.
Not an issue as long as remember the distinction between "being" and "person".
Not an issue as long as remember the distinction between "being" and "person".
Philosophical jargon is quick to enter into the picture in a discussion with even the most astute Trinitarian. They will tell you that they believe that God is one sure; but they will quantify what they mean by saying 'We believe God is one in essence but is comprised of Three persons'.
So if thegrandverbalizer hears what Christians are saying why does he go after straw men?
So if thegrandverbalizer hears what Christians are saying why does he go after straw men?
When asked to define what they mean by persons more philosophical jargon enters and one is hard pressed to get a proper definition of person.
Rather nice assertion. Like the way he just throws that out there and doesn't substantiate it. In a previous thread he remarked that an understand of what "being" and "person" mean in Hebrew, Aramaic, Kione Greek, English, and Arabic is in order to really get at the heart of the discussion. I agree. I'm preparing such a discussion even now.
Rather nice assertion. Like the way he just throws that out there and doesn't substantiate it. In a previous thread he remarked that an understand of what "being" and "person" mean in Hebrew, Aramaic, Kione Greek, English, and Arabic is in order to really get at the heart of the discussion. I agree. I'm preparing such a discussion even now.
So what you end up with is Tri-theism that tries to mask itself as monotheism and tries to distance itself from modalism.
So does Islam embrace modalism. I'm not a Muslim and I freely admit that I am not qualified to make a judgment on that. However, equating Tri-thesim with the Trinity when one knows that is not what we are saying is just dishonest.
So does Islam embrace modalism. I'm not a Muslim and I freely admit that I am not qualified to make a judgment on that. However, equating Tri-thesim with the Trinity when one knows that is not what we are saying is just dishonest.
The Qur'an lays down the truth
Say: Allah is One (Absolute)
Allah is Unique.
Allah begots not
nor is Allah begotten.
And there is NOTHING LIKE unto Allah.
(Holy Qur'an chapter 112:1-4)\
More assertion. "begotten" and "begot:" is thought of as the way people procreate and that is not what Christians believe about Jesus.
More assertion. "begotten" and "begot:" is thought of as the way people procreate and that is not what Christians believe about Jesus.
As to Allah's nature Allah's being (dhat) or essence is One. The Trinitarians can make such a claim They may say, "We believe God's essence (being) is One" However it is a fallacious claim.
No it's not. We can't help it if one cannot see a difference between "being" and "person". God is indeed unique. There is nothing or anything like God anywhere.
They do not believe that God's essence is One, because God's essence is SHARED. They believe that God's essence (being) is shared by THREE.
It is not UNIQUE TO ONE. It is SHARED by THREE.
Thegrandverbalizer would have a point if God's being was shared by more than one being. No Christian would argue that each person in the Trinity is a separate being.
Note for example what Protestant Christian apologist James White says here: http://vintage.aomin.org/trinitydef.html
It is necessary here to distinguish between the terms "being" and "person." It would be a contradiction, obviously, to say that there are three beings within one being, or three persons within one person. So what is the difference? We clearly recognize the difference between being and person every day. We recognizewhat something is, yet we also recognize individuals within a classification. For example, we speak of the "being" of man---human being. A rock has "being"---the being of a rock, as does a cat, a dog, etc. Yet, we also know that there are personal attributes as well. That is, we recognize both "what" and "who" when we talk about a person.
Amen. He's quoting Dr. James White.
The Bible tells us there are three classifications of personal beings---God, man, and angels. What is personality? The ability to have emotion, will, to express oneself. Rocks cannot speak. Cats cannot think of themselves over against others, and, say, work for the common good of "cat kind." Hence, we are saying that there is one eternal, infinite being of God, shared fully and completely by three persons, Father, Son and Spirit. One what, three who's.
Yup!
Note the philosophical jargon. When White says above "It would be a contradiction, obviously, to say that there are three beings within one being, or three persons within one person." what White does not tell you is that it is not a contradiction to say "there are three beings that share one being, or three persons that share one person."
Dr White didn't say that because those are indeed contradictions and not what we believe. Back of the rails thegrandverbalizer goes!
Dr White didn't say that because those are indeed contradictions and not what we believe. Back of the rails thegrandverbalizer goes!
Also the last sentence something he left out. "Hence, we are saying that there is one eternal, infinite being of God, shared fully and completely by three persons, Father, Son and Spirit. One what, three who's.
What White didn't tell you is "One what, three who's that share FULLY and COMPLETELY One What"
No, he is saying three who's that share FULLY and COMPLETELY One What.
They therefore in reality do not believe that God's essence is One. If they truly believe that than God's essence is one what?
It can't be ONE if it is SHARED by THREE. The being cannot be Unique to One if it is also SHARED by THREE.
Three what? Again he's right if we are saying the one being is shared by three beings but we are not saying that!
Now I can claim that a rock has being fair enough. However, if I claim that rock and it's being (time and place everything about it) is shared FULLY and EQUALLY by atleast two other rocks I cannot in all honestly look you straight in the face and than claim I believe in a rock that is Unique in it's being.
No one is saying that we are talking about time and place when talking about the nature of God. God is timeless and omnipresent. There is no place or Time God is not. I thought that Muslims agreed with that. You can't get any more unique than that.
No one is saying that we are talking about time and place when talking about the nature of God. God is timeless and omnipresent. There is no place or Time God is not. I thought that Muslims agreed with that. You can't get any more unique than that.
If we start to take this approach we have already left the pure and safe road. We have left the creed of safety. Allah no longer has that which no one or nothing else has because Allah's being is not unique. Allah's being is shared. Than to turn around and couch this in philosophical language and claim to the people of La Ilaha illa lah (there is no God except God) that you worship the God of Abraham and that you are monotheistic is frankly insulting. You insult yourselves, and when you look into your own hearts you will come face to face with the monstrosity of that doctrine which was forged and formulated in Church councils and couched in Greek Philosophical verbiage.
Insulting? I'm still waiting for an apology for butchering what I believe and saying that I believe things that I don't as a Trinitarian.
Insulting? I'm still waiting for an apology for butchering what I believe and saying that I believe things that I don't as a Trinitarian.
May Allah protect us and keep us on the way that is straight! I call all the Christians who believe in Trinity (Tri-theism) back to the worship of the One True God.
Heaping insult on top of insult. One last time Tri-theism does not equal Trinity.
Islam and Christianity A Common Word: Allah is uniquely one (refutation of the Trinity)
Fistbump of the Day: Is praying to God any different than praying to a milk jug? - National Messianic Jewish | Examiner.com
A question about prayer was sent to this writer which pertains to what was called, “the milk jug argument.” It goes something to the likes of: if by praying to God we receive the answers of “Yes,” “No” or “Wait,” we could just as effectively pray to a milk jug since we can assume the same results.I personally hate this argument but since people actually use it, it does need to be answered. Follow the links to read Mariano's demolition of this "argument" that just seems to refuse to die the death it deserves due to the unrepentant and hard hearts of those who use it.
Is praying to God any different than praying to a milk jug? - National Messianic Jewish | Examiner.com
Quote on Theodicy from RC Sproul
Image by james.thompson via Flickr"Why do bad things happen to good people? That only happened once, and He volunteered." - R.C. Sproul
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)