EPM said:
I guess I'll tell you what evidence would convince me of a +God universe (your God, specifically)....
Other evidence would include personal revelation from God....
The Rapture. If the Rapture happened then I would instantly convert. No question.
Finally, if a YEC were able to accurately describe the theory of evolution - with a decent cross-section of the evidence that supports it - and then were to refute it using sound reasoning and scientific evidence; then I'd convert too.
Not because the ToE had been disproved, that makes no difference. Merely because a YEC was able to display a level of honesty and intellectual rigour with regards to evolution that, so far, has been so lacking that it would be miraculous at this point to actually see it. ;)
Firstly, I doubt from talking to you in the past whether you would take an angel as evidence...you would merely think you were dreaming? Yes?
Rapture...is too late as far as I know. Might as well say "When God sends me to hell, then I will believe."
Finally, you should not base your beliefs about God on your concept of dishonest people. True? Just because people can lie while in politics, does this mean that politics do not exist?
Remember, YEC people are not the only "fundamentalist" Christian believers. To me fundamentalist means sticking to the truth of the whole Bible.
I will aim to get my "would be" old earth view on soon for you as you have expressed interest in the past.
I presented things that could conceivably occur and would convince me that the way I currently view the world is wrong. You have failed to provide such instances.
Can you show me how it is probable that earth fell into just the right distance from the sun to form delicate life? Also can you show me how apparent order in our universe that seems to be like building blocks of laws working together... that seem to fit together so well, without design?
Also, show me how when at times I have prayed in faith and miracles have happened or unlikely situations occur along with my prayer, how did it happen by accident?
These refutations might convince me of no God. I would need to weigh the evidence. Just as you weigh the evidence...but we come to different conclusions. I am unconvinced of a universe without God. You are unconvinced of a universe with God.
BeamStalk said:
Eye witness testimony means nothing without corroborating evidence. There are men being freed in Texas that were accused of rape by eye witness testimony, including victim testimony. Why are they being freed? DNA evidence proves they didn't do it. Now were the eye witnesses lying? Probably not, I would guess that most were mistaken or did not see everything as clearly as they thought and the mind filled in the blanks.
Yes I know people get things wrong but we are talking about EVIDENCE, NOT PROOF. How do court cases generally make their decisions? by looking at the evidence they have, taking the best conclusion. We all live like this.
From DNA, they inference the best conclusion. DNA is not proof from my understanding. 2+2=4 is proof, it is a truism , but in reality we all take conclusions on assumptions to some degree.
What did you have for tea/dinner/supper? (whatever Americans call it :))
We know that food can be poisoned without us knowing it. Do you scientifically test it to see if it is poisoned each time or do you take the best conclusion?
Do you test the air each time you breath it in?
BeamStalk said:
Here is an example:
A person walks up to you and says, "I have a baseball."
You respond, "Do you have any evidence for this?"
"Here it is in my hand."
A different person walks up to you and says, "I have a baseball."
"Do you have any evidence for this?"
"YOU CAN'T PROVE I DON'T HAVE A BASEBALL!"
I'll re-write it to demonstrate how I see it:
A person walks up to you and says, "I have affectionate love for someone."
You respond, "Do you have any evidence for this?"
"Yes, the affects of it"
A different person walks up to you and says, "I have affectionate love for someone."
"Do you have any evidence for this?"
"Yes, but YOU CAN'T PROVE I DON'T HAVE AFFECTIONATE LOVE FOR SOMEONE!"
The person with affectionate love cannot show scientifically as a "baseball" that it is real...but they can have evidence of this affectionate love that leads to the conclusion of a real affectionate love.
God is not stick and stone, He is God. We can see evidence of His affects (like love) on creation around us. I cannot see wind, but I can see it's affects.
P.S. Who is Dani'EL?
Wow, this post is all over the place. I know you didn't mean to, but when you toss out this many points and questions and lose all coherence it becomes almost impossible to see what your actual point is.
ReplyDeleteI'll give it a go though.
"Firstly, I doubt from talking to you in the past whether you would take an angel as evidence...you would merely think you were dreaming? Yes?".
I presume that an angel of the Lord would be able to appear to me in such a way that I would know that it wasn't a dream (otherwise, what's the point of appearing to me?). So not necessarily.
"Rapture...is too late as far as I know".
So what's the point of the Rapture then?
"Finally, you should not base your beliefs about God on your concept of dishonest people. True?".
I was kidding, mate. My point was that YEC folk seem incapable of honestly describing the theory of evolution and it would be a 'miracle' if one of them were able to. I know you don't necessarily identify with YEC (some would call heretic for that, BTW) and neither do most Christians. I was just saying that it would be a 'miraculous' even if this were to happen.
I look forward to hearing your Old Earth thoughts when you've formulated them.
The rest of your response to me is just you dancing around the issue again. I don't know why you don't just say what you really want to say; "nothing can convince me that there is no God". That's what you want to say, right? So just say it.
Because I seriously doubt that any explanation that anyone could give regarding fine-tuning, design, life or your perception of answered prayers is going to make the slightest bit of difference to you're conclusion that God is responsible.
I'll let Beams pick up the rest.
PS. this is Dani'El;
http://thejudgmentofsanfranciscoluke17.blogspot.com/
Wow, this post is all over the place. I know you didn't mean to, but when you toss out this many points and questions and lose all coherence it becomes almost impossible to see what your actual point is.
ReplyDeleteHuh?
I knew the exact points I wanted to bring out.
You seemed to pick up them which is good.
My points...I replied to various statements made by you.
I seek to point out that there is a difference between evidence and proof. The core paragraph of this post is "These refutations might convince me of no God. I would need to weigh the evidence. Just as you weigh the evidence...but we come to different conclusions. I am unconvinced of a universe without God. You are unconvinced of a universe with God."
You and Beams, were trying to say from my understanding, that I believe for no reason (evidence)...which is a lie, and simply by faith. I am unconvinced of no-God for a reason. If my reasons for the existence of God were taken away then of course I would consider His non-existence, just as any person would.
God does not require us to be idiots. Throughout the Bible He always gives reasons for people to believe in Him
The rest of your response to me is just you dancing around the issue again. I don't know why you don't just say what you really want to say; "nothing can convince me that there is no God". That's what you want to say, right? So just say it.
???
I feel like saying the exact same thing about you guys! LOL. Dancing around the issue by saying you are simply un-convinced.
Da Bomb,
ReplyDeleteQuick question; do you think that a belief in a god(s) is the default state for human beings?
Not any god in particular, just generic 'god'. If so, why? [I would advise against saying something along the lines of 'the Bible says...' lest you be accused of circular reasoning, but if that is indeed your explanation then so be it]
Cheers,
ExPatMatt said...
ReplyDeleteSo what's the point of the Rapture then?
------
Most of what is understood by the term “the Rapture” is based on popular fiction and not on scripture. It is portrayed as being an escape for Christians from the “Great Tribulation” prophesied of the end of history.
This view was widely popularised by Hal Lindsay in the 1970s and more recently by Tim Lahaye.
Scripture speaks of an event when surviving Christians on the earth will be caught up to meet Jesus in the air upon His return. I see that this happens AFTER the events commonly described as “the Great Tribulation”. That period is described as a time of great persecution against God’s people throughout which countless numbers will be martyred for their faith.
On Jesus return He will defeat the world rulers and install His own rule on earth with various degrees of authority delegated to His people.
So the event known as “The Rapture” is a gathering of God’s people to Jesus, prior to His anger being poured out upon those who have been savagely persecuting them.
I therefore would NOT like to take the risk of thinking I could repent and turn to God AFTER the “Rapture” has taken place, when I think the existence of God has been confirmed.
Dear DaBomb,
ReplyDeleteNow you owe me 1000 times of:
I should not write "affect" when I mean "effect"
You wrote:
"Yes, the affects of it"
You meant:
"Yes, the effects of it"
So, when something has an effect on us, it is affecting us. Clear?
G.E.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"God is not stick and stone, He is God. We can see evidence of His EFFECTS (like love) on creation around us. I cannot see wind, but I can see ITS EFFECTS."
ReplyDelete(Note also the "ITS", no apostrophe. It's corresponds to "it is" and to "it has", while "its" is the proper pronoun you wanted to use.)
...
EPM,
ReplyDeleteQuick question; do you think that a belief in a god(s) is the default state for human beings?
Well, if you mean that I think that it is the most obvious conclusion that there is a God, then yes.
But whereas I do not think that it is a "default" position. What I mean by this is simply that we all start as babies and as we get older we mature and look at the world around us and draw conclusions from evidence.
So technically I do not believe in a default "position", but I think that God is most obvious, therefore the stronger and most common sense conclusion to come to is the conclusion of God.
Make sense?
Onesimus,
Great comment about the rapture, I too am a post-trib.
Photosynthesis,
New name ay G.E.?
LOL, Thanks for the tips on the grammar...shows my laziness in regard to overlooking grammar :)
This view was widely popularised by Hal Lindsay in the 1970s and more recently by Tim Lahaye.
ReplyDeleteWell actually it was John Darby that started and made popular the PDM form of rapture that most people think of today. It didn't really take off until the publication of the Scofield Reference Bible.
The passage that people refer to as the rapture is found in 1 Thessalonians 4 and 5:
Now concerning love of the brothers and sisters, you do not need to have anyone write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love one another; and indeed you do love all the brothers and sisters throughout Macedonia. But we urge you, beloved, to do so more and more, to aspire to live quietly, to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we directed you, so that you may behave properly towards outsiders and be dependent on no one.
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who have died, so that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have died. For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will by no means precede those who have died. For the Lord himself, with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call and with the sound of God’s trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord for ever. Therefore encourage one another with these words.
Now concerning the times and the seasons, brothers and sisters, you do not need to have anything written to you. For you yourselves know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. When they say, ‘There is peace and security’, then sudden destruction will come upon them, as labour pains come upon a pregnant woman, and there will be no escape!
That passage is also followed up with this:
But we appeal to you, brothers and sisters, to respect those who labour among you, and have charge of you in the Lord and admonish you; esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves. And we urge you, beloved,* to admonish the idlers, encourage the faint-hearted, help the weak, be patient with all of them. See that none of you repays evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to all. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise the words of prophets, but test everything; hold fast to what is good; abstain from every form of evil.
A lot of the words around the oft quoted 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 get left out. This "rapture" was just to show that anyone that dies before Jesus' return will be taken to heaven also. Reading this was comfort for people in Thessaloniki that were afraid their loved ones weren't going to heaven because they died before Jesus' return. In other words they thought the return was imminent.
I included the last verse because of all the disrespect being shown towards authority figures lately by RTCs (Real True Christians).
Yes I know people get things wrong but we are talking about EVIDENCE, NOT PROOF. How do court cases generally make their decisions? by looking at the evidence they have, taking the best conclusion. We all live like this.
ReplyDeleteFrom DNA, they inference the best conclusion. DNA is not proof from my understanding. 2+2=4 is proof, it is a truism , but in reality we all take conclusions on assumptions to some degree.
You do know how to miss the point completely, don't you? I was showing that eye witnesses are not very reliable, that they need corroborating evidence to back up what they are saying.
What did you have for tea/dinner/supper? (whatever Americans call it :))
We know that food can be poisoned without us knowing it. Do you scientifically test it to see if it is poisoned each time or do you take the best conclusion?
Do you test the air each time you breath it in?
No, I take a chance like everyone else. You are right that the only proof is in math. What that has to do with my point is nothing.
Also less evidence is needed for mundane claims than for extraordinary claims. You would take me at my word that my real name is Justin, but you would want proof if I claimed I had found a cure for cancer.
The person with affectionate love cannot show scientifically as a "baseball" that it is real...but they can have evidence of this affectionate love that leads to the conclusion of a real affectionate love.
Again you completely miss the point. It was not about ignoring evidence, it was about switching the burden of proof. You are behaving like the person claiming that we cannot disprove they have a baseball or affectionate love.
God is not stick and stone, He is God. We can see evidence of His affects (like love) on creation around us. I cannot see wind, but I can see it's affects.
You can feel wind and test it. With the right tools you can see wind. Wind has a measurable influence on objects. We understand the source of wind, air moving from pockets of high pressure to pockets of low pressure. What is the measurable influence of God on any object that we can repeatedly test and show that its source is God?
Yup, a new name. A lot of people were taking the old one too personally. "Get Education" is kind of my motto. It works for me (I look continually to get education). But people think I am calling them uneducated. But when I want to do that I do it. So that was not the reason for the old name.
ReplyDeleteAnyway ...
photosynthesis,
ReplyDeleteLOL, I always tended to think G.E. was a put down, but NE way.
Take my name, it is just a favourite old computer gaming name that I kept, but I suppose people could think it is prideful. But I don't mean it in that way...only in gaming :)
Bring on AOE! Old games rule!
Beams,
You do know how to miss the point completely, don't you? I was showing that eye witnesses are not very reliable, that they need corroborating evidence to back up what they are saying.
But not all witnesses are unreliable...we need to work with what we have got. That is all I am trying to say; I thought you were challenging that.
Again you completely miss the point. It was not about ignoring evidence, it was about switching the burden of proof. You are behaving like the person claiming that we cannot disprove they have a baseball or affectionate love.
I thought you were portraying that because I could not give you scientific evidence of God Himself, then my arguments were pointless.
There is no neutral belief. We all believe in things we cannot see...that is my point. Just because you cannot scientifically test something does not mean it is not real. These are my points. I look forward to discussing with atheists on even ground, that is, they admit they believe something they cannot (an undesigned universe) see and so do I.
Then we can weigh the evidence without false security in being "unconvinced". Because if you are unconvinced of "something", then you must be convinced of the opposite to the "thing" you are unconvinced of.
DB
About the rapture,
ReplyDeleteWell actually it was John Darby that started and made popular the PDM form of rapture that most people think of today. It didn't really take off until the publication of the Scofield Reference Bible
I am pretty sure Onesimus would already know that.
This "rapture" was just to show that anyone that dies before Jesus' return will be taken to heaven also. Reading this was comfort for people in Thessaloniki that were afraid their loved ones weren't going to heaven because they died before Jesus' return. In other words they thought the return was imminent.
It is quite clear that the rapture is an event in of itself.
18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.
1 ¶ But concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need that I should write to you.
2 For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night.
3 For when they say, "Peace and safety!" then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape.
4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief.
5 You are all sons of light and sons of the day. We are not of the night nor of darkness.
6 ¶ Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober.
7 For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk are drunk at night.
8 But let us who are of the day be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet the hope of salvation.
9 For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,
10 who died for us, that whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with Him.
11 ¶ Therefore comfort each other and edify one another, just as you also are doing.
Comfort means or can mean to strengthen, even in the english it is com-FORT.
v18: is true, through the knowledge of the coming of Christ where we will be caught up to Him in the clouds and to be with Him forever more is a great comfort and a great hope, especially after the great tribulation.
v1: we can know when the coming of Christ will be if we watch. but He will come as a thief in the night to those who are not watching.
(Matthew 24: 40 "Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left.
41 "Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left.
42 "Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming.
43 "But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into.
44 "Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.)
So we are to be ready like the master and watch for the coming of Christ. v40 and 41 make it clear that this is some kind of a rapture or catching up as 1 Thessalonians 4 tells us.
v4-6
We are told that we are not in darkness so that that the coming of Christ will be as a thief to us. We are to watch and be sober.
Note: I am not into date setting. I just watch for the signs.
I included the last verse because of all the disrespect being shown towards authority figures lately by RTCs (Real True Christians).
I do not follow you here??? What do you mean?
DB
BeamStalk said...
ReplyDeleteWell actually it was John Darby that started and made popular the PDM form of rapture that most people think of today. It didn't really take off until the publication of the Scofield Reference Bible.
-----
Yes I know about Darby and Scofield’s involvement – but the majority of people TODAY would not have taken their beliefs directly from those sources. The direct influence of Lindsay and La Haye is much more widespread in recent years. Most of those who believe in a pre-trib rapture today are not likely to be aware of Darby and Scofield.
Hey all! The rapture is basically an American conceit that started with Cotton Mather. There's a good wiki about it.
ReplyDeleteMe, I'm looking forward to all the free space we'll have when the "true" Christians are gone. And all my Catholic friends will still be here, so what's the prob?
Zilch???
ReplyDeleteWho said all catholics were not not true christians?
True christians will be reigning with Christ on earth for 1000 years. we won't be "gone".
What happens when the 1,000 years are up?
ReplyDeleteWho said all Catholics were not true Christians? Er, just about every Protestant I've ever encountered. There's an entertaining argument over at Rhoblogy's, where Rho is telling an Eastern Orthodox guy that he is not a Christian and will probably go to Hell. But maybe that says more about the crowd I hang out with than anything else...
ReplyDeleteExPatMatt said...
ReplyDeleteWhat happens when the 1,000 years are up?
----
If you read the end of the bible and you can find out for yourself.
Start at Revelation 19 and read on to the end.
Details of the 1000 years start at the beginning of chapter 20.
Zilch,
ReplyDeleteThere we go, please don't label christians and put them in boxes...just as you atheists don't like it when we do it to you.
Da Bomb: the Christians I was referring to were doing all the labeling and boxing themselves. But yes, I am well aware that there are many different Christian viewpoints, just as there are many different atheist viewpoints.
ReplyDeletecheers from cool Vienna, zilch
Ah, so after 1,000 years God lets the Devil out to play again and then beats him. Again.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the point?
Firstly the devil and his deceptive influence is removed from the earth and people experience a world run with perfect justice. Man will have no excuses like "the devil made me do it" or that social conditions are the cause of man's bad behaviour. The "validity" of excuses like that will be totally removed.
ReplyDeleteThen after the 1000 years the devil is released and guess what - at the first opportunity men rebel against the justice that has been experienced for the previous 1000 years.
Proving without any shadow of doubt that mankind is corrupt, arrogant and anti-God (especially considering that God's reality would be totally clear during that 1000 years considering His Son has been ruling the earth for all of that time).
What's the point?
It will give mankind absolutely no excuse for their wilful contempt against their creator.
Oh, that makes perfect sense.....
ReplyDelete?