SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Articles and Sermons : 7 Arguments Atheists Can't Use by Eli Brayley

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 Next Page )
PosterThread
ChrisJD
Member



Joined: 2006/2/11
Posts: 2895
Philadelphia PA

 Re:

Hi Aaron,

"...isn't Marx something of a straw man here?"


No, Marx is not a straw man, just one in a long list of athiests responsible for mass-murder and torture in this world. They put into practice the creed which is as much Satanic as it is athiestic, 'do as you will', or as one athiest put it, 'no gods, no masters'.

Human reason is the athiest's dogma and opinion is his golden rule because he alone is the measure for himself, and anyone else that offers another measure besides that is just one self-guided autonomaton chiding another.


Christianity is not anti-rational, it is supra-rational.

It begins with a rationality that decesnds from Eternity, down to man. James calls it the wisdom from above and Paul says it is 'Christ Jesus' our wisdom, which none of the princes of this world knew, for had they known it, they would not have crucified the LORD of Glory.


Man cannot rise above what he worships. And man, using only earthly wisdom and human reason, can't go any higher than the top of his own head.

No wonder then that so many athiest demi-gods are worshiped in their cult of personality.


Jesus alone takes men higher.

But you have to get low first in order to see Him




_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

 2011/5/19 7:42Profile
ginnyrose
Member



Joined: 2004/7/7
Posts: 7534
Mississippi

 Re:

Quote:
ginnyrose, such would be a prediction or an intention. If that is how you employ the word: 'fact' then I can understand why you remain so confidently confused.



Ok, so I presented by opinion as fact. Yet you do likewise and consider yourself superior.

You know what? when God spoke to man through his prophets he used language that is simple, to the point and wastes no words. When man works to discount God's word they usually become very wordy, confusing the listener. Job had friends like that. Eventually, God spoke to them and informed them that they have kindled his wrath and have not spoken what is right. Then God told them to take animals for a burnt offering to Job and that he will pray for them. Wonder how humiliating that was for them?

Truth is not subjective; it just IS. Many religions have risen claiming to be the embodiment of truth, but all of their founders have died - grave yard dead and they rotted and stank. Not so with Jesus. He, too, died but resurrected, unlike all the other founders of religions. Most, if not all, of the founders of other religions can point to a grave that holds the body of their founder. Not so with Christianity: there is a grave but it is empty! Hence, His credibility: he lives!


_________________
Sandra Miller

 2011/5/19 10:26Profile
AaronAgassi
Member



Joined: 2011/4/11
Posts: 118


 Re:

Is Atheism a creed, any more than not playing chess is a hobby? Should Christianity be held to account for Aztec human sacrifice? After all, they’re both religions! ChrisJD, if you are at all acquainted with historicism etc., you know perfectly well that Marx was not a faliblist. Indeed, faliblism was Popper's rejection of infaliblist Utopist ideologies especially Communism.

You claim exclusive infallible truth, suprarationaly, transcending the rational, down from on high. That is a gigantic special pleading of blanket exemption from rational accountability and therefore antirational and barking mad. Indeed your justification is sheer stubborn refusal to embrace the human condition of imperfection and uncertainty. God is on your side, and you can't be mistaken about persecuting Gays and oppressing reproductive rights. Really, you should understand that the commandment of no gods and no masters anciently came in the name of YAHWEH: http://www.counterpunch.org/estabrook03292005.html And thinking for oneself ought to follow as corollary.

Sometimes it's the little words that sow confusion, Ginnyrose. Indeed, I do not know if I present opinion as fact, because I still do not know what the very word: 'fact' even means. What I can tell is that all assertions, Ontological statements such as employing the verb: 'to be', are, tautologically and inevitably, both opinion and claims of truth. Such is the fallible human condition. Indeed, truth is correspondence to reality in assertions, and reality is objective not subjective. But knowledge, being fallible awareness of truth, is always open to question.

And incidentally, Jesus is hardly the first mythic religious founder claimed to have overcome death.

 2011/5/19 13:25Profile









 Re: 7 Arguments Atheists Can't Use by Eli Brayley


Hello Aaron,

These are a few thoughts on some things you've mentioned since last I posted to you.

Quote:
the power in the psyche of understanding and forgiveness is quite evident but with or without religion.

Matthew 16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Mark 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

Luke 9:25 For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, or be cast away?

Quote:
But unlike you folks, I do not pretend to know better than God what God knowing me better than I know myself, ought to say to me.

Jesus offers us insight to what you may expect to hear, through his teachings.

Matthew 25:21 His lord said unto him, Well done, [thou] good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

Quote:
No Alive-to-God, what you say is not in keeping with faliblism, because your answer to inevitable error and ignorance of personal shortcoming or misdeed, is not error detection as best we may, but recourse mythic infallibility.

Let's go back a bit here. I guess in Atheism, everything is about you. In Christianity, it's about 'us' and 'we' - the 'otherness of God' and 'me' in fellowship. (I don't mean to suggest you have no friends, I just mean in the what you call the 'religious' sense, you are alone, whereas the Christian is never alone.)

But, that means that what God sees when he looks towards me, is Jesus Christ, and what I see when I look towards Jesus Christ is Jesus Christ AND my shortcomings in the light of his revelations to me (both about himself, and about me). Therefore, FREQUENTLY, I transact with God over the matters he draws to my attention. There are many angles to those transactions which I won't attempt to cover here (apart from repentance and worship), but suffice it to say that even the process of being corrected, is conducted within the compass of 'fellowship with God'. That's the difference. He doesn't cut me off or reject me as a punishment for not having been perfect, or, for things not yet known, and during this process of coming into agreement with God, the Holy Spirit renews my mind and I begin to think differently. Hopefully, more like him.
Quote:
And how's that working for you? Imperfectly, oh mere mortal? I thought so. But maybe that's okay.

:-D Very neat. The question is rather, 'does it work for God?' If it does, that's all we need.


I have more to say, but out of time for now. You could wait till I finish, before replying, or not. As you like. :) Thanks for reading anyway.

 2011/5/19 16:07
ChrisJD
Member



Joined: 2006/2/11
Posts: 2895
Philadelphia PA

 Re:

Hi Aaron,

"Certainly Rationalism and Atheism historically are fueled by humanistic moral outrage with abuse in the name of God and worship of an unjust God as might inspire such inequity"

I mentioned Karl Marx again because you said this above. Though he criticised religion, though he and others may have been moraly outraged by the abuses of religion in the name of God, he and his followers have bathed the Earth in blood in the name of militant atheism. Atheism has lit the fires of religous persecution and murder all over the Earth. And wherever genuine Christians have suffered by their hands, they have also had something to offer them as an alternative, something that could change them from monsters, into even saviours of men. I'm not sure what atheists of other stripes besides marxists(of which there are millions), have offered them. Maybe you know what they did to get them to put down their guns and stop murdering whole familes and nations.


Aaron,

"You claim exclusive infallible truth, suprarationaly, transcending the rational, down from on high. That is a gigantic special pleading of blanket exemption from rational accountability and therefore antirational and barking mad."

On the one hand you have said that absolute certainty is the mark of arrogant madness, yet you keep arguing with people you call 'barking mad', and this you assert, absolutely, without a hint of doubt.

Are we the ones that need a straight-jacket Aaron? Or is the philosophy you are holding on to tightening around you the more you kick and struggle at us?





_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

 2011/5/19 19:40Profile
ChrisJD
Member



Joined: 2006/2/11
Posts: 2895
Philadelphia PA

 Re:

"Really, you should understand that the commandment of no gods and no masters anciently came in the name of YAHWEH"


Worship is an expression of worth. And worship is instictive in human beings. When the atheist said 'no gods and no masters' it was not to exclude worship, just worship in the name of everything that is called God or master; it was to exclude the worship of God in order to make room for the worship of themselves through the exhaltaion of their minds and wills. Personal freedom is their sacred revelation and personal gratification their sweet savor of incense.









_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

 2011/5/19 19:58Profile
ChrisJD
Member



Joined: 2006/2/11
Posts: 2895
Philadelphia PA

 Re:

"And incidentally, Jesus is hardly the first mythic religious founder claimed to have overcome death."


Aaron, Jesus was aware of the claims of impostors before him(John 10:8).

Trying to resurrect dead stories that died out long ago because they never had any living fire to begin with in order to obscure the abiding testimony of Jesus Christ which has changed the World forever is like trying to throw dead coals on a live one in order to smother it.

Satan and this world with him have throw every concievable insult, assult, shame, ignominy, lie, deciet, trick, accusation, obfuscation, power and ploy against the testimony of Jesus Christ and IT CONTINUES TO BURN.

Determining where that fire comes from is a deeply personal matter, between that Fire and us.



_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

 2011/5/19 20:12Profile









 Re: 7 Arguments Atheists Can't Use by Eli Brayley

Quote:
-after God, according to your account, gave us sheer credulity and then hid the evidence in an alternate dimension accessible only by altered states or ideations indistinguishable from wishful thinking, and amid a range of similarly fantastical competing religions! Yeah, your God's a real laugh riot! Seriously, in its own right, why would honest disagreement be immoral unto damnation?

Hi Aaron,

The testimony of men from the beginning of time is that they did know when God had communicated with them. We can tell they knew, because they either replied to Him, or, did something He had asked them to do. By this we are sure they were sure.


'gave us sheer credulity and then hid the evidence' doesn't make sense. The evidence comes first; that's what prompts the credulity. I'm sure you can see that in theory.

'in an alternate dimension accessible only by altered states or ideations indistinguishable from wishful thinking' - the 'alternate dimension' is with you all the time, whether you acknowledge it or not. The 'altered states' to which you refer are only to be expected by someone having encounters with the living God.

Agreed, it is necessary to separate these from wishful thinking (or fantasy), but most definitely they ARE distinguishable by anyone who desires to know the difference.
Quote:
and amid a range of similarly fantastical competing religions!

In the Old Testament, God repeatedly scorns the images or idols which represented the spirits behind them, which were worshipped by various names and people groups.

Psalm 115:1 Not unto us, O LORD, not unto us, but unto thy name give glory, for thy mercy, [and] for thy truth's sake. 2 Wherefore should the heathen say, Where [is] now their God? 3 But our God [is] in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased. 4 Their idols [are] silver and gold, the work of men's hands. 5 They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not: 6 they have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not: 7 they have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat. 8 They that make them are like unto them; [so is] every one that trusteth in them.


Daniel 5:4 They drank wine, and praised the gods of gold, and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone.

EDIT: The fallen angels which appear on and around earth as demons are about half in number of the angels which ascend to and from heaven. They were all created beings by God. The religions which worship demons (evil, or unclean spirits, as the Bible calls them), are worshipping 'the creature more than the Creator'. This is one of Paul's complaints in Romans 1, which he says will eventually bring 'the wrath of God' upon 'all unrighteousness' (of knowing truth about God but choosing not to retain that truth in such a way as to be changed by it - to glorify God, or, to obey God's commands). All other religions worship other gods (spirits) and there is a great difference between what is expected of their worshippers, than worshippers of God are enjoined to. See Leviticus 11:43 3 Ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby. {yourselves abominable: Heb. your souls, etc} and Leviticus 18.

1 Corinthians 10:14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we [being] many are one bread, [and] one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I [say], that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. 22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?[end edit]

Quote:
Seriously, in its own right, why would honest disagreement be immoral unto damnation?

The word 'disagreement' implies a conversation with another party. Assuming you had MET God, you might not be so quick to disagree with him. 'Disagreeing' honestly wouldn't be as advantageous as 'agreeing' honestly.

Quote:
Your mythic God actually punishes compassion and righteousness along with rationality and credulity.

God himself is PURE compassion AND Righteousness and he most certainly approves of a sound mind, and faith - so I'm not sure what gave you the idea you expressed there.
Quote:
And I call your position antirational because of what Brothertom posted: "You cannot argue faith, or reason it out." This is a rejection of reason and of systematic doubt. If that's not antirational and barking mad, then what is? Rationality and rationalism do not take a backseat to supernatural faith in pursuit of truth.

'This is a rejection of reason and of systematic doubt.' The rejection needed is that which 'reasons' there is no God. The 'systematic doubt' engaged, must be applied to all previous skepticism and indicators that God is real. In the face of the 'evidence' I mentioned earlier, there is nothing unreasonable or antirational about faith. What Brothertom meant is that once you've got it, it's difficult to explain - or give up.
Quote:
Do you not maintain that God is good and moral? Please clarify.

I maintain that the morality we experience and negotiate in the world, is a function of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Luke 18:18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? 19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none [is] good, save one, [that is], God.

So yes, God is 'good', and I suggest to you that the goodness of God is of an entirely different quality to the goodness of men.

Yes, God knows what is right and what it wrong.

Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil:...'

Paul told Titus 1:15
Unto the pure all things [are] pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving [is] nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.


If this has not sufficiently clarified what I believe, please ask again.

Quote:
Does God at least answer to Himself?

Yes, most assuredly he does.

Quote:
If God is utterly amoral, then perhaps the Euthyphro Dilemma becomes moot. But what if, as you suggest, righteousness is substituted for morality, however the two might be distinguished? In that case, it would seem the dilemma remains the same. And preaching for a God who discourages people from thinking too much about righteousness, ought to raise alarm. Are, for example, Atheism or Homosexuality unrighteous simply because God so ordains? Could God, if it so amused Him, decide that child rape, torture and murder is righteous? Or does God according to his own righteous nature, condemn violence and abuse, because they are already unrighteous? And in that case then, what is unrighteous about Atheism and Homosexuality?

'But what if, as you suggest, righteousness is substituted for morality, however the two might be distinguished?'

The first is an inward state imputed and imparted by Christ through faith in his power to redeem from sin and death.

The second is a complex system of external judgements, compromises and negotiations in agreement with others in society, bearing less and less resemblance to God's standards of justice and integrity as time goes by.

'And preaching for a God who discourages people from thinking too much about righteousness, ought to raise alarm.'

It would indeed. I don't know where you got this idea. One of God's cries in the Old Testament is that 'none calleth for justice'. You mentioned the Beatitudes: Jesus said 'blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled'.

Regarding things which God decries as abominations, mostly they hang on simple principles first voiced in Genesis 1 - 3. A key, is that man was made male and female, in God's own image. Violations of Maker's Instructions incur his displeasure or wrath, if unrepented. God told Adam and Eve to replenish the earth. From this we see that he is a God of increase. He loves children. The reason that children get hurt is mostly that the adults to whom they have been entrusted, don't fulfil their role as desired.


I will have a think about trees and radio masts, mountains and redemption, and come back to you - maybe in the next few days.

 2011/5/19 20:37
Veronica226
Member



Joined: 2010/2/3
Posts: 144
Montana

 Re:

Not to anyone in particular, I just wanted to point something out that Aaron said. Hopefully my fellow believers will understand what I'm getting at...

Quote:
You claim exclusive infallible truth, suprarationaly, transcending the rational, down from on high. That is a gigantic special pleading of blanket exemption from rational accountability and therefore antirational and barking mad. Indeed your justification is sheer stubborn refusal to embrace the human condition of imperfection and uncertainty. God is on your side, and you can't be mistaken about PERSECUTING GAYS AND OPPRESSING REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS.


(Changed to caps for emphasis.)

Perhaps this is the real reason he bucks against the spurs? Because personal "rights" are at stake?

Multiple times he has implied or said that we are mad. If so why argue with insane people? It's the same as going down to the asylum finding someone who thinks the sun isn't real and arguing with them. You can't argue with an insane person. It. Just. Doesn't. Work. So why continue to argue with us if, because we believe in absolute truth or a super-rational God, we are insane. Because personal "rights" are at stake.
So lets get down to the heart of the issue, why don't you want there to be a God?


_________________
Veronica

 2011/5/19 21:05Profile
AaronAgassi
Member



Joined: 2011/4/11
Posts: 118


 Re:

Yes Veronica226, civil rights are a substantive matter at stake, and I mentioned religious intolerance in context of humanistic moral outrage as an historical motivation of Atheism as indeed ought to give pause to any human conscience.

Alive-to-God, Atheism may indeed be associated with individualism, but as we can see, also with humanism. Indeed, the mere absence of Theism allows any range of parameters. Whereas religions and ideologies though they may claim to be all about togetherness are often somewhat conditional and monolithic whereas true friendship needs to be more open to difference.

"The testimony of men from the beginning of time is that they did know when God had communicated with them. We can tell they knew, because they either replied to Him, or, did something He had asked them to do. By this we are sure they were sure." Such testimony is hardly unique to Christianity.

I refer to honest disagreement. You reply, what: Disagreement with God about the nature of God in the very face of God? Not quite. That is sophistry. You know perfectly well I refer to beliefs and opinions held in life that may be true or not, but differ and disagree with one another. For without difference of opinion, the scientific rational quest for truth is impossible. And if there is a God, could it be that there will be any soul for whom there will be no surprises in meeting our Maker? Indeed, I don’t know about you, but if, just for example, the religion of the Norsemen turns out to be the true faith, I for one am screwed, because my chances of falling in battle in order to attain Valhalla do seem slim to nil! In that case, see you all in Nifelheim! Indeed, given significant doctrinal dispute even within Christianity claiming suprarational information, how can one chose the correct denomination in order to avoid eternal damnation?

 2011/5/20 0:46Profile





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy