-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Breno,
That's just as reasonable an approach as anything else.
We don't REALLIY owe somebody an explanation if they aren't REALLY looking for one.
Usually when people say things like that, it's because they don't really want an answer at all...
they just want to argue.
If they really want an answer, they'll be open to WHATEVER you have to say,
in the GENUINE HOPE you just MIGHT have an answer to their dilemmas about GOD and LIFE.
When someone isn't sincere, and they aren't really looking for an answer,
then it's much less critical HOW you answer them...
because they aren't listening.
AT that point you can walk away, have a debate, do whatever.
Just do whatever God moves you to do.
That's just as reasonable an approach as anything else.
We don't REALLIY owe somebody an explanation if they aren't REALLY looking for one.
Usually when people say things like that, it's because they don't really want an answer at all...
they just want to argue.
If they really want an answer, they'll be open to WHATEVER you have to say,
in the GENUINE HOPE you just MIGHT have an answer to their dilemmas about GOD and LIFE.
When someone isn't sincere, and they aren't really looking for an answer,
then it's much less critical HOW you answer them...
because they aren't listening.
AT that point you can walk away, have a debate, do whatever.
Just do whatever God moves you to do.
If I was content to fill in gaps with unproven and unprovable, extremely weak philosophical answers, which are based on absolutely nothing at all, not even clear principles of logical thought, and which are deceptively couched in the trappings of scientific language to make them sound like real science, and which are also far more self contradictory and far more mathematically implausible than anything theism offers...
then I'd probably join you on the buddhist boards on our way to the local atheist meeting.
then I'd probably join you on the buddhist boards on our way to the local atheist meeting.
A
I see atheists acting like fools in the media ranting and raving making false assertions, building straw men armies, engaging in loopy polemics, and violating logical principles with abandon.
Then when they are soundly refuted by educated Christians they shift to ad hominem personal attacks, start tossing in red herrings, and running false assertions together run after the other not letting anyone get a word in edgewise to the extent they sometimes behave as animated as a meth head who just freebased a lid of ice. They're lives are so often filled with immoral behavior.
Fortunately, we have both God's divine revelation (e.g. scripture) and also His natural revelation (e.g. creation) which makes refuting them very easy when competency in both is mastered. Not to mention that learning how divine revelation and natural revelation correlate and harmonize is very edifying in a rebellious generation making so many false assertions about both.
I do agree with the OP that young Christians need to step up in life and gain a better mastery with respect to the things of God instead of dissipating in escapist entertainment pursuits as we see societally occurring anymore especially as we move into the final act.
Then when they are soundly refuted by educated Christians they shift to ad hominem personal attacks, start tossing in red herrings, and running false assertions together run after the other not letting anyone get a word in edgewise to the extent they sometimes behave as animated as a meth head who just freebased a lid of ice. They're lives are so often filled with immoral behavior.
Fortunately, we have both God's divine revelation (e.g. scripture) and also His natural revelation (e.g. creation) which makes refuting them very easy when competency in both is mastered. Not to mention that learning how divine revelation and natural revelation correlate and harmonize is very edifying in a rebellious generation making so many false assertions about both.
I do agree with the OP that young Christians need to step up in life and gain a better mastery with respect to the things of God instead of dissipating in escapist entertainment pursuits as we see societally occurring anymore especially as we move into the final act.
Well, for starters, not everyone's first language is English. If speaking good English is the only precursor for taking someone seriously then that is infelicitous.
I think it's really sad that an intelligent and thought provoking idea would be discarded solely for the sake of grammar or sentence structure.
Anyway peace.
A
Well, I'm here now so let's see what you are doing. What's this fallacious nonsense?:
"I was just highlighting that there are many gods you don't believe in... Such as Odin, Zeus, Poseidon etc.. And me saying that you will face their judgement is equally as effective as you telling me I will face your god's judgement."
^ One can believe in a God that is true without believing in false gods and be correct. In fact, if someone comes along and fallaciously asserts that doing so is illogical they are making a false assertion.
I see atheists engage in this fallacious reasoning all the time and it's infantile.
A true God exists. No other gods exist. If this is a true statement, and I assert that it is, then it's entirely possible for you to face an existent God's judgment without facing any non-existent god/gods/goddess/goddesses judgment whether or not you believe that you will.
Asserting that a true God cannot exist because false gods do not exist is a fallacious argument. It's as infantile as asserting that horses don't exist because flying unicorns don't exist. Obviously horses exist and unicorns do not.
"equally effective" <-- not hardly.
"I was just highlighting that there are many gods you don't believe in... Such as Odin, Zeus, Poseidon etc.. And me saying that you will face their judgement is equally as effective as you telling me I will face your god's judgement."
^ One can believe in a God that is true without believing in false gods and be correct. In fact, if someone comes along and fallaciously asserts that doing so is illogical they are making a false assertion.
I see atheists engage in this fallacious reasoning all the time and it's infantile.
A true God exists. No other gods exist. If this is a true statement, and I assert that it is, then it's entirely possible for you to face an existent God's judgment without facing any non-existent god/gods/goddess/goddesses judgment whether or not you believe that you will.
Asserting that a true God cannot exist because false gods do not exist is a fallacious argument. It's as infantile as asserting that horses don't exist because flying unicorns don't exist. Obviously horses exist and unicorns do not.
"equally effective" <-- not hardly.
The Bible, as the Word of God is very much indeed the truth that we, as Christians all rely on.
However, it is reasonable to expect that people who are not Christians will not consider this to be so.
So using historical facts, scientific theories and other reports in conjunction with the Bible makes sense than using the Bible alone in discussion with an atheist - that is what I understood from this. (could be wrong)
I also saw it as the OP urging Christians to be wise and prepare more before discussion than just debate for the sake of it.
We are all passionate about what we believe is the truth but I think for any debate there has to be some common ground that everyone agrees on.
(Starting with respect of course.)
PS - I could be wrong in my interpretation of this... I leave room for errors...
And also I leave because I am mostly done here.
God bless everyone.
Last edited:
S
The Bible, as the Word of God is very much indeed the truth that we, as Christians all rely on.
However, it is reasonable to expect that people who are not Christians will not consider this to be so.
So using historical facts, scientific theories and other reports in conjunction with the Bible makes sense than using the Bible alone in discussion with an atheist - that is what I understood from this.
I also saw it as the OP urging Christians to be wise and prepare more before discussion than just debate for the sake of it.
We are all passionate about what we believe is the truth but I think for any debate there has to be some common ground that everyone agrees on.
(Starting with respect of course.)
PS - I could be wrong in my interpretation of this... I leave room for errors...
And also I leave because I am mostly done here.
God bless everyone.
However, it is reasonable to expect that people who are not Christians will not consider this to be so.
So using historical facts, scientific theories and other reports in conjunction with the Bible makes sense than using the Bible alone in discussion with an atheist - that is what I understood from this.
I also saw it as the OP urging Christians to be wise and prepare more before discussion than just debate for the sake of it.
We are all passionate about what we believe is the truth but I think for any debate there has to be some common ground that everyone agrees on.
(Starting with respect of course.)
PS - I could be wrong in my interpretation of this... I leave room for errors...
And also I leave because I am mostly done here.
God bless everyone.
Scripture can be censured in relation to the faith, and in those cases, it seems fair that it (Scripture) can be used in turn. I believe you're right about common ground, and it often seems to be missing.
A
True correspondence with respect to the Christian worldview and reality. Paganism doesn't have it, Christianity does. See, that was easy.
Instead of asking such elementary questions, why not put forth the effort to answer the questions you're asking. That's what people with integrity do. You do have integrity don't you?
Here's a good choice to start with: 'Why I Am a Christian: Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe.'
Enjoy. When one's right then they aren't all wrong.
Instead of asking such elementary questions, why not put forth the effort to answer the questions you're asking. That's what people with integrity do. You do have integrity don't you?
Here's a good choice to start with: 'Why I Am a Christian: Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe.'
Enjoy. When one's right then they aren't all wrong.
I want to make a brief point about methodology.
We're talking about apologetics, and there are MANY different and effective ways to go about it.
I think we can often choose the best approach simply based on context:
1) What is the environment we are in?
2. Who is the person in front of us, that we're talking to?
When Christ spoke to people, he gave each person a special message, just for them.
He spoke to each person in a different way, so THAT person would best understand.
I think that whether we are preaching, witnessing, or doing apologetics,
we should still be using Christ's example of tailoring the message to the listener.
With this concept in mind, there really is no "bad" apologetic argument,
only the ability to present it badly.
There are no bad arguments, just arguments that fit better in different places,
and with different people.
The most important thing is to be walking closely with God, so we can be led by his Spirit.
Once D.L. Moody was confronted with an atheist, and he had a VERY STRANGE apologetic argument.
The Atheist came up after a sermon to argue.
Moody turned to him and said, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die."
Then Moody went back to talking to someone else!
Soon the man raised his voice, and began to argue again.
Moody again turned to him and said, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die."
And AGAIN he turned his back, and went back to talking with someone else.
This happened numerous times.
Each time the man tried to argue, Mood said the same thing,
"The soul that sinneth, it shall die."
Eventually Moody and his companions noticed someone behind them
kneeling on the floor, weeping and wailing,
bawling his eyes out in a terrible fit.
They looked closer...
it was the same atheist, now broken... broken and humbled before his God.
He repented of his sins that night, and gave his life to Christ.
That is how Moody discussed the existence of God with an atheist.
There are many ways to do apologetics,
from discussing particle physics to discussing only the heart.
Whatever we do, we need to be led by God,
so that He can help us choose the right discussion for the right person.
We're talking about apologetics, and there are MANY different and effective ways to go about it.
I think we can often choose the best approach simply based on context:
1) What is the environment we are in?
2. Who is the person in front of us, that we're talking to?
When Christ spoke to people, he gave each person a special message, just for them.
He spoke to each person in a different way, so THAT person would best understand.
I think that whether we are preaching, witnessing, or doing apologetics,
we should still be using Christ's example of tailoring the message to the listener.
With this concept in mind, there really is no "bad" apologetic argument,
only the ability to present it badly.
There are no bad arguments, just arguments that fit better in different places,
and with different people.
The most important thing is to be walking closely with God, so we can be led by his Spirit.
Once D.L. Moody was confronted with an atheist, and he had a VERY STRANGE apologetic argument.
The Atheist came up after a sermon to argue.
Moody turned to him and said, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die."
Then Moody went back to talking to someone else!
Soon the man raised his voice, and began to argue again.
Moody again turned to him and said, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die."
And AGAIN he turned his back, and went back to talking with someone else.
This happened numerous times.
Each time the man tried to argue, Mood said the same thing,
"The soul that sinneth, it shall die."
Eventually Moody and his companions noticed someone behind them
kneeling on the floor, weeping and wailing,
bawling his eyes out in a terrible fit.
They looked closer...
it was the same atheist, now broken... broken and humbled before his God.
He repented of his sins that night, and gave his life to Christ.
That is how Moody discussed the existence of God with an atheist.
There are many ways to do apologetics,
from discussing particle physics to discussing only the heart.
Whatever we do, we need to be led by God,
so that He can help us choose the right discussion for the right person.