Religion Ask a Christian - Continued in Part 2

[Chief]

Continued in Part Two:

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/ask-a-christian-part-2.1295001/unread

 

[Gethelred]

Buh bow. As mentioned above, which you have acknowledged was right to say, you are again presenting a false dichotomy. God has given us medicine because everything we have comes from him. He has given us logic, he has given us reason, he has given us the means to heal the sick and feed the hungry.

When Jesus dealt with the hunger of the 5000, did he do it by praying, or by giving them food? As with this medicine example, he did both. He prayed to heaven a prayer of thanksgiving, and then he gave out food. This is the practical way in which we see how our free will and God's total sovereignty work with one another.

I have a question.

Are there any achievements that are solely mankinds alone?

 

[Evolved1]

Buh bow. As mentioned above, which you have acknowledged was right to say, you are again presenting a false dichotomy. God has given us medicine because everything we have comes from him. He has given us logic, he has given us reason, he has given us the means to heal the sick and feed the hungry.

When Jesus dealt with the hunger of the 5000, did he do it by praying, or by giving them food? As with this medicine example, he did both. He prayed to heaven a prayer of thanksgiving, and then he gave out food. This is the practical way in which we see how our free will and God's total sovereignty work with one another.

You're reaching there, which I suppose is an example of great faith.

The new testament is replete with stories of miraculous healing and food being multiplied to miraculously feed the masses. You know as well as I do that none of that is real, so you're seeking to pull the supernatural out of your belief system and bring it more into the realm of realism. I can appreciate why you'd do that.

God heals a believer of cancer through chemotherapy....nonsense that believers accept.
God feeds poor people through church donations....nonsense that believers accept.

If there's no sign of the miraculous, your deity is dead.

“Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone. Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned. These miraculous signs will accompany those who believe: They will cast out demons in my name, and they will speak in new languages. They will be able to handle snakes with safety, and if they drink anything poisonous, it won’t hurt them. They will be able to place their hands on the sick, and they will be healed.” Mark 16:15-18

None of that happens today. Why? The answer is obvious to me.

Cool story, but also irrelevant to the point.

Sure it was. There is FAR more evidence for the theory of evolution than anything in the bible....resurrection, other miracles, existence of Yeshua, the Exodus from Egypt. Your faith isn't even in the same ballpark.

The theory of evolution will likely undergo minor adjustments as knowledge improves, but the facts of evolution remain constant. Shifting position when new evidence comes to light is a sign of openness and intelligence. If religious people were open to new evidence, there wouldn't be any religious people.

Which means that your dichotomy is indeed false.

No.

Of course. It is the hinge of history. Regardless of whether you believe it happened, you can surely see that if it did happen, that is as good as gold for everything else.

The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is weak and circumstantial.

 

[Evolved1]

There is no interpreting needed. The passage is talking about premature live birth, and therefore says nothing about what happens to a baby if it should die afterwards, which may or may not have been impacted by being born prematurely. It's irrelevant to this law.

Enough to know what the passage says.

You were the one who brought it up.

I brought the passage up because I see it as relevant to the discussion. You've shared your view and I've shared mine, so there's no point rehashing the same arguments. I don't agree with your interpretation of the passage.

I have already mentioned that all humans are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27, 9:6). Given that we know from passages like Psalm 139:13-16 that God knows us before we are even conceived, and is the one who makes us who we are. Therefore, there is no possible distinction to be drawn in terms of value in God's eyes.

I don't see how you could conclude that god values an embryo equally to a child from any of those passages.

The psalm passage is poetic and it takes a significant amount of mental gymnastics to make the leap in 'logic' that you have.

Take a look at Gen 2:7 "then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature."

In that passage, there's a clear distinction between when the mans flesh was created and when his spirit became alive. Adam wasn't made in the image of god until god gave him the breath of life.

 

[TigerCraig]

Why do you quote so literally when you know better?
Medicine is a gift from God, as is technology and industry.

So does that mean disease and suffering are also gifts fron your god?

 

[The Speaker]

I have a question.

Are there any achievements that are solely mankinds alone?

I think you already know the answer to that. Why do you ask?

 

[The Speaker]

You're reaching there, which I suppose is an example of great faith.

The new testament is replete with stories of miraculous healing and food being multiplied to miraculously feed the masses. You know as well as I do that none of that is real, so you're seeking to pull the supernatural out of your belief system and bring it more into the realm of realism. I can appreciate why you'd do that.

God heals a believer of cancer through chemotherapy....nonsense that believers accept.
God feeds poor people through church donations....nonsense that believers accept.

If there's no sign of the miraculous, your deity is dead.

I am not removing the 'supernatural' out of anything. You're the one going spouting off dualism. I am saying that the physical and the spiritual are deeply intertwined, which is the Biblical approach to it. Don't complain just because it's too hard for you to argue against.

“Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone. Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned. These miraculous signs will accompany those who believe: They will cast out demons in my name, and they will speak in new languages. They will be able to handle snakes with safety, and if they drink anything poisonous, it won’t hurt them. They will be able to place their hands on the sick, and they will be healed.” Mark 16:15-18

None of that happens today. Why? The answer is obvious to me.

You don't believe any of it happens today, and even if it does, you will do anything to explain it away, won't you?

Sure it was. There is FAR more evidence for the theory of evolution than anything in the bible....resurrection, other miracles, existence of Yeshua, the Exodus from Egypt. Your faith isn't even in the same ballpark.

The theory of evolution will likely undergo minor adjustments as knowledge improves, but the facts of evolution remain constant. Shifting position when new evidence comes to light is a sign of openness and intelligence. If religious people were open to new evidence, there wouldn't be any religious people.

Your faith in evolution as the bedrock of everything is both admirable and ironic.

No.

The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is weak and circumstantial.

Then there is no point discussing with you any further. If you are so far gone that you can even accept a hypothetical premise that is plainly acceptable and logical, how can I trust that you are approaching anything logically?

 

[Gethelred]

I think you already know the answer to that. Why do you ask?

I ask, because I want to know. This isn't an attempt at a gotcha, either.

If you think that all achievement comes from God, how does that marry with free will? How do you reconcile that, if we cannot take credit for any good we do, how can we be found guilty of the ills we do either?

 

[The Speaker]

I ask, because I want to know. This isn't an attempt at a gotcha, either.

If you think that all achievement comes from God, how does that marry with free will? How do you reconcile that, if we cannot take credit for any good we do, how can we be found guilty of the ills we do either?

I don't know why you think that we would not be honoured for the good we do given we are held to account for the evil we do.

 

[Gethelred]

I don't know why you think that we would not be honoured for the good we do given we are held to account for the evil we do.

In your posts, you say God has provided us with medicine, implying that it is not the work of our own endeavor or our own studies into anatomy, or biology. How do you avoid the notion that, if God has provided us with medicine, we cannot take the credit for it? Does it come from him or not?

 

[Gethelred]

Couldn't one of you at least pray to your bloody gods to keep the rain away?

 

[Bring back Drum]

I have a question.

Are there any achievements that are solely mankinds alone?

Masturbation probably.

 

[Evolved1]

I am not removing the 'supernatural' out of anything. You're the one going spouting off dualism. I am saying that the physical and the spiritual are deeply intertwined, which is the Biblical approach to it. Don't complain just because it's too hard for you to argue against.



You don't believe any of it happens today, and even if it does, you will do anything to explain it away, won't you?



Your faith in evolution as the bedrock of everything is both admirable and ironic.



Then there is no point discussing with you any further. If you are so far gone that you can even accept a hypothetical premise that is plainly acceptable and logical, how can I trust that you are approaching anything logically?

I see you're well acquainted with the tried and trusted pigeon chess strategy.

Calling the theory of evolution 'faith' is an example of false equivalence, which is a logical fallacy. I find it rather odd that the most strident critics of the theory of evolution don't know the first thing about it.

Clearly we're not going to reach agreement on much, though I didn't expect us to. If you're trying to persuade me with common Christian apologetics, you wont get far.

Thanks for the discussion. I'm happy to leave it there also.

 

[Vdubs]

In your posts, you say God has provided us with medicine, implying that it is not the work of our own endeavor or our own studies into anatomy, or biology. How do you avoid the notion that, if God has provided us with medicine, we cannot take the credit for it? Does it come from him or not?

As in many of your posts, it has to be an all or none thing.
BUT...God gives people brains and intellect to use for great things and not so great things, and we all have free will. People are praying for a vaccine for Covid-019, that medical researchers can use their intellect and training for the betterment of us all. Many scientists and doctors are Christians, and pray for assistance with developing such things; many are not. Either way, it is NOT all or none. Human achievements are not mutually exclusive to God being involved.

 

[Evolved1]

Masturbation probably.

When Diego Maradona masturbates, does he use the hand of god?

 

[Gethelred]

As in many of your posts, it has to be an all or none thing.
BUT...God gives people brains and intellect to use for great things and not so great things, and we all have free will. People are praying for a vaccine for Covid-019, that medical researchers can use their intellect and training for the betterment of us all. Many scientists and doctors are Christians, and pray for assistance with developing such things; many are not. Either way, it is NOT all or none. Human achievements are not mutually exclusive to God being involved.

One cannot take the credit for medicine away from people and give it to god without at the very least reducing the culpability of the person doing the research. This has implications for free will, and for guilt. That you do not like this comes as no surprise.

 

[Vdubs]

Why is technology a "gift from god" and pussy, homosexuality and reproductive rights not.

And why did he give us technology but allow some tax-dodging campaigner like Steve Blowjobs to distribute it.

And wait so long to give it to us. I would have loved a playstation 4 when I was 12. All I had was atari 2600.

Sorry just saw you're not a christian maybe someone else can help me

You need help all right. Not sure you'll get it in this thread from those of us who ARE CHRISTIANS.

 

[Evolved1]

As in many of your posts, it has to be an all or none thing.
BUT...God gives people brains and intellect to use for great things and not so great things, and we all have free will. People are praying for a vaccine for Covid-019, that medical researchers can use their intellect and training for the betterment of us all. Many scientists and doctors are Christians, and pray for assistance with developing such things; many are not. Either way, it is NOT all or none. Human achievements are not mutually exclusive to God being involved.

You could perform a study to determine the influence of god on scientific achievement given enough data points. I'm quite certain there would be no meaningful statistical significance for the influence of god.

What do you think?

 

[Evolved1]

One cannot take the credit for medicine away from people and give it to god without at the very least reducing the culpability of the person doing the research. This has implications for free will, and for guilt. That you do not like this comes as no surprise.

I credit all of my Olympic gold medals to the work of the FSM. None of the credit is mine.

 

[Vdubs]

One cannot take the credit for medicine away from people and give it to god without at the very least reducing the culpability of the person doing the research. This has implications for free will, and for guilt. That you do not like this comes as no surprise.

Blah blah blah. I thank God every day for the skill of great surgeons, and builders, and engineers, etc. etc. That does not depend on them being God-fearing people. If they are, great. Nobody is diminishing the skills or attributes of such people except you. It is not an either / or. People can work really hard and achieve excellence, with or without reliance on God, but those of us who believe in God acknowledge that he has provided for us really well.
When people use their free will for the betterment of society, it is a gift; when they use their intellect in corrupt or devious ways that does not please God, there are repercussions at some point. No brainer

 

[Gethelred]

Blah blah blah. I thank God every day for the skill of great surgeons, and builders, and engineers, etc. etc. That does not depend on them being God-fearing people. If they are, great. Nobody is diminishing the skills or attributes of such people except you. It is not an either / or. People can work really hard and achieve excellence, with or without reliance on God, but those of us who believe in God acknowledge that he has provided for us really well.
When people use their free will for the betterment of society, it is a gift; when they use their intellect in corrupt or devious ways that does not please God, there are repercussions at some point. No brainer

I wish I could handwave the contents of someone else's argument with the equanimity you possess. But then, my side of this argument corresponds with needing things like logic and evidence where yours can rely on ignorance and rhetoric, so I suppose I should not be surprised.

Couldn't you at least do us all a favour and pray for the rain to piss off? I'm trying to watch the cricket.

 

[Vdubs]

I wish I could handwave the contents of someone else's argument with the equanimity you possess. But then, my side of this argument corresponds with needing things like logic and evidence where yours can rely on ignorance and rhetoric, so I suppose I should not be surprised.

Couldn't you at least do us all a favour and pray for the rain to piss off? I'm trying to watch the cricket.

You need black v white, either v or. You can not entertain the idea that God is the provider .

 

[Vdubs]

You could perform a study to determine the influence of god on scientific achievement given enough data points. I'm quite certain there would be no meaningful statistical significance for the influence of god.

What do you think?

Nothink.

 

[Evolved1]

Nothink.

Jesus.

 

[Evolved1]

You need black v white, either v or. You can not entertain the idea that God is the provider .

What if god is real, and there's only one true god, but his name is the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Will you entertain that idea?

 

[The Speaker]

In your posts, you say God has provided us with medicine, implying that it is not the work of our own endeavor or our own studies into anatomy, or biology. How do you avoid the notion that, if God has provided us with medicine, we cannot take the credit for it? Does it come from him or not?

We've been over compatibilism. It comes from him, and we are responsible.