[BaseballMan]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...irrational

"Materialistic atheism is one of the easiest worldviews to refute. A materialistic atheist believes that nature is all that there is. He believes that there is no transcendent God who oversees and maintains creation. Many atheists believe that their worldview is rational—and scientific. However, by embracing materialism, the atheist has destroyed the possibility of knowledge, as well as science and technology. In other words, if atheism were true, it would be impossible to prove anything!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The laws of logic support belief in God. Atheism is not logical. To read further click the link above.

[thecavemaster]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...irrational

"Materialistic atheism is one of the easiest worldviews to refute. A materialistic atheist believes that nature is all that there is. He believes that there is no transcendent God who oversees and maintains creation. Many atheists believe that their worldview is rational—and scientific. However, by embracing materialism, the atheist has destroyed the possibility of knowledge, as well as science and technology. In other words, if atheism were true, it would be impossible to prove anything!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The laws of logic support belief in God. Atheism is not logical. To read further click the link above.

If you've ever heard Christoper Hinchens speak, you know that atheism can be defended eloquently and persuasively. I don't think it's fair to start with a God-belief worldview, then dumb down the views of others so as to make your argument stronger. I've seen Hinchens debate Creationists: probably, if you are a Creationist, you think Hinchens a fool; however, if your window on belief is atheistic, you tend to think the Creationist a fool.

[BaseballMan]

If you've ever heard Christoper Hinchens speak, you know that atheism can be defended eloquently and persuasively. I don't think it's fair to start with a God-belief worldview, then dumb down the views of others so as to make your argument stronger. I've seen Hinchens debate Creationists: probably, if you are a Creationist, you think Hinchens a fool; however, if your window on belief is atheistic, you tend to think the Creationist a fool.

I suppose only on the Day of Judgement shall the real fool be shown his folly.

[thecavemaster]

I suppose only on the Day of Judgement shall the real fool be shown his folly.

"I am unwilling that any should perish...I came not to destroy but to save..."
Almost sounds like you desire for the "fools" to be shown their folly. In addition, with 130,000+ dead in Mynamar, thousands upon thousands dead in China (schoolchildren washed away and crushed by debris), I can see why Kurt Vonnegutt called god the "laziest man in town." Can't you at least see that, even if you don't agree with it? Dear God: spare me from narrow vision and a cold heart.

[BaseballMan]

"I am unwilling that any should perish...I came not to destroy but to save..."
Almost sounds like you desire for the "fools" to be shown their folly.

"The Lord is...not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (II Peter 3:9)

That's the actual reference. And the Lord is willing that none should perish. He even sent His only Son to die, so that we could be saved by faith in Him. However, many will not follow, and many will follow their own way. Many will not believe, and many will turn away. I don't desire for anyone to be on the judgement seat of God, but would rather hope they see their folly.

[BaseballMan]

In addition, with 130,000+ dead in Mynamar, thousands upon thousands dead in China (schoolchildren washed away and crushed by debris), I can see why Kurt Vonnegutt called god the "laziest man in town." Can't you at least see that, even if you don't agree with it? Dear God: spare me from narrow vision and a cold heart.

"We live in a fallen world. Most of the inhabitants of our world are living life-styles of indifference to the design and plan and wishes of their Creator. In such a world any of us can be victims as well as perpetrators of wrong. In such a world the forces of nature can become unbalanced by human activity which ignores God. It is very difficult to trace cause and effect in many events which happen to us, apparently out of nowhere, for no discernible reason."

http://ldolphin.org/disasters.html

[thecavemaster]

"We live in a fallen world. Most of the inhabitants of our world are living life-styles of indifference to the design and plan and wishes of their Creator. In such a world any of us can be victims as well as perpetrators of wrong. In such a world the forces of nature can become unbalanced by human activity which ignores God. It is very difficult to trace cause and effect in many events which happen to us, apparently out of nowhere, for no discernible reason."

http://ldolphin.org/disasters.html

Yes (perhaps)... but what does it all have to do with children? I am not saying that "god is the laziest man in town," but I am stating that I can see how people might feel or think that way at times (as did the Prophets from time to time as they lamented God's absence or apparent indifference)...

[BaseballMan]

Yes (perhaps)... but what does it all have to do with children? I am not saying that "god is the laziest man in town," but I am stating that I can see how people might feel or think that way at times (as did the Prophets from time to time as they lamented God's absence or apparent indifference)...

"What about babies and young children who never reach the ability to make this individual choice? The “age of accountability” is a concept that teaches those who die before reaching the “age of accountability” are automatically saved, by God’s grace and mercy. The “age of accountability” is a belief that God saves all those who die before reaching the ability to make a decision for or against Christ. Thirteen is the most common number given for the age of accountability based on the Jewish custom that a child becomes an adult at the age of 13. However, the Bible gives no direct support to the age of 13 always being the age of accountability. It likely varies from child to child. A child has passed the age of accountability once he or she is capable of making a faith decision for or against Christ."
~ http://www.gotquestions.org/age-of-accountability.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even true christians still describe feelings that God is not near. However, He tells us He is always near, but it is us who at times wander away, and therefore feel like we're light years from God. If God just pulled us out of trouble all the time, then we'd never build true character, and christians would never discover the wonderfulness of the Father and how living by His will is so amazing.

[DevilsWin]

"What about babies and young children who never reach the ability to make this individual choice? The “age of accountability” is a concept that teaches those who die before reaching the “age of accountability” are automatically saved, by God’s grace and mercy. The “age of accountability” is a belief that God saves all those who die before reaching the ability to make a decision for or against Christ. Thirteen is the most common number given for the age of accountability based on the Jewish custom that a child becomes an adult at the age of 13. However, the Bible gives no direct support to the age of 13 always being the age of accountability. It likely varies from child to child. A child has passed the age of accountability once he or she is capable of making a faith decision for or against Christ."
~ http://www.gotquestions.org/age-of-accountability.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even true christians still describe feelings that God is not near. However, He tells us He is always near, but it is us who at times wander away, and therefore feel like we're light years from God. If God just pulled us out of trouble all the time, then we'd never build true character, and christians would never discover the wonderfulness of the Father and how living by His will is so amazing.

What about the 13 year old girl from Outter Mongolia that dies in an earthquake and has never heard of Jesus Christ?
Is her soul dammed to **** for all of eternity through no fault of her own?

[BaseballMan]

What about the 13 year old girl from Outter Mongolia that dies in an earthquake and has never heard of Jesus Christ?
Is her soul dammed to **** for all of eternity through no fault of her own?

It is not for me to judge. If you would have clicked the link and read the entire passage then you would know that only God determines when a person is accountable to Him. Also, who are you or I to tell God what He can or cannot do?

Romans 9:20-26
20But who are you, O man,(AA) to answer back to God?(AB) Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21(AC) Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump(AD) one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience(AE) vessels of wrath(AF) prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known(AG) the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he(AH) has prepared beforehand for glory— 24even us whom he(AI) has called,(AJ) not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? 25As indeed he says in Hosea,

(AK) "Those who were not my people I will call 'my people,'
and her who was not beloved I will call 'beloved.'"
26(AL) "And in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,'
there they will be called(AM) 'sons of the living God.'"

[thecavemaster]

I am simply suggesting that belief if God is not as obvious nor as easy nor as rationale as logicians of religion might argue.

[BaseballMan]

I am simply suggesting that belief if God is not as obvious nor as easy nor as rationale as logicians of religion might argue.

The unbelievers eyes are blinded until the glory of God is revealed to them. Once one believes, truly believes, the evidence is all around and in everything. It becomes so entirely logical that you end up saying, "Why in the world didn't I notice all this before?"

[thecavemaster]

The unbelievers eyes are blinded until the glory of God is revealed to them. Once one believes, truly believes, the evidence is all around and in everything. It becomes so entirely logical that you end up saying, "Why in the world didn't I notice all this before?"

The mystery of creation exists for many atheists as well. They also have a logical system of thought within which atheism fits. Many say, "How on earth can one look at things as they are, at science, and conclude the tribal god of the hebrews is somehow "GOD"?

[BaseballMan]

The mystery of creation exists for many atheists as well. They also have a logical system of thought within which atheism fits. Many say, "How on earth can one look at things as they are, at science, and conclude the tribal god of the hebrews is somehow "GOD"?

"The atheist might say, “Well, I can reason just fine, and I don’t believe in God.” But this is no different than the critic of air saying, “Well, I can breathe just fine, and I don’t believe in air.” This isn’t a rational response. Breathing requires air, not a profession of belief in air. Likewise, logical reasoning requires God, not a profession of belief in Him. Of course the atheist can reason; it’s because God has made his mind and given him access to the laws of logic—and that’s the point. It’s because God exists that reasoning is possible. The atheist can reason, but within his own worldview he cannot account for his ability to reason."

"Rational thinking, science, and technology make sense in a Christian worldview. The Christian has a basis for these things; the atheist does not. This is not to say that atheists cannot be rational about some things. They can because they too are made in God’s image and have access to God’s laws of logic. But they have no rational basis for rationality within their own worldview. Likewise, atheists can be moral, but they have no basis for that morality according to what they claim to believe. An atheist is a walking bundle of contradictions. He reasons and does science, yet he denies the very God that makes reasoning and science possible. On the other hand, the Christian worldview is consistent and makes sense of human reasoning and experience."

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...irrational

[thecavemaster]

"The atheist might say, “Well, I can reason just fine, and I don’t believe in God.” But this is no different than the critic of air saying, “Well, I can breathe just fine, and I don’t believe in air.” This isn’t a rational response. Breathing requires air, not a profession of belief in air. Likewise, logical reasoning requires God, not a profession of belief in Him. Of course the atheist can reason; it’s because God has made his mind and given him access to the laws of logic—and that’s the point. It’s because God exists that reasoning is possible. The atheist can reason, but within his own worldview he cannot account for his ability to reason."

"Rational thinking, science, and technology make sense in a Christian worldview. The Christian has a basis for these things; the atheist does not. This is not to say that atheists cannot be rational about some things. They can because they too are made in God’s image and have access to God’s laws of logic. But they have no rational basis for rationality within their own worldview. Likewise, atheists can be moral, but they have no basis for that morality according to what they claim to believe. An atheist is a walking bundle of contradictions. He reasons and does science, yet he denies the very God that makes reasoning and science possible. On the other hand, the Christian worldview is consistent and makes sense of human reasoning and experience."

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...irrational

Again, and we will have to agree to disagree here, the thinking atheist can reason, can account for the capacity to reason, can point out irrationalities in the "god made it" worldview... can and have. Now, you may not agree with them, may count their beliefs, their reasons as just so much straw spinning in the wind, and, of course, many of them would repay you the favor.

[BaseballMan]

Again, and we will have to agree to disagree here, the thinking atheist can reason, can account for the capacity to reason, can point out irrationalities in the "god made it" worldview... can and have. Now, you may not agree with them, may count their beliefs, their reasons as just so much straw spinning in the wind, and, of course, many of them would repay you the favor.

Not saying they can't reason, but only that an atheist has no basis for their reasoning. They have no real resource other than their own mind. In their own refuting, an atheist borrows the things of God to argue that God does not exist. Hence the laws of logic defy the atheists own argument.

[thecavemaster]

Not saying they can't reason, but only that an atheist has no basis for their reasoning. They have no real resource other than their own mind. In their own refuting, an atheist borrows the things of God to argue that God does not exist. Hence the laws of logic defy the atheists own argument.

"god made the brain, god made the tree; therefore, to reason requires the brain, requires the tree." The atheist rejects the first premise and reasons from the premise that god does not exist. You reason from the premise that god does exist. If either you or the atheist has a mistaken first premise, then both are in the "no basis" realm. All you say of them, they could turn around and say of you. This is all I am saying, and I don't see how you can disagree with that.

[BaseballMan]

"god made the brain, god made the tree; therefore, to reason requires the brain, requires the tree." The atheist rejects the first premise and reasons from the premise that god does not exist. You reason from the premise that god does exist. If either you or the atheist has a mistaken first premise, then both are in the "no basis" realm. All you say of them, they could turn around and say of you. This is all I am saying, and I don't see how you can disagree with that.

And you are proving my point. They can say that, but by the laws of logic they cannot have any basis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Reasoning involves using the laws of logic. These include the law of non-contradiction which says that you can’t have A and not-A at the same time and in the same relationship. For example, the statement “My car is in the parking lot, and it is not the case that my car is in the parking lot” is necessarily false by the law of non-contradiction. Any rational person would accept this law. But why is this law true? Why should there be a law of non-contradiction, or for that matter, any laws of reasoning? The Christian can answer this question. For the Christian there is an absolute standard for reasoning; we are to pattern our thoughts after God’s. The laws of logic are a reflection of the way God thinks. The law of non-contradiction is not simply one person’s opinion of how we ought to think, rather it stems from God’s self-consistent nature. God cannot deny Himself ( 2 Timothy 2:13), and so, the way God upholds the universe will necessarily be non-contradictory."

"The materialistic atheist can’t have laws of logic. He believes that everything that exists is material—part of the physical world. But laws of logic are not physical. You can’t stub your toe on a law of logic. Laws of logic cannot exist in the atheist’s world, yet he uses them to try to reason. This is inconsistent. He is borrowing from the Christian worldview to argue against the Christian worldview. The atheist’s view cannot be rational because he uses things (laws of logic) that cannot exist according to his profession."
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...irrational

[DevilsWin]

[youtube="Comparative Video of Religion"]2aW2N46vf4Q[/youtube]

[thecavemaster]

And you are proving my point. They can say that, but by the laws of logic they cannot have any basis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Reasoning involves using the laws of logic. These include the law of non-contradiction which says that you can’t have A and not-A at the same time and in the same relationship. For example, the statement “My car is in the parking lot, and it is not the case that my car is in the parking lot” is necessarily false by the law of non-contradiction. Any rational person would accept this law. But why is this law true? Why should there be a law of non-contradiction, or for that matter, any laws of reasoning? The Christian can answer this question. For the Christian there is an absolute standard for reasoning; we are to pattern our thoughts after God’s. The laws of logic are a reflection of the way God thinks. The law of non-contradiction is not simply one person’s opinion of how we ought to think, rather it stems from God’s self-consistent nature. God cannot deny Himself ( 2 Timothy 2:13), and so, the way God upholds the universe will necessarily be non-contradictory."

"The materialistic atheist can’t have laws of logic. He believes that everything that exists is material—part of the physical world. But laws of logic are not physical. You can’t stub your toe on a law of logic. Laws of logic cannot exist in the atheist’s world, yet he uses them to try to reason. This is inconsistent. He is borrowing from the Christian worldview to argue against the Christian worldview. The atheist’s view cannot be rational because he uses things (laws of logic) that cannot exist according to his profession."
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...irrational

Explain, if you will, by A and not A logic, how jesus walked on water.

[BaseballMan]

Explain, if you will, by A and not A logic, how jesus walked on water.

Simple. He is God. He created it, therefore He knows it and all the secrets to it.

[thecavemaster]

Simple. He is God. He created it, therefore He knows it and all the secrets to it.

Your explanation requires faith. The attempt to reduce faith to logistical reasonings and argumentative certainty coincide with the right brained dominant individual. Black and white... all or nothing... absolutes.

[BaseballMan]

Your explanation requires faith. The attempt to reduce faith to logistical reasonings and argumentative certainty coincide with the right brained dominant individual. Black and white... all or nothing... absolutes.

God is the absolute basis for truth. That is the law of logic from the christian point. There is no basis from the atheists point.

Therefore, it is written that Jesus walked on water. It was seen by eyewitness accounts. It is written in the Holy Scriptures in which itself claims to be God-Breathed. It doesn't matter what brain you are, where you see it from. By the basis for absolute truth, Jesus walked on water. There is no basis for claiming He did not.

[thecavemaster]

God is the absolute basis for truth. That is the law of logic from the christian point. There is no basis from the atheists point.

Therefore, it is written that Jesus walked on water. It was seen by eyewitness accounts. It is written in the Holy Scriptures in which itself claims to be God-Breathed. It doesn't matter what brain you are, where you see it from. By the basis for absolute truth, Jesus walked on water. There is no basis for claiming He did not.

Atheists (the thinking ones) would not agree with your "no basis" assessment. I am not an atheist, so I cannot make their arguments for them; however, I have heard atheists speak, talked to them at length, and know that the breezy dismissal of their positions and reasons is cavalier. God is the basis for absolute truth. The basis for absolute truth is God. ... and around and around... circular reasoning keeps looping premises and conclusions, keeps asserting as conclusion the very thing yet to be proved.

[BaseballMan]

Atheists (the thinking ones) would not agree with your "no basis" assessment. I am not an atheist, so I cannot make their arguments for them; however, I have heard atheists speak, talked to them at length, and know that the breezy dismissal of their positions and reasons is cavalier. God is the basis for absolute truth. The basis for absolute truth is God. ... and around and around... circular reasoning keeps looping premises and conclusions, keeps asserting as conclusion the very thing yet to be proved.

When I see a basis that is not borrowed from the christian worldview, we'll put it to the test. You keep saying that you've spoken to atheists and that they dismiss this statement, but the cavelier reasons have not seemed to stick out in you. What is the basis for their logic? You keep saying they have it. Would you care to present it?

[thecavemaster]

When I see a basis that is not borrowed from the christian worldview, we'll put it to the test. You keep saying that you've spoken to atheists and that they dismiss this statement, but the cavelier reasons have not seemed to stick out in you. What is the basis for their logic? You keep saying they have it. Would you care to present it?

Atheists reason from "no god"... Christians reason from "yes god." What evidence have they of no god? What evidence have you of yes god? Each discounts the other. Each dismisses the other. The one says "narrow minded idiots." The other says, "**** bound fools." One set of dinosaur bones: two different answers. ....next door, a neighbor woman weeps for her son, killed in a mortar attack...soon, he will be a set of bones.

[ComfortEagle]

This thread has been closed due to the following rule violations:


Posting false or incorrect information will not be tolerated. If you are unaware of something such as a score or any information regarding a certain topic, then do not post it until sure. False threads and posts will be deleted and you will be warned.

Post padding will not be tolerated. Topics are there for your view pleasure but you are not required to post something in every one that you open. If you have no real opinion or knowledge on a subject, please move on to another one.

This thread is also being closed for “spamming.” Here is why:
When you create these threads and put the links to the other sites in them, you are essentially promoting these other sites. Since you have posted the links they are now searchable through Google and in essence you are using the server space of this site to promote these other sites, which we will no longer tolerate. This is BluegrassRivals, not answersingenesis.com and we are not paying for server space to promote any of the sites that you are consistently linking to.

Please refrain from posting these type of threads in the future or alternative action will be taken in the form of suspension or ban. No one wants to read a book from some other website, if they wanted to, by now they would have gone to the site.