Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 5 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Great, let's go with logic for a minute please. The Bible states that we can's see the complete picture. My question is, how may we pass judgment on this (God), when we can't see all the brush strokes, components, colors, width, depth, etc. I will happily answer your question after you have answered mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 3 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: I will happily answer your question after you have answered mine. No, yours are wanting me to make an assumption about the entire picture by passing judgment on individual brush strokes....I am unwilling to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 7 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: The Bible states that we can's see the complete picture. Here is the problem with Christian "reasoning." That statement is taken by a Christian on blind faith and therefore by definition there is no evidence that it is true. One can only, for his own reasons, choose to believe the unsupported statement. One must choose to believe the Bible, or at least parts of it. One cannot be intellectually persuaded to belief; it is an emotional proposition, not intellectual. But considering that statement alone, kind of a lame excuse, isn't it? It tells us that when reality doesn't match up with Scripture it's only because we have been prevented from knowing enough about how things work. Not a valid defense. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 3 minutes ago, florduh said: Here is the problem with Christian "reasoning." That statement is taken by a Christian on blind faith and therefore by definition there is no evidence that it is true. One can only, for his own reasons, choose to believe the unsupported statement. One must choose to believe the Bible, or at least parts of it. One cannot be intellectually persuaded to belief; it is an emotional proposition, not intellectual. But considering that statement alone, kind of a lame excuse, isn't it? It tells us that when reality doesn't match up with Scripture it's only because we have been prevented from knowing enough about how things work. Not a valid defense. But one would think that coming from intellectuals, you also wouldn't pass judgment on incomplete data.... That to me is the more incredulous aspect of this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 33 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: No, yours are wanting me to make an assumption about the entire picture by passing judgment on individual brush strokes....I am unwilling to do so. The problem with your question is that it presupposes that we don't have a complete picture of god. We do. We have the bible, which purports to be the word of god, god's divine revelation of himself. It is, therefore, as complete a picture of god as god chose to give us. As such, it is completely reasonable to pass judgement on god based on the bible. And the bible, along with our present reality, demonstrates that god is neither willing nor able to prevent evil. Why, then, should we call him god? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 5 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: The problem with your question is that it presupposes that we don't have a complete picture of god. We do. We have the bible, which purports to be the word of god, god's divine revelation of himself. It is, therefore, as complete a picture of god as god chose to give us. As such, it is completely reasonable to pass judgement on god based on the bible. And the bible, along with our present reality, demonstrates that god is neither willing nor able to prevent evil. Why, then, should we call him god? No, it's not. The Bible itself says the picture is incomplete. 1Co 13:12 - For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 54 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: The Bible itself says the picture is incomplete. So what? Does that make it true any more than talking snakes are true? What we have here is an unreliable source claiming itself to be unreliable. BUT HAVE FAITH!!! (At least in parts of it.) And stop using "intellectuals" as a pejorative. I'm just a simple guy who wants evidence, has the ability to think and reason, and I have the ability to observe reality and contrast it with religious dogma. The intellectuals you need to malign would be Dawkins, Hawking, Hitchens and others who put lots of effort into making the argument for reality and facts. I'm just a guy who doesn't easily buy into bullshit anymore. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 1 hour ago, Edgarcito said: No, it's not. The Bible itself says the picture is incomplete. 1Co 13:12 - For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. As I said, the bible is as complete a picture as god chose to give us. It is perfectly reasonable for us to judge him by what he says and does in the bible. So, is god able to prevent evil, but not willing; or is he willing but not able? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: As I said, the bible is as complete a picture as god chose to give us. It is perfectly reasonable for us to judge him by what he says and does in the bible. So, is god able to prevent evil, but not willing; or is he willing but not able? Look, if you are using the Bible as given evidence, then you are ignoring the part that says incomplete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 9 minutes ago, florduh said: So what? Does that make it true any more than talking snakes are true? What we have here is an unreliable source claiming itself to be unreliable. BUT HAVE FAITH!!! (At least in parts of it.) And stop using "intellectuals" as a pejorative. I'm just a simple guy who wants evidence, has the ability to think and reason, and I have the ability to observe reality and contrast it with religious dogma. The intellectuals you need to malign would be Dawkins, Hawking, Hitchens and others who put lots of effort into making the argument for reality and facts. I'm just a guy who doesn't easily buy into bullshit anymore. I'm with you....if I were of the mind to be an atheist, or whatever category that I might fall, I would toss the whole baby out because of lack of evidence....OR: "It appears this, but we know we don't have the entire picture....and won't". It's the only reasonable thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterP Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 6 hours ago, Edgarcito said: I don't know what child you are wishing me to help Walter. I'm not an police officer nor sex trafficking investigator. Not sure how you defined that Jesus wants me to go help this child here in the next few minutes. I understand works are a part of belief. I did some works yesterday that I deem important to continuing the values I believe in. Fair enough? You're not sure how I defined that Jesus wants you to go and help this child, Edgarcito? But surely I don't need to make it any plainer than Jesus did? Matthew 25. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ And not knowing which child to help is a situation you simply cannot do anything about? Or would it be more accurate to say (given your own words) that you don't deem finding out how you can help them as being sufficiently important work for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 2 hours ago, Edgarcito said: But one would think that coming from intellectuals, you also wouldn't pass judgment on incomplete data.... That to me is the more incredulous aspect of this... I have incomplete data on the flying spaghetti monster. Should I therefore believe he might exist? How about the angel Moroni? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 10 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: "It appears this, but we know we don't have the entire picture....and won't". We have the entire picture and so do you. We just have different thresholds for believing unsubstantiated claims. It's a cheesy way to squirm out of thinking for yourself when you assert that the Bible tells you that when it's word is obviously wrong or contradictory that just means you don't know enough. You do know enough. Now try thinking about it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 Poster Edgarcito is demonstrating why it can be difficult, if not impossible, to reason with a devout Christian. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 13 minutes ago, florduh said: We have the entire picture and so do you. We just have different thresholds for believing unsubstantiated claims. It's a cheesy way to squirm out of thinking for yourself when you assert that the Bible tells you that when it's word is obviously wrong or contradictory that just means you don't know enough. You do know enough. Now try thinking about it. I just told you my threshold, my standard for my reasoning AND what I believe to be proper from an objective investigation. Not sure what else to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 14 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: I just told you my threshold, my standard for my reasoning AND what I believe to be proper from an objective investigation. Not sure what else to offer. Yes, I think we understand each other, we simply disagree on what constitutes evidence, what makes sense and intellectual honesty. Using the Bible to prove the Bible is, frankly, an idiotic argument we see all the time. Please understand that most of us here have actually been Christians. We are from many denominations, we have engaged in apologetics, taught Sunday school, led Bible studies, been missionaries, Biblical scholars and ministers. We understand where you're coming from. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 1 hour ago, Edgarcito said: Look, if you are using the Bible as given evidence, then you are ignoring the part that says incomplete. And you're ignoring the part where it is as complete as god chose for it to be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 11, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 11, 2019 1 hour ago, Edgarcito said: I'm with you....if I were of the mind to be an atheist, or whatever category that I might fall, I would toss the whole baby out because of lack of evidence....OR: "It appears this, but we know we don't have the entire picture....and won't". It's the only reasonable thing to do. Having incomplete evidence is not a good enough reason to insert "god" as the conclusion, either. Apply your own logic to your own beliefs here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 RNP's question bumped: So, is god able to prevent evil, but not willing; or is he willing but not able? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 While you're at church feeding hungry children, doing good works ... think about the other children that are being bought and sold under Jesus' watchful eye. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 12, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 12, 2019 So, @Edgarcito, let's leave aside the question of whether or not the bible is complete, since it's obvious we're looking at it two different ways. Instead, let's discuss how the bible, even though incomplete, demonstrates that god is neither willing, nor able, to prevent evil, as that was really the main point I was making. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: So, @Edgarcito, let's leave aside the question of whether or not the bible is complete, since it's obvious we're looking at it two different ways. Instead, let's discuss how the bible, even though incomplete, demonstrates that god is neither willing, nor able, to prevent evil, as that was really the main point I was making. Really thought we could move on, but that question is answered by where we place ourselves in the timeline/story. I place myself post Jesus, the man, and that point when He returns. That puts me in a place where I do the best I can with the aid of the Spirit, and Jesus is the judge when I die. Whether you think He responds to prayers, is able or unable, is willing but not wanting to is not on the table at this point. It's a time for people to show their colors. Thx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 12, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 12, 2019 53 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Really thought we could move on, but that question is answered by where we place ourselves in the timeline/story. I place myself post Jesus, the man, and that point when He returns. That puts me in a place where I do the best I can with the aid of the Spirit, and Jesus is the judge when I die. Whether you think He responds to prayers, is able or unable, is willing but not wanting to is not on the table at this point. It's a time for people to show their colors. Thx. Umm, no. Whether he is willing and able to prevent evil or not is on the table and has been since Thursday. Quit dodging the question. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: Umm, no. Whether he is willing and able to prevent evil or not is on the table and has been since Thursday. Quit dodging the question. Please give me an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 12, 2019 Super Moderator Share Posted October 12, 2019 21 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Please give me an example. Ten-year-old sex slave... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts