Questions about.. uh God? Surprise.

[Club29]

@shotgun

Due to Mr. Tentative’s solid and thorough refutation of my post, I am forced to renounce my Christianity… (chuckles)

To Mr. Mental Edge, perhaps in response to your statement, a further quote by Van Til would be appropriate.

"We believe the facts of the universe are unaccounted for except upon the Christian-theistic basis. In other words, facts and interpretations of facts cannot be separated. It is impossible even to discuss any particular fact except in relation to some principle of interpretation. The real question about facts is, therefore, what kind of universal can give the best account of the facts. Or rather, the real question is which universal can state or give meaning to any fact." - Van Tils Christian Theistic Evidences.

Chuckles?

Why would a christian “chuckle” in any case about something so damn important such as eternity.

[shotgun]

Mr. Club29,

Are you going to respond to my post or are you content with changing the subject? Because I can proceed either way.

[Club29]

@shotgun

Mr. Club29,

Are you going to respond to my post or are you content with changing the subject? Because I can proceed either way.

I was pretty sure I did… respond… to your post… Mr. Shotgun.

[shotgun]

Where you not happy with the way I answered your questions about anomalies, and if not, why? Do you maintain that your question can consistently be asked of the Christian, even in light of the specific reasons I gave to the contrary?

In your response to my post, it would be beneficial to re-state my argument, (in a generous and adequate way) then show how I have reasoned falsely.

I applaud your emotional involvement in this issue, but I should not like to see you end up like Mr. Tentative, who, in his last post to me, made self refuting remarks such as:

You present circular arguments, Extrapolate conclusions from thin air, and arrive at a Christian god as if there were no other possibilities.

Which, is itself, a conclusion pulled from thin air, as if there were no other possibilities.

If you would critique my post, and show me the error of my reasoning, I would be most appreciative!

[Club29]

@shotgun

Where you not happy with the way I answered your questions about anomalies, and if not, why? Do you maintain that your question can consistently be asked of the Christian, even in light of the specific reasons I gave to the contrary?

In your response to my post, it would be beneficial to re-state my argument, (in a generous and adequate way) then show how I have reasoned falsely.

I applaud your emotional involvement in this issue, but I should not like to see you end up like Mr. Tentative, who, in his last post to me, made self refuting remarks such as:

You present circular arguments, Extrapolate conclusions from thin air, and arrive at a Christian god as if there were no other possibilities.

Which, is itself, a conclusion pulled from thin air, as if there were no other possibilities.

If you would critique my post, and show me the error of my reasoning, I would be most appreciative!

Mr. Shotgun,

You theistic gascon, gotta love you and I’m glad you’ve taken the time to grace us with your presence.

Now I will elaborate, I suppose it’s needed? On my first sincere response I’ve already given.

In no way shape or form, am I trying to prove you wrong. That was not my intent, but I’m not sure you understood what I meant to say. So I’ll try it again.

If God existed, would there not be more unexplained occurances happening, would we have reached this height of scientific intelligence that would lead us astray so far if God existed. Now of course we cannot attempt to know the intent of God, however, why would God allow us to be more confused? I’m going to allow them to find out the processes I’ve created so that more scientist will stop believing in me? Therefore more people who lose faith in me? God’s best weapon right now for faith is that there are unknown occurances, but they are few and far between, and they’re becoming fewer all the time. Now this is only a thought, a thought of why would God allow this? I mean, God could have gave the secret to the many men he used about how he logically turned water into wine, how he logically raised people from the dead, how he logically parted the red sea, how he logically turned men into cattle and made lambs talk? These are God’s secrets that he never shared although many I’m sure wanted to know. Is our civilization not worse than babel?? Isn’t that one of the reasons he destroyed babel?

I’m not trying to attempt to say I know how God would have done it, but through our own personal connections, we sure as hell know we’re confused and mislead entirely, why would he have allowed that?

My question is not, wouldn’t there be more mothman prophecies, my question is wouldn’t there be a hell of alot more shit we don’t understand “scientific things” Why is the sky blue and so on.

No it isn’t textbook, so i’m not sure if you can answer it.

[shotgun]

You theistic gascon, gotta love you and I’m glad you’ve taken the time to grace us with your presence.

We’ll see how long that lasts…(lol)

Now I will elaborate, I suppose it’s needed?

No, it is not needed. What is needed is a response to my argument, which you have yet to provide, as I’ll show in this response.

In no way shape or form, am I trying to prove you wrong.

Really? One of my explicitly stated conclusions was that neither you nor Mr. Reality Checks posts could refer to the Christian God. If you’re not trying to prove this wrong, then why did you write this entire response to me, apparently applying your reasoning to the Christian God?

I don’t for a minute buy your statement that you’re “not trying to prove you wrong.” According to scripture you hate and despise that which is true.

1 Corinthians 2:14 says:

But the natural man does not receive the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Titus 1:15 says:

To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled.

In addition, the Westminster Confession also makes this point clear:

Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto. Chapter 9 section 3.

So, I do understand at the outset that your fallen nature leaves you in such a state as to naturally despise and wish to discredit my position. It’s ok, I can deal with that.

That was not my intent, but I’m not sure you understood what I meant to say. So I’ll try it again.

I do understand your argument, and despite what you think, it is a little more “textbook” than you may realize. (See the collection of lectures by Bertrand Russel called, “Why I’m not a Christian.”) If you think I have at some point unfairly represented your statements, then, please correct me. (Doing so may force you to go back and actually read my post.)

If God existed, would there not be more unexplained occurrences happening,

Unexplained by your empirical naturalistic presuppositions?

would we have reached this height of scientific intelligence that would lead us astray so far if God existed.

Due to mans unregenerate nature, he strives against the Lord, and insists on placing his own autonomous nature on Gods throne. This is no surprise. It is only due to the common grace of God on all man that empirically based naturalistic science has made any progress at all.

Now of course we cannot attempt to know the intent of God,

The Christian knows the intent of God, because we realize that God has revealed it to all men. He has written his law on our hearts, as per Romans chapter 2 verse 15.

however, why would God allow us to be more confused?

Romans 1 starting in verse 22 answers this question nicely:

Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Verse 28 concludes:

Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

When autonomous man strives against God, he allows their evil for a time (gives them over to it). This is so that the righteous will of God will be carried out unto all men.

I’m going to allow them to find out the processes I’ve created so that more scientist will stop believing in me?

The study of Gods natural revelation is very important, and certainly strengthens the faith of the Christian. This of course is not so for the man who interprets all empirical data through the lens of his false non-Christian presuppositions. This is why Christian scientists (who have faith in the Bible) interpret data in radically different ways than does the Naturalistic atheist.

God’s best weapon right now for faith is that there are unknown occurrences, but they are few and far between, and they’re becoming fewer all the time.

So, we’re getting closer to solving Zeno’s paradox’s? How about Hume’s problem of induction? I suggest you read Bertrand Russel’s “Problems of Philosophy.”

[b]Now this is only a thought, a thought of why would God allow this? I mean, God could have gave the secret to the many men he used about how he logically turned water into wine, how he logically raised people from the dead, how he logically parted the red sea, how he logically turned men into cattle and made lambs talk? These are God’s secrets that he never shared although many I’m sure wanted to know. Is our civilization not worse than Babel?? Isn’t that one of the reasons he destroyed babel?[/b]

Please refer to my above post, in which I answer these questions very nicely. Especially pay attention to my discussion about Gods providential working in nature.

As for Babel, I’ll leave that to it’s own thread (if you’re curious enough to start one.)

[shotgun]

I’m not trying to attempt to say I know how God would have done it, but through our own personal connections, we sure as hell know we’re confused and mislead entirely, why would he have allowed that?

Again, this question could be re-stated as, “What is the meaning of life.” Why would God create someone he knew would just “be confused” and ultimately end up in Hell?

Romans 9:17

“For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens who he wants to harden.”

Also, in verse 21:

Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? What if God choosing to show his wrath and make his power known bore with great patience the objects of his wrath - prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy whom he prepared in advance for glory?

My question is not, wouldn’t there be more mothman prophecies, my question is wouldn’t there be a hell of alot more shit we don’t understand “scientific things” Why is the sky blue and so on.

You have not even tried to show how this should be the case if Christianity were true.

Christians maintain that God provides men with the rational preconditions of intelligibility, without which you couldn’t know anything at all. Let alone what color the sky is.

As for textbooks, try looking in one and finding out how to tell me that the sky is blue without utilizing Christian presuppositions. (Begging the question doesn’t count.) I suggest proving to me the blueness of the sky in a different thread as well, in the effort to keep this thread as on topic as possible.

Love in Christ,

Americas favorite firearm

[Xunzian]

We’re actually discussing that very question about the blue-ness of the sky in this thread. I’d be curious to see what you have to say about it.

[Club29]

@shotgun

You theistic gascon, gotta love you and I’m glad you’ve taken the time to grace us with your presence.

We’ll see how long that lasts…(lol)

Now I will elaborate, I suppose it’s needed?

No, it is not needed. What is needed is a response to my argument, which you have yet to provide, as I’ll show in this response.

In no way shape or form, am I trying to prove you wrong.

Really? One of my explicitly stated conclusions was that neither you nor Mr. Reality Checks posts could refer to the Christian God. If you’re not trying to prove this wrong, then why did you write this entire response to me, apparently applying your reasoning to the Christian God?

I don’t for a minute buy your statement that you’re “not trying to prove you wrong.” According to scripture you hate and despise that which is true.

1 Corinthians 2:14 says:

But the natural man does not receive the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Titus 1:15 says:

To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled.

In addition, the Westminster Confession also makes this point clear:

Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto. Chapter 9 section 3.

So, I do understand at the outset that your fallen nature leaves you in such a state as to naturally despise and wish to discredit my position. It’s ok, I can deal with that.

That was not my intent, but I’m not sure you understood what I meant to say. So I’ll try it again.

I do understand your argument, and despite what you think, it is a little more “textbook” than you may realize. (See the collection of lectures by Bertrand Russel called, “Why I’m not a Christian.”) If you think I have at some point unfairly represented your statements, then, please correct me. (Doing so may force you to go back and actually read my post.)

If God existed, would there not be more unexplained occurrences happening,

Unexplained by your empirical naturalistic presuppositions?

would we have reached this height of scientific intelligence that would lead us astray so far if God existed.

Due to mans unregenerate nature, he strives against the Lord, and insists on placing his own autonomous nature on Gods throne. This is no surprise. It is only due to the common grace of God on all man that empirically based naturalistic science has made any progress at all.

Now of course we cannot attempt to know the intent of God,

The Christian knows the intent of God, because we realize that God has revealed it to all men. He has written his law on our hearts, as per Romans chapter 2 verse 15.

however, why would God allow us to be more confused?

Romans 1 starting in verse 22 answers this question nicely:

Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Verse 28 concludes:

Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

When autonomous man strives against God, he allows their evil for a time (gives them over to it). This is so that the righteous will of God will be carried out unto all men.

I’m going to allow them to find out the processes I’ve created so that more scientist will stop believing in me?

The study of Gods natural revelation is very important, and certainly strengthens the faith of the Christian. This of course is not so for the man who interprets all empirical data through the lens of his false non-Christian presuppositions. This is why Christian scientists (who have faith in the Bible) interpret data in radically different ways than does the Naturalistic atheist.

God’s best weapon right now for faith is that there are unknown occurrences, but they are few and far between, and they’re becoming fewer all the time.

So, we’re getting closer to solving Zeno’s paradox’s? How about Hume’s problem of induction? I suggest you read Bertrand Russel’s “Problems of Philosophy.”

[b]Now this is only a thought, a thought of why would God allow this? I mean, God could have gave the secret to the many men he used about how he logically turned water into wine, how he logically raised people from the dead, how he logically parted the red sea, how he logically turned men into cattle and made lambs talk? These are God’s secrets that he never shared although many I’m sure wanted to know. Is our civilization not worse than Babel?? Isn’t that one of the reasons he destroyed babel?[/b]

Please refer to my above post, in which I answer these questions very nicely. Especially pay attention to my discussion about Gods providential working in nature.

As for Babel, I’ll leave that to it’s own thread (if you’re curious enough to start one.)

First of all, I did give you a response to your argument. I wrote the response to help you understand where it is im coming from with my question specifically, and I’ve done it a second time, how rude of you.

According to scripture? “You” See that’s your problem, as well as many theists problem. Why don’t you talk to people like they are just like you instead of a slave of satan.

I wish to despise and discredit your position because your ‘being’ an asshole. From your very first post you’ve been very pompous (and that is your nature as said by the atheistic bible, I mean do you like that? creature from the jesus lagoon?). As I said, try talking to people with respect.

Unexplained from the position we don’t understand how it works. It’s really quite simple.

God’s grace was a bit more flexible recently than it was in babel, I mean, technically I haven’t seen fire and brimstone reign down from the sky or people turning into salt. But we do have way more homosexual activity and definitely better technology but God decided this time he’ll let it happen did he.

So you know the intent of God? You know why he causes natural disasters? Damn, that’s pretty amazing, I wish when I was a devout apologetist I knew his purpose, would have definitely helped in philosophy 101.

The simple question is, it doesn’t seem from personal natural thought that God would want to confuse us, but yet we are confused with the fact that the universe could have probably came about without him, and that we have no signs that we see once in a while that don’t make sense for us to possibly believe there is something more. Why does that scale tip to that? This is only a ‘doesn’t it seem’ it would be that way? Doesn’t it seem that God wouldn’t want us more confused and lost to him? It’s not an argument, its simple something to ponder. In fact, really most arguments that are called arguments are just natural tendancies we believe. I REPEAT AGAIN, I’M NOT SAYING GOD DOES NOT EXIST, BECAUSE IF HE DID WE’D HAVE MORE SCIENTIFIC ANOMALIES. I’m saying as I’ve said it a hundred times, wouldn’t it seem that it would be that way.

Now you have to answer why it wouldn’t seem that way. And quite personally, I don’t even care to know unless it’s a pretty clear idea. Because that was the smallest of my questions, and it wasn’t an argument but a simple question, you however have not answered it right. And this time if you do attempt to answer it again, please spare me of the play by plays or why I act the way I do because the bible says so and just talk to me like a man or a woman, w/e you are.

[joekoba]

@shotgun

In the interest of narrowing the scope of this discussion back to a reasonable level, I will here only respond to what seems to me the two most interesting posts in the above discourse.

By interesting, I in no way mean, “philosophically sound” since none of you so far have shown any concern for consistency in your own approach to the posed topic. By interesting, I simply mean, the posts which have seemingly taken the most time to think through the stated position, and arrive at some form of critique of a Theistic view.

I will answer Mr. Club29’s question (for the first time in this thread) from a uniquely Christian foundation. I will also respond to Mr. Reality Check, (who should know better than to make certain generalizations given the outcome of our last exchange).

I see no better way to begin than by directly confronting Mr. Club29’s explicit question:

[i]“If God existed, would we not have more scientific anomalies?”[/i]

In answer to this, I will quote from a lecture given by Werner Heisenberg called, “Quantum Theory and the Roots of Atomic Science.”

Looking back to the development of Greek philosophy up to this point one realizes that it has been borne from the beginning to this stage by the tension between the One and the Many. For our senses the world consists of an infinite variety of things and events, colors and sounds. But in order to understand it we have to introduce some kind of order, and order means to recognize what is equal, it means some sort of unity. From this springs the belief that there is one fundamental principal, and at the same time the difficulty to derive from it the infinite variety of things. - Lecture by Werner Heisenberg. You can read this lecture in the book containing a series of lectures by Heisenberg “Physics and Philosophy” pg. 36.

It is here that Werner Heisenberg clearly explains the ancient philosophical problem that I shall refer to as the “One and the Many.” (I bolded the relevant description in Heisenberg’s quote.)

With this paradox in mind, it is possible to say that in a timeless and eternal universe, that ALL actions are anomalies. Granted, there are some unusual patterns of anomalies, (like sasquatch, or the success of boy bands,) but these unusual patterns of anomalies are no more strange than the regular pattern of events that we’re used to. In other words, in relation to the “One,” all events are a part of the “many” no matter how “strange” the event may be.

There are hidden assumptions in Mr. Club29’s statement which need fleshing out for the sake of clarity. Re-stated Mr. 29’s question would sound like this:

“If some nebulous, unspecified, concept of a God WERE to have created everything, then why do we not observe more scientific anomalies?”

In light of the One and the Many, we can see that Club’s question poses no problem for the Christian, who says that God, through his divine providence is Lord over every aspect of life.

Such an imposing question may cause problems for some other religion, but as for the Christian, it is not a problem at all. In fact, it is only upon Christian presuppositions that the One and the Many problem can even be consistently addressed.

I love God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit! God being by nature One, and Many is on par with the supposed paradox described by Heisenberg. As Christian Theologian Cornelius Van Til explains:

“In God’s being there are no particulars not related to the universal and there is nothing universal that is not fully expressed in the particular. It goes without saying that if we hold to the eternal one and many in the manner explained above we must hold the temporal one and many to be created by God.” - Van Til in “Defense of the Faith” pg. 43.

Van Til goes on to say, (on page 44):

“All aspects being equally created, no one aspect of reality may be regarded as more ultimate than another. Thus the created one and many may in this respect be said to be equal to one another; they are equally derived and equally dependent upon God who sustains them both. The particulars or facts of the universe do and must act in accord with universals and laws. Thus there is order in the created universe. On the other hand, the laws may not and can never reduce the particulars to abstract particulars or reduce their individuality in any manner.”

Unity and plurality, (One and the Many) are equally ultimate in the Christian conception of the ontological Trinity. Thus can the Christian determine the legitimate role of universals and particulars, consistently tying together the one and the many.

But what of Mr. Reality Check’s objection? Why indeed would God need to “swoop in and fix something?”

As was the case in our former exchange, I assume at the outset that Mr. Check is intending to critique the Christian position, especially the doctrine concerning miracles, but has failed to explicitly state this to be so. This is a convenient oversight on the part of Mr. Check, since, had he indicated that his question were being asked to the Christian, I could immediately point out how ungenerous and demonstrably false his characterization of the Christian position was!

I’ll grant to Mr. Check that he was not including Christianity in his discourse, since I’m sure he’s knowledgeable enough in Christian theology to realize how inadequate such a critique would be when applied to the Christian concept of God, and his miracles.

As more knowledgeable individuals like myself and Mr. Check realize, such a position could NOT be applied to the Christian God, given the doctrine of the divine providential working of God in his Creation.

To the Christian, God is the final cause of all things from wind blowing trees, to wind parting seas! The Westminster Confession of Faith says it this way:

“God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass.” - chapter 3, section 1.

(If any of you would like a further scriptural case of Gods complete sovereignty, please shoot me an email, and I’ll be happy to discuss with you the relevant scriptures!)

This being the case in Christian theology, all acts are caused by God. Any “miracle” would just be an unusual display of Gods providential working in nature.

If this is true, then why would God re-grow a mans arm, if God ordained for that man to lose his arm to begin with? “Unusual” workings of God’s will (miracles) happen for specific and explicitly stated reasons! One common reason, especially at the end of the Old covenant dispensation, was to give authority to the one performing the miracle.

John 10:37

“Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does, but if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father!”

Such is not always the reason for Gods unusual providential workings, but what must be remembered is that God is sovereignly in control and knows what is best for us.

Romans 8:28 says that in ALL things God works for the good of those who love him!

Thus the Christian can be confident in prayers prayed in the will of Jesus, (in his name). Jesus especially teaches us this in the Sermon on the Mount when he shows his disciples the correct attitudes to have when praying. (Matthew 5:9) “THY WILL BE DONE!”

In Conclusion

It is clearly evident that neither Club29, nor Mr. Check’s arguments against the rationality of Theism apply to Christianity, and that being the case, I am not concerned with the conclusions they draw from their arguments, since it does not apply to the Christian God.

I look forward to any further discussion on this issue!

Let’s just save time and space. Your last statement reflects closed mindedness that reflects that of a common “Christian.” This forum isn’t for closed minded individuals, although most take exception to this in the religion forum. Since your God cannot be attacked what good is he?

Also what God knows best for us doesn’t mean what we know best which God knows best.