Christian Answers Repository

Originally posted by Vicky32

Originally posted by SaberTruth

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by LHP666

 

What is a "xtian"?

It's a derogatory term for "Christian", though originally it was a medieval way to save space. Same with "Xmas". Another popular anti-Christian term is "Jebus". This sort of vocabulary is a sure sign of a mocker. In my experience. For what that's worth.

Don't forget the zombie sneer!
That's one of their faves.
3rd line, mods.
Vicky (4th line, if you're counting.)

As I said....the quality of the answer-manual is apparently of no interest. Why was is presented then?

reply to post by bogomil

As I said....the quality of the answer-manual is apparently of no interest. Why was is presented then?

It's been commented on repeatedly, and added to with other links. There are a great deal of Christian apologetic resources two pages back as well as the material linked in the OP. But you've highlighted an interesting dysfunction, the need to spend an inordinate amount of bandwidth repelling the thread trolls.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by bogomil

 

As I said....the quality of the answer-manual is apparently of no interest. Why was is presented then?

It's been commented on repeatedly, and added to with other links. There are a great deal of Christian apologetic resources two pages back as well as the material linked in the OP. But you've highlighted an interesting dysfunction, the need to spend an inordinate amount of bandwidth repelling the thread trolls.

edit on 22-6-2011 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

The most direct comments to the OP link are from critics, but sofar no real interest have manifested from pro-theists.

If doubt if I presently have time to look at more than the OP link.

reply to post by bogomil

The most direct comments to the OP link are from critics, but sofar no real interest have manifested from pro-theists.

All Theists have commented on the OP. (That could be wrong, but I believe so) And a great deal of our time is spent countering the trolling by people who are not Christians here to derail the thread. I suppose the nuclear option of ignoring is on the table but I'm not that fed up yet.

If doubt if I presently have time to look at more than the OP link.

Do or don't, it was posted as a resource to aid Christians in their understanding and apologetics inventory.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by bogomil

 

The most direct comments to the OP link are from critics, but sofar no real interest have manifested from pro-theists.

All Theists have commented on the OP. (That could be wrong, but I believe so) And a great deal of our time is spent countering the trolling by people who are not Christians here to derail the thread. I suppose the nuclear option of ignoring is on the table but I'm not that fed up yet.

If doubt if I presently have time to look at more than the OP link.

Do or don't, it was posted as a resource to aid Christians in their understanding and apologetics inventory.

I refer directly to the LINK in OP.

I'll leave you to your own imaginations on 'trolling'; it's completely irrelevant and seemingly to avoid a critical analysis of the OP link.

Originally posted by Vicky32

Originally posted by LHP666

I believe that one has to be raised in this from the point of early childhood, when they are most vulnerable. Older people generally see how stupid it all is and aren't subject to the church;s programming.

So, how do you explain someone like me, who grew up in an atheist home and became a Christian as an adult? My brother and sister who did the same?
None of us were raised as Christians.
Vicky

How do I explain it? I said "Older people generally see how stupid it all is and aren't subject to the church;s programming.

Generally, it's true. I guess that you think you're somehow exceptional?

So, when I first see this thread, why do I see that it's another wasteland? Half of SaberTruth's posts have been taken off, boys, and I have no difficulty knowing it's because you can't tolerate opposition.

That's funny!
I've had my beautiful and wise posts removed too. I'm sure that this wonderful and enlightening post will be removed as well, since you are off topic and I am responding to your off topic posts. I'm being PERSECUTED!!!!

I should sleep more, because that's when everybody else comes out to play!

Anyway, as we theists (and even mods) have said repeatedly, the OP is clearly aimed at Christians to share a resource for us to use, and invited other theists to share as well.

How difficult is that to understand?

But as I've stated elsewhere, people here want all Christian threads to be about ANYTHING they want and to totally disregard the OP's intent. I could (and some have already proved this in principle) start a thread entitled "Christians, what is your favorite Bible verse?" and the trolls would whine about us not wanting to debate them!

Yet we all know that if I were to start giving the trolls a taste of their own medicine by posting off-topic and hostile comments in every ant-theist thread and stalking individuals wherever they go, I would be penalized or banned and a random sampling of my comments would be erased. Then the anti-theists would laugh and say what a hypocrite I must be since I've spoken out so much against that sort of behavior.

You anti-theists want a debate? Fine... but not here, because this is NOT a neutral venue. I will not waste any more time researching and debating only to wake up the next day to see half my content gone and U2Us telling me I've been penalized (which curiously happens after I complain about someone else). There is no point trying to talk to anyone here as long as this Sword of Damocles hangs over every theist's head.

reply to post by SaberTruth

Thanks for responding to my earlier questions; it's nice to hear Christians opinions; atheists, non-believers or even inquizitors should value this thread for learning the arguments of the Theist.

Out of your inventory or list of responses/arguments to the Theist position, what would be the best argument, which argument most convinces you?

Also, why is faith considered a virtue? (believing before having evidence)

Thanks again.

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by SaberTruth

 

Thanks for responding to my earlier questions

You're quite welcome.

Out of your inventory or list of responses/arguments to the Theist position, what would be the best argument, which argument most convinces you?

Science. We observe that physical things run down (increasing entropy). We also observe that no effect is greater than its cause. So the physical universe must have a cause outside of itself, not subject to the laws of physics, and "greater" than itself. Since the universe contains complexity, order, interdependence, power, vastness, design, intelligent beings, love, etc., then the First Cause must possess all such qualities in limitless abundance. For the inevitable objection "Who made God?", this is actually a red herring, an attempt to deflect attention from the argument. The question is how anything at all came into existence, and an endless regression never faces or answers it. Somewhere along the line there had to be a First Cause which itself is uncaused and thus eternal. It can't be the physical universe because we observe that to be running down. All theories about the uni somehow being a kind of perpetual motion machine or a figment of our collective imagination require, IMHO, much more blind faith that the First Cause. And even if all this evidence is rejected, I would remind critics that as anti-theists' own Carl Sagan said, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

Also, why is faith considered a virtue? (believing before having evidence)

Faith as taught in the Bible does NOT require the absence of evidence. We begin with the standard legal practice of eyewitness testimony and judge the reliability of the witnesses. An excellent study on this was done by Harvard Law School founder Simon Greenleaf. He, though an unbeliever at the time, concluded from his study that Jesus really did rise from the dead. So our faith is based upon historical evidence at the very least. Surely that kind of faith must be considered a virtue.

reply to post by SaberTruth

For the inevitable objection "Who made God?", this is actually a red herring, an attempt to deflect attention from the argument. The question is how anything at all came into existence, and an endless regression never faces or answers it.

Indeed, a first cause would beg the question of causation; an infinite regress is always inevitable, and without evidence, first cause is an assumption, and it's an assumption that can't be backed up with science as your smiley face might suggest.

www.skepticsannotatedbible.com...

Annotatations from the bible show irrefutably that the bible contains scientific innacuracies, and was clearly written by people with a lack of understanding, or the language to describe understanding.

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

Then i could make any theory up, and get angry at people for not believing it. The burden of proof has always been on the person making the positive claim.

Read Russell Bertrand's teapot argument:-

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time

Faith as taught in the Bible

But there's no hiding from the fact that faith is blind; i don't consider that a virtue; it's having answers before asking questions; and many Christians have got it wrong in the past:-

"What were Galileo's scientific and biblical conflicts with the Church?"

www.christiananswers.net...

Religion-Based Objections to Science Curriculum:

www.anevolvingcreation.net...

It seems people with a belief in a God (specifically Theists) have trouble accepting scientific evidence.

Perhaps people were resistant to believe that we live on a heating and cooling planet; because that meant that Volcanoes; Earthquakes; Tornadoes and Tsunamis were NOT the will on an "intelligent being".

And suddenly all this "Great Flood" dogma seems watery.

If Christians or Theists don't have any issue with evidence; why would they attempt to pass Anti-Evolution bills:-

richarddawkins.net...
www2.ncseweb.org...

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
Indeed, a first cause would beg the question of causation; an infinite regress is always inevitable, and without evidence, first cause is an assumption, and it's an assumption that can't be backed up with science as your smiley face might suggest.

Infinite regression is not inevitable and is no less begging the question than any other theory or assertion, none of which can be backed up with science, since science is limited to that which can be observed or repeated. But what science can tell us is sufficient basis for the First Cause theory, and if you throw that out then you must also throw out every other theory on the same grounds. So there is no compelling evidence to discard the First Cause view, or to support some other view more strongly.

Annotatations from the bible show irrefutably that the bible contains scientific innacuracies, and was clearly written by people with a lack of understanding, or the language to describe understanding.

Not so, and that issue has been hashed over countless times.

Then i could make any theory up, and get angry at people for not believing it. The burden of proof has always been on the person making the positive claim.

You mean like evolutionism? People get REALLY angry if you don't swallow that one. So let's put the burden of proof on them just like everyone else. And the ridiculous teapot thing has been discussed here and many other places, and I won't go around on that again just to entertain you.

But there's no hiding from the fact that faith is blind;

All standard, scholarly historical and legal practice notwithstanding, eh? There is indeed faith that is not blind, as opposed to some of these ridiculous "free thinking" stories.

I've been very patient and kind to you so far, but like every single anti-theist I've ever encountered, the seeming "just have questions" intro is nothing but bait. You asked, I answered, no more.

reply to post by SaberTruth

Not so, and that issue has been hashed over countless times.

No problem, any expansion on that? Any refutations, any examples that you cuold refute?? Any of the scientific innaccuracies studied and refuted without doubt?

You mean like evolutionism? People get REALLY angry if you don't swallow that one.

I don't think people get "REALLY" angry" - People are just frustrated that people would rather not believe in the truth of evidence. (DNA, fossil records, carbon dating) Name a few "creationist scientists" that have cogent points AGAINST evolution, i'd be interested in that.

And the ridiculous teapot thing has been discussed here and many other places, and I won't go around on that again just to entertain you.

It only highlights the argument from ignorance; which is basically "you can't prove it false." I've not heard any decent reponses to Russell's refutation

All standard, scholarly historical and legal practice notwithstanding, eh? There is indeed faith that is not blind, as opposed to some of these ridiculous "free thinking" stories.

"All standard, scholarly historical and legal practice notwithstanding, eh" - Nothing to do with faith.

Your version of "Faith" is by definition; blind.

Faith has many connotations:-

-"Complete trust or confidence in someone or something" (i.e. my mother, or science)
-"Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof" (i.e God, afterlife, reincarnation, scientology's claims to "truth")

I think you're getting confused between the connotations of fatih.

I've been very patient and kind to you so far, but like every single anti-theist I've ever encountered, the seeming "just have questions" intro is nothing but bait. You asked, I answered, no more.

I've been more than patient, and polite, and i will continue to be so, and ask further questions as this is a "Christian Answers Repository". And many Christians seem to have a differring and often conflicting answers to the same questions.

Peace

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
No problem, any expansion on that? Any refutations, any examples that you cuold refute?? Any of the scientific innaccuracies studied and refuted without doubt?

Take a look around this forum for plenty of discussion on all of the standard anti-theist "questions". I'm not going to reinvent the wheel.

I don't think people get "REALLY" angry" - People are just frustrated that people would rather not believe in the truth of evidence. (DNA, fossil records, carbon dating) Name a few "creationist scientists" that have cogent points AGAINST evolution, i'd be interested in that.

Yes, they get REALLY angry. And it isn't frustration, it's hatred. We all get frustrated at our opponent's apparent inability to grasp facts and arguments; this is hardly a one-way street. But most theists can tell you that the majority of their experiences with anti-theists is overtly hostile.

Your version of "Faith" is by definition; blind.

No, it is not, as I explained. You asked me for MY view and I gave it.

I've been more than patient, and polite, and i will continue to be so, and ask further questions as this is a "Christian Answers Repository". And many Christians seem to have a differring and often conflicting answers to the same questions.

Did you read the OP content and not just the title? Seriously, how else could I have explained that this was FOR CHRISTIANS to share RESOURCES, not to debate the content of one site? How else can I say it? Once again: the OP states that the Thinktank site is a great resource for Christians. Is that still unclear? Confusing? Do I not know what I posted, or is it just remotely possible that the anti-theists here only read the title and, as usual, decided that anything goes so they can get indignant when we try to stay on topic?

There will be no "peace" as long as there is no communication. If anti-theists could just grasp the OP and stick to it (which means this particular thread is of zero interest to them), I might try communicating further. But they can't and won't, so neither will I.

reply to post by SaberTruth

Take a look around this forum for plenty of discussion on all of the standard anti-theist "questions". I'm not going to reinvent the wheel.

Again, this being a "Christian Answers Repository" i thought it best to ask my questions regarding Christianity here; of course there are other threads in which non-believers or anti-theists can take part; this IS "Faith, Religion and Theology" forum, isn't it? Maybe Christians want to see answers to my questions....

Yes, they get REALLY angry. And it isn't frustration, it's hatred. We all get frustrated at our opponent's apparent inability to grasp facts and arguments; this is hardly a one-way street. But most theists can tell you that the majority of their experiences with anti-theists is overtly hostile.

Hatred? I don't think so, and i don't think you could back that up. It's not anger, far be it from atheists or non-theists to tell people what to believe; if people don't want to believe in evidence, they don't have to, no-one is forcing Theists, but this IS a medium in which we can exhange opinions; that much we have to admit.

No, it is not, as I explained. You asked me for MY view and I gave it.

No problem, but your faith isn't backed by empirical evidence, it's blind, your assumption of the unknown is just as good as any other assumption, as both assumptions would be blind, or unknowing.

Did you read the OP content and not just the title?

Indeed, and i'll insist again, these are questions or queries that could be raised by someone with faith, but being from someone without, you should find them very useful so that people are made aware of the common arguments posed by Atheists, non-believers or inquizitors and the worthy rebuttalls to each.

or is it just remotely possible that the anti-theists here only read the title and, as usual, decided that anything goes so they can get indignant when we try to stay on topic?

Indeed, i'm offering improvements to the Theist answer-bank, maybe the Christian resource missed some information; perhaps some of my questions are answered by the resource you linked.

There will be no "peace" as long as there is no communication. If anti-theists could just grasp the OP and stick to it (which means this particular thread is of zero interest to them), I might try communicating further. But they can't and won't, so neither will I.

We're on a forum, exhanging ideas, i've never stated i was an "Anti-Theist". Perhaps your time is misspent by getting angry at them when they only have questions that will improve your answer-banks, and your debate technique.

reply to post by ExistentialNightmare


Apparently I was supposed to make a post that anti-theists wanted, not one that Christians wanted. My bad.

reply to post by SaberTruth


Apologies; i wasn't aware the non-theist (or even anti-theist) was excluded from taking part in discussion.

Peace.

Originally posted by SaberTruth
I should sleep more, because that's when everybody else comes out to play!

Anyway, as we theists (and even mods) have said repeatedly, the OP is clearly aimed at Christians to share a resource for us to use, and invited other theists to share as well.

How difficult is that to understand?

But as I've stated elsewhere, people here want all Christian threads to be about ANYTHING they want and to totally disregard the OP's intent. I could (and some have already proved this in principle) start a thread entitled "Christians, what is your favorite Bible verse?" and the trolls would whine about us not wanting to debate them!

Yet we all know that if I were to start giving the trolls a taste of their own medicine by posting off-topic and hostile comments in every ant-theist thread and stalking individuals wherever they go, I would be penalized or banned and a random sampling of my comments would be erased. Then the anti-theists would laugh and say what a hypocrite I must be since I've spoken out so much against that sort of behavior.

You anti-theists want a debate? Fine... but not here, because this is NOT a neutral venue. I will not waste any more time researching and debating only to wake up the next day to see half my content gone and U2Us telling me I've been penalized (which curiously happens after I complain about someone else). There is no point trying to talk to anyone here as long as this Sword of Damocles hangs over every theist's head.

Attention...

All threads are opened to all members for participation. As long as the posts are civil and on-topic there is no need to attempt to exclude others from actively partaking in the discussion. Attempts to dissuade participation from members who may not share the same view points as others will not be tolerated.