Shattered00

I realize that there is no "concrete" way for me to debunk what the Christians say, but then again, maybe I am overlooking something. So many Christians I have run into claim that science in general and things like skeletal remains of homo erectus or the problem of time discrepancy with Adam etc. are just God's way of testing faith. In other words, it is God's way of discerning between the true believers and the fakers. I really despise this so-called "critique" of science and anything that attempts to debunk Christianity. Any suggestions?

Phishfood

so their god is a liar, and deceptive. and since he's so deceptive, and makes things to appear what they are not, we can't really say anything about him, can we? Furthermore, unless they can provide some sort of proof that god is deceiving them (im curious to see how that would go), they're just tossing shit out of their heads.
So a) they can prove he would be deceptive, in which case we get back to a deist-type god without attributes that we can describe, since who would know what's true or not about Him, or b) they can't prove it, in which case you get to laugh at them for just making things up, and it still gets you away from a christian god. that is, god is not supposed to be a liar, and all the things that God claims (like creation, flood, etc) are just baloney and not meant to be deceptive. Furthermore, these theists kind of trap themselves. by saying "its god being deceptive" they acknowledge the existence of the evidence. now, by taking away their excuse for its presence, they're left with the evidence and no excuse for its being there. so dont let them backpedal into a "yah i know i just said god was being deceptive, but now im saying it doesnt exist"-type argument.

Now go get'em!
-Pf

Peter Kirby

Probably a wasted effort, but you could attempt to enlighten them on the old Christian school of thought that God has both a special revelation (esp. scripture) and a general or natural revelation, which is the world itself, brought into being by the Word. Thus, the two revelations should cohere (if they don't--one or the other is misunderstood, then, on this theory).

best,
Peter Kirby

greyline

I think perhaps the best approach to this is to make the person state what they believe on faith and what they believe based on science.

If they believe something purely on faith, there's nothing yo can do.

If they attempt to bring science into the equation, they have left the realm of faith and you can debate the on rational terms.

The Bible Thumper

Actually, I hold this view. The "Theory of Evolution" was a concept created by God to separate the sheep from the goats.

Just compare the conduct of any Athiest with any Christian on this message board and you'll see what I mean.

Diogenes the Cynic

[Mod Hat=On]Please do not make sweeping ad hominems against either theistic or non-theistic posters on this board.[/Mod Hat]

Ojuice5001

That's true. Evolution is how the sheep separated from the goats. :devil3:

Diogenes the Cynic

Three questions, Thumper:

1. What does evolutionary theory have to do with theistic belief?
2. Why does an omniscient God need to "test" people's faith? Doesn't he already know what the answer is?
3. What reason has God given humanity to believe that the physical evidence of evolution is false? You seem to be suggesting that we should believe the Bible rather than the evidence but my question is how did you arrive at your conclusion that the Bible was the word of God?

Ojuice5001

Actually, this comment reminds me of one made by Alvin Plantinga. Only he says it's the scientific establishment that uses evolution that way:

On Christian Scholarship

Godless Wonder

And just what is so unreasonable about the idea that the Bible isn't the word of God?