RE: What are the Characteristics of a NT Christian?
April 17, 2017 at 9:33 am
(This post was last modified: April 17, 2017 at 9:35 am by Brian37.)
(April 17, 2017 at 8:32 am)Harry Nevis Wrote:(April 14, 2017 at 4:18 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: When first introduced Newton's law of gravity was considered supernatural because the prevailing wisdom at the time what that bodily interaction required physical things to bump against each other. Proponents of "naturalism" are really just explaining away the uncanny and inexplicable phenomena that do not fit the physical reductionist paradigm. Consider for a moment how the term materialism has changed over time in order to adapt it to new findings in physics. Anyone promoting 19th century materialism today would be laughed at. The 20th century version of materialism is becoming just as untenable and archaic. The more we learn about matter, the more it seems to dissolve into structured nothingness.
So you're saying there is no supernatural, right?
(April 14, 2017 at 5:48 pm)SteveII Wrote: That is foolish talk. How could someone believe in the NT before finding it compelling. People find it compelling because of the message and the evidence of its truthfulness. Refer to my post on Christianity being based on a cumulative case.--particularly the last line.
He's talking about believing in god first, numbnuts. There is no "evidence of truthfulness" if you don't believe it first.
(April 14, 2017 at 5:48 pm)SteveII Wrote: christians can't understand the world and are unwilling to try? That is a stupid statement with no basis in reality. It is you that has to answer "I don't know" to any number of questions that are important to the vast majority of people on the planet. And since these are metaphysical questions, your naturalistic, worldview will never provide and answer.
So, getting ANY answer that make you feel good is better than admitting you don"t know? This shows again how christianity is an emotional choice, not a rational one.
(April 16, 2017 at 9:01 am)SteveII Wrote: The point is you are not saying "I don't know". These are metaphysical question that cannot be answered by science so what you are really saying is that "I will never know". That is simply not sufficient to the vast majority of people in the world.
Who cares what's "sufficient"? Sufficient for what?
Steve can't flat out quote the book, so then tries to use "fine tuning" as an end around claiming "I'm not arguing the bible right now".....Now trying to hide behind the word "Metaphysical". And still unwilling to use a larger sample control group by plugging other god claims in and other holy writings in to "fine tuning" or "metaphysical".
He has nothing. If he had something that same formula would work for everybody including people with other clubs.
