Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The Justification of Religious Belief

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Hornet View Post
    It sounds like you are saying that Christianity must be experienced by a particular person in order for that person to know whether it is true.
    I would agree with that. Perhaps knowing Christ is like being married - the experience can be had, and known about; but it is too irreducibly personal & dialogical & inward to be replicated for purposes of external observation, as though it were a dead butterfly under a microscope. There is no academically or scientifically “neutral” or “objective” way of testing for the reality of the saving knowledge of God. And besides, it is a sin to test God. A million proofs by Homer Simpson cannot prove there is no God, because all such proofs are mere word-shuffling that cannot prevail against the Reality of Who God is. This BTW is one of the reasons that it is silly and a waste of time to try to test the efficacy of intercessory of prayer by praying, and not praying, for different groups of patients. Such untheological naivety is fit only for savages. If even savages are that foolish. Some follies are so great as to be possible only to very civilised people.

    My confidence in the usefulness of reason as a means of apologetic is pretty much nil. Reason, however useful in other ways, is far too feeble to “justify the ways of God to man”. Because arguments based on reason can always be answered or exploded. To have knowledge about God, revelation by God is essential.
    Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 06-30-2019, 07:08 PM.

    Comment

    widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
    Working...
    X