Arguments, The Bible, and Smart Apologists

[dafydd]

What's wrong with following Satan?

I do. I play the fiddle and old Beelzebub has the best tunes. Much better than that anodyne pap you hear in church.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Remember, "winning" a debate is like riding a stationary bicycle. Lots of huffing and puffing, but in the end you've gone nowhere.

 

[I Am The Scum]

And still others need to see that there are good reason-based arguments to accept God, and have their heads in the right place before their hearts will follow. I was one of those people, and those are the people that the "smart" apologists are tailoring their arguments to.

The point of my post is that I don't understand why God would leave the intellectual types in want of a better book. When you look through the Bible, there's nothing for the critically-minded. Does he not care about these people? Is scrutiny a bad thing? It's not that The Bible presents bad arguments, but that it presents none whatsoever.

By the way, where's Crono?

The ontological argument(s) beat the holy crap out of any cosmological argument.

I'm aware of the difficulty the ontological argument causes with those who attempt to refute it, but I specifically stated that, for the sake of this discussion, the quality of an argument is to be measured by its ability to influence. Do you think that the ontological argument has influenced very many people?

I'm just curious if you actually believe that. I'm not actually intending to go into too much detail on any one argument here.

I think you'll find most or all smart apologists hold very unconventional religious beliefs, mostly attributed to them being smart, or at least their religious views are very strongly tempered away from the indefensible "fundamentalist" garbage we're used to seeing.

I would never try to hold anyone accountable for the beliefs of his or her "champion." That's not what this is about. One can agree with Craig on his Kalam argument, but disagree on various interpretations of scripture.

Funny, slightly-related story: One time I was engaged in a forum debate with someone who was using some kind of nonsensical cosmological argument. As we got into it further, I realized he had resorted to copying and pasting segments from William Lane Craig, and even posting Youtube clips of Craig himself, but he still wasn't quite getting it right, by misinterpreting the commentary and leading it into conclusions that didn't actually follow. In order to to provide him of a better understanding of the issue (and, yes, his own argument), I attempted to offer a better explanation of the subject: "Well, when Craig says such-and-such, this is what he means... and here's why I disagree..."

His response: "Well, Craig doesn't believe in once-saved-always-saved, so why would I listen to him?"

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I'm aware of the difficulty the ontological argument causes with those who attempt to refute it, but I specifically stated that, for the sake of this discussion, the quality of an argument is to be measured by its ability to influence.

The ability to influence has little to do with the quality of an argument. In the same fashion as the success of an advertizing campaign has little to do with the quality of the product. And somewhat equating quality of content with quality of eyewash, sophistry, appearance is dubious to my mind even just for the sake of discussion.

But to some extent you are right. Craig is somewhat good at what he does with the KCA. Creating the impression that we are really discussing stuff, that there really is debate, that there is a lot to rebut for unbelievers what with all those blown up premises and that sciency stuff, when in fact the nominal subject matter, God, is nearly absent from the argument.

Do you think that the ontological argument has influenced very many people?

I'm just curious if you actually believe that. I'm not actually intending to go into too much detail on any one argument here.

 

[AvalonXQ]

The point of my post is that I don't understand why God would leave the intellectual types in want of a better book. When you look through the Bible, there's nothing for the critically-minded. Does he not care about these people? Is scrutiny a bad thing? It's not that The Bible presents bad arguments, but that it presents none whatsoever.

I disagree. I think there's plenty in the Bible, especially in Paul's writings in Corinthians, Ephesians, and Galatians, for the critically-minded. And teachings during the Christian journeys also made it clear that questioning and study was to be strongly encouraged.

By the way, where's Crono?

I'm leaving the forum. I eliminated my avatar and signature in preparation for that.

 

[Ethnikos]

I disagree. I think there's plenty in the Bible, especially in Paul's writings in Corinthians, Ephesians, and Galatians, for the critically-minded. And teachings during the Christian journeys also made it clear that questioning and study was to be strongly encouraged.
I'm leaving the forum. I eliminated my avatar and signature in preparation for that.

The popular form of Christianity today seems to be moving away from the rational sort of thing you are talking about, considering it tainted by Greek philosophy, and are moving towards an even less rational stance, claiming no rationality to God whatsoever, and that it is all through direct revelation that is unquestionable.
As for you leaving, I used to enjoy your comments a long time ago when you first joined but I am afraid you have become influenced by the trend that is pushing Christianity off a cliff. Instead of giving up the forum I would suggest you remove yourself from your current company who are directing your views on religion.

 

[AvalonXQ]

As for you leaving, I used to enjoy your comments a long time ago when you first joined but I am afraid you have become influenced by the trend that is pushing Christianity off a cliff. Instead of giving up the forum I would suggest you remove yourself from your current company who are directing your views on religion.

Since we're critiquing each other, let me take a moment to say that I don't believe anything you've said has ever made even a little bit of sense. You seem to spout nonsense without any connection to either reality or the Bible.

I particularly don't appreciate this because, as evidenced in this thread, as soon as you show up and say whatever disconnected thing you want to say, it diverts the conversation from anything even remotely serious or useful. People try to respond to your nonsense, which they mistake for something resembling Christianity, and the result is a thread that ends up having very little value to me.

But good luck to you anyway.

 

[Ethnikos]

People try to respond to your nonsense, which they mistake for something resembling Christianity, and the result is a thread that ends up having very little value to me.

I say things that I think could possibly be useful in a general way. I know there are more people who read this forum than who post regularly. I design my post oriented to that consideration, knowing most likely my thought would be rejected out of hand by who I am directly addressing.
I consider myself a Christian but I imagine one who does not weight himself down with excess baggage in the way of doctrine and dogma. I believe the sole purpose of the Gospel is to make us better people and that is by being good to others, not by subscribing to a whole bunch of stuff that does not direct one down that path. That includes not supporting wars of any kind. Not supporting murder or cruelty to others.
If being a Christian involves all those things, and that is the new definition of a Christian, then I renounce the name and will not be included.

 

[I Am The Scum]

I'm leaving the forum. I eliminated my avatar and signature in preparation for that.

That's depressing. I don't feel like arguing now.

I think you're one of the best posters this forum has to offer. I hope you change your mind.

 

[Charlie Monoxide]

I always liked St. Anselm’s Ontological Argument, since it doesn't use the bible.

http://www.saintaquinas.com/philosophy.html

Basically Anselm is saying that since we can "imagine" a god, he must exist ....

Charlie (thinking about Flying Spaghetti Monsters) Monoxide

 

[Leumas]

I disagree. I think there's plenty in the Bible, especially in Paul's writings in Corinthians, Ephesians, and Galatians, for the critically-minded. And teachings during the Christian journeys also made it clear that questioning and study was to be strongly encouraged.

ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE.... you obviously have not read the REPEATED admonitions of Paul against wisdom in almost all his epistles.

Here is a VIVID example


1 Corinthians

{1:16} And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
{1:17} For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.{1:18} For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
{1:19} For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. {1:20} Where [is] the wise? where [is] the scribe? where [is] the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?{1:21} For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. {1:22} For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: {1:23} But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
{1:24} But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
{1:25} Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
{1:26} For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, [are called:
]{1:27} But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
{1:28} And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, [yea,] and things which are not,
to bring to nought things that are:
{1:29} That no flesh should glory in his presence.
{1:30} But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
{1:31} That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

{2:1} And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the
testimony of God.
{2:2} For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
{2:3} And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
{2:4} And my speech and my preaching [was] not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:
{2:5} That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
{2:6} Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
{2:7} But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, [even] the hidden [wisdom,] which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
{2:8} Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known [it,] they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
{2:9} But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
{2:10} But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
{2:11} For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
{2:12} Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
{2:13} Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
{2:14} But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them,] because they are spiritually discerned. {2:15} But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
{2:16} For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.​

 

[Ethnikos]

1 Corinthians
{1:22} For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

Seeking wisdom is not condemned by Paul.
He seems to be saying that despite their searching, they did not achieve their goal.
Then he is contrasting those supposed wise men, with people who would seem in possession of no wisdom, as deemed by men, who all of a sudden do know God by knowing His son.
So I would think Paul is accepting this quest as being legitimate but unobtainable by human methods.
So he is creating a reality where the two things can coexist.
While the second example, those wishing signs, are consigned to being always frustrated and being of no practical use.

 

[Leumas]

Seeking wisdom is not condemned by Paul.
He seems to be saying that despite their searching, they did not achieve their goal.
Then he is contrasting those supposed wise men, with people who would seem in possession of no wisdom, as deemed by men, who all of a sudden do know God by knowing His son.
So I would think Paul is accepting this quest as being legitimate but unobtainable by human methods.
So he is creating a reality where the two things can coexist.
While the second example, those wishing signs, are consigned to being always frustrated and being of no practical use.

1 Corintians
{1:19} For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

He is not condemning but he is saying it is a WASTE OF TIME and that even god himself will make sure that it comes to no avail or good end.

So if I were to fear god I would consider that seeking after knowledge or prudence or wisdom or any science would be a FOOL'S QUEST and not to even bother in the first place

Since
{2:14} the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them,] because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[GrandMasterFox]

And likewise you will note, that whenever the cosmological arguments or any of that sillyness comes along, the next question is "how is that related to [insert religion here]" you can't get from "there's a designer" to "jesus\muhamad\moses\xenu" are real.

Partly the reason for this, is because it's a marketing thing. It's easier to trap you in the net by getting you to accept a designer, then the holy ghost or going to church. Due to the secularism of modern times, "Inteligent Design" sells better than creationisim (not just in a court of law).

You'll also note that if you talk to believers, they'll say a lot of times when they toss the "smart" arguments that you call them, that it was not what convinced them, but it is something they think will convince you.

When you look through the Bible, there's nothing for the critically-minded.

Actually there is. I have long sense said that there are several places in the bible that I always wondered how in the world someone left them in because they seem a good indication this God doesn't exist.

Like Elijah and the Baal prophets. They give a test that flat out tells you if a god is fake or not. How about repeating more of these please?

 

[Ethnikos]

[{2:14} the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them,] because they are spiritually discerned.

It is narrowed down to this one thing that they will not attain naturally, "The things of the spirit of God", since, apparently you would by definition, have to have that spirit.
I don't see that condemning all philosophy.

 

[Ethnikos]

Like Elijah and the Baal prophets. They give a test that flat out tells you if a god is fake or not. How about repeating more of these please?

I think only an evil god would take the challenge.
Notice Elijah runs off after this and lives with a widow who worships Baal, the quiet god who did not bring fire from heaven.
The difference was geographical. Baal was the god of that bit of earth. Yahweh was the destroyer god of the desert. What did Yahweh do? Stopped the rain. The widow worshipped the local god who had been there for a long time. What happened when Abraham brought Yahweh to Canaan? The draught came and his descendants had to flee to Egypt. The Baal god brought by the wife of the king of Israel was a foreign god, just with a similar name to the local Baal. That god had no power to resist Yahweh.

 

[Leumas]

It is narrowed down to this one thing that they will not attain naturally, "The things of the spirit of God", since, apparently you would by definition, have to have that spirit.
I don't see that condemning all philosophy.

Ethnikos.... you seem to see only SOME things and ignore others

How about this verse which I have already referenced TWO times....here is the third time....I hope you would read it this time.

1 Corintians

{1:19} For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.​

 

[Ethnikos]

Ethnikos.... you seem to see only SOME things and ignore others

How about this verse which I have already referenced TWO times....here is the third time....I hope you would read it this time.

That is an OT quote, not to be interpreted by the reader.
The writer uses the quote to draw his own interpretation from.

 

[Leumas]

That is an OT quote, not to be interpreted by the reader.
The writer uses the quote to draw his own interpretation from.

It is an OT quote which he uses to BOLSTER his argument and to SHOW that wisdom is to NO AVAIL and that whoever pursues wisdom and prudence will eventually be DESTROYED and BROUGHT TO NOTHING by the FATHER OF JESUS.

I do not see how anyone can fail to understand by all this and the OTHER verses in the passages I quoted that Paul considers wisdom a FOOL’S QUEST.

 

[Ethnikos]

It is an OT quote which he uses to BOLSTER his argument and to SHOW that wisdom is to NO AVAIL and that whoever pursues wisdom and prudence will eventually be DESTROYED and BROUGHT TO NOTHING by the FATHER OF JESUS.

I do not see how anyone can fail to understand by all this and the OTHER verses in the passages I quoted that Paul considers wisdom a FOOL’S QUEST.

I don't know. Maybe because I have never had it presented to me that way.
I would have to think about it a little more.