Originally posted by Leonhard
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Christianity 201 Guidelines
orthodox Christians only.
Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?
This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.
Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.
The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?
This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.
Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.
The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Atheism
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostI don't think it's a matter of being a 'closet' theist. I think that when confronted with the truth at the judgment even the strongest atheist will have to acknowledge that the only thing really stopping them from having known was their own unwillingness to see what was right before them.
I do think that there is a level at which we know that God is there because we are made in His image and given an instinct to seek Him. But it's a mistake to think of that knowledge as being the same as conscious knowledge. It's more akin to the way we know how to breathe from the instant of birth, despite having never before been exposed to air.The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu
[T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations
Comment
-
Eh, maybe. Truth is, most of the concept of mental knowledge sans conscious recall is just theory we've given a bunch of important sounding names. Is subconscious significantly different from instinct or from repressed memory?
When I became an atheist, I knew full well there was the chance I was wrong and that if so, there would be no valid excuse (turned out there was even less of an excuse than I'd have thought then... ). I had known God existed but had decided that that was incorrect. So, if I know X and decide X is not true, if I am in error and X is true, can I legitimately argue that I didn't really know X?
Epidemiological tailspins aside, I think the problem is that we aren't really talking about 'knowing' so much as 'knowing with high degrees of certitude'. We want a degree of certitude that probably exceeds what we actually have in the 'real' world. I may be really sure the table is solid - but in reality, the particles that make it up don't touch each other and are separated by ridiculously huge distances (if we scaled up) - it's not solid at all. So what I know with a high degree of certainty isn't actually true, from an atomic POV - maybe trusting certitude has limits.
Um, you can safely ignore the rambling..."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostI think what people have a harder time with is the notion that literally every atheist does this.
What St Paul says in Romans is all very well, but how does it follow that, because what he said then was true of unbelief in the times he lived in, therefore, his words are equally applicable to unbelief today ? Wittgenstein would probably have wiped the floor with him. St Paul is not above using fallacies: his "But who art thou, o man, to answer against God ?" in Romans 9 is a good example of a veiled argumentum ad baculum; he doesn't even attempt to answer the objection.
If people do not believe in the God of the Bible, it is often because He is an intolerable affront to their moral sense. Granted, the reasoning objectors use is often flawed - it is absurd to judge the barbaric and brutal god of Joshua and Samuel by the standards of the NT - but their mistakes are often explicable as the result of Christian failure to notice that revelation is progressive, and that the contents of the Bible differ very widely in their character. The murderous ethics of Esther could hardly be more opposed to the Teaching and Example of Christ. Nothing is gained by an apologetic that fails to admit that parts of the Bible are immoral and perverted, and that such parts fall far short of the highest pagan ethics. Illogic and depravity in the Bible, even in the service of God, are still illogical and depraved; that they appear in the Bible, is neither a defence nor a justification. Behaviour outside the Bible that is rightly called barbaric, savage or illogical, does not become holy and wise by being in the Bible with the words "And the Lord said unto X..." prefixed to them.
The massacre of the Amalekites in 1 Samuel 15 is more depraved, not less, for being ascribed to God - to make things worse, the Nazis who committed the massacres at Oradour and Lidice did at least have the decency not to ascribe their actions to a command of God; but the author of 1 Sam.15 does ascribe the massacre of the Amalekites to a Divine command. As objectors have so rightly implied, the fact that God in the Bible commands X does not even begin to guarantee that the allegedly Divine command is morally good. Divine Command Ethics abolishes the difference between God and the devil, good and evil, righteousness and unrighteousness, light and darkness, between belial and Christ.
None of this means that wicked and depraved passages in the Bible are not in some sense inspired, but who believes that they are as theologically central as Hebrews 1, or the gospels ? Repellent as they are, they are of great value for showing where the Gospel came from historically. Even so, that Christians can make sense of the depraved parts of the Bible does not mean atheists will not be scandalised by them, or by Christian lack of indignation with those passages. And how does one persuade an atheist that such passages are inspired ? To believe that, requires faith in a very specific God.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 04-14-2024, 04:34 PM
|
4 responses
34 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-16-2024, 03:47 PM | ||
Started by One Bad Pig, 04-10-2024, 12:35 PM
|
0 responses
27 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
04-10-2024, 12:35 PM
|
||
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
|
35 responses
178 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
03-27-2024, 08:28 AM
|
||
Started by NorrinRadd, 04-13-2022, 12:54 AM
|
45 responses
338 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by NorrinRadd
04-12-2024, 04:35 PM
|
||
Started by Zymologist, 07-09-2019, 01:18 PM
|
345 responses
17,174 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Yesterday, 07:38 PM
|
Comment