Posts: 7318
Threads: 75
Joined: April 18, 2015
Reputation:
72
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 6:22 pm
(This post was last modified: July 10, 2015 at 6:23 pm by Longhorn.)
(July 10, 2015 at 5:38 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Guys, while many less attentive (or more hostile) members of the forum simplistically dismiss me because they claim I'm only here to preach my own gospel. However, I'm actually more interested in finding and presenting good answers to your questions.
Now, you will both want to respond to my question below, but you seem to be raising the same objection. I'm happy to attempt an answer but I want to be sure that I understand exactly what the objection is.
Are you asking: Why doesn't God reveal himself dramatically today like he did in the Old Testament?
If not, please express the issue in your own words.
This is NOT my answer, but if Abraham, Moses, the prophets and others had a personal encounter with God that managed to get written up in the various books which we know collectively as the Bible, why do you count those as somehow "legitimate" whereas the Near Death Experiences or other supernatural occurences in the lives of modern believers are discounted?
What's the difference?
My questions are, why is god silent (compared to the OT at least) and why don't OT revelations interfere with human free will like you claim they would?
And to answer your question, there is no difference. They are all unsupported claims, events that have natural explanations and are all equally invalid as evidence for god; however, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that god exists. Why doesn't he interfere like he used to? how did his interferences not violate free will?
if you're saying that ndes are the way god reveals himself now, how does that not violate our free will?
Posts: 7085
Threads: 69
Joined: September 11, 2012
Reputation:
84
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 6:49 pm
I still want to know why not being able to turn my head 360 degrees isn't a violation of my free will, but Randy will probably continue to dodge it, so I don't have high hopes for an answer.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
Posts: 2447
Threads: 19
Joined: May 13, 2015
Reputation:
8
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 6:58 pm
(July 10, 2015 at 6:49 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: I still want to know why not being able to turn my head 360 degrees isn't a violation of my free will, but Randy will probably continue to dodge it, so I don't have high hopes for an answer.
God has given you certain physical characteristics and capabilities. I'm not sure it's a case of God violating your free will so much as it is that God has limited what you are physically capable of doing.
Posts: 7085
Threads: 69
Joined: September 11, 2012
Reputation:
84
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 6:59 pm
(July 10, 2015 at 6:58 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: (July 10, 2015 at 6:49 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: I still want to know why not being able to turn my head 360 degrees isn't a violation of my free will, but Randy will probably continue to dodge it, so I don't have high hopes for an answer.
God has given you certain physical characteristics and capabilities. I'm not sure it's a case of God violating your free will so much as it is that God has limited what you are physically capable of doing.
There's no difference. Still dodging, I see.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
Posts: 6946
Threads: 26
Joined: April 28, 2012
Reputation:
83
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 7:12 pm
(July 10, 2015 at 6:58 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: I'm not sure it's a case of God violating your free will so much as it is that God has limited what you are physically capable of doing.
If that were true instead of just more shit you've pulled from your ass, Eve would not have been tall enough to reach the bottom branch.
Posts: 2447
Threads: 19
Joined: May 13, 2015
Reputation:
8
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 9:38 pm
(July 10, 2015 at 6:59 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: (July 10, 2015 at 6:58 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: God has given you certain physical characteristics and capabilities. I'm not sure it's a case of God violating your free will so much as it is that God has limited what you are physically capable of doing.
There's no difference. Still dodging, I see.
How is it "dodging" when I have obviously attempted to answer the question twice. You don't like my answers, and maybe that's fair if my answers suck.
But "dodging" means that I don't attempt to answer the question, doesn't it? ![[Image: sad_yes.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=forums.catholic.com%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Fani%2Fsad_yes.gif)
Posts: 7085
Threads: 69
Joined: September 11, 2012
Reputation:
84
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 10:25 pm
You didn't attempt to answer the question at all. You just used semantics to move the goalposts.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 10:58 pm
(This post was last modified: July 10, 2015 at 10:58 pm by Pizza.)
(July 10, 2015 at 10:25 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: You didn't attempt to answer the question at all. You just used semantics to move the goalposts. Then he plays definition lawyer with the word "dodging." That's kind of funny.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 11:44 pm
(July 8, 2015 at 9:51 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: (July 8, 2015 at 7:44 pm)IATIA Wrote: The classic theist response. "My god is real and yours is not". Same evidence, same stories, just a matter of preference. As it has been said, once you truly understand why you reject all those other gods, you will understand why we reject yours.
The idea that Jesus is no different than the 2,000+ gods of ancient history who have been largely forgotten may make it easier for you to discount Christianity (without actually thinking), but it's not a legitimate argument. The alleged parallels between Jesus and other so-called gods lack any real substance.
The alleged events in the life of Jesus lack any real substance.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 5492
Threads: 53
Joined: September 4, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 10, 2015 at 11:59 pm
It's funny how when you participate with the rest of the AF community in all the various threads, you don't even realize some people (theists) are still active in threads you've long given up on, like this one with Randy, and "atheistic origin science yadda yadda" with snowtracks.
Makes ya appreciate CL and the like.
I can't remember where this verse is from, I think it got removed from canon:
"I don't hang around with mostly men because I'm gay. It's because men are better than women. Better trained, better equipped...better. Just better! I'm not gay."
For context, this is the previous verse:
"Hi Jesus" -robvalue
|
