Johnny Skeptic

Message to Helpmabob: Let’s assume the following for the sake of argument:

1 - Being A created the universe.

2 - Being A is omnipotent and omnipresent.

3 - Being B inspired the writing of the Bible.

Ok, can we be reasonably certain that Being A and being B are the same being? I submit that we cannot. This is because we cannot be reasonably certain whether or not Being B has revealed his true intentions. 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 say “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” Now who told Paul that, a being who wished to reveal his true intentions, or a being who wished to conceal his true intentions? Well, it depends upon how well the being was able to reveal or conceal his true intentions. Being A would certainly be able to easily reveal his true intentions if that is what he wished to do, but we cannot be reasonably certain whether or not Being A and Being B are the same being. So, the question is, if Being B is not the creator of the universe, does he have sufficient power to deceive whoever he wishes to deceive? It would not be logical for anyone to assume that they know whether or not Being B has sufficient power to deceive whoever he wishes to deceive.

Being A might very well be planning to reveal his specific existence and will to humans, but he might choose to do so after humans die. Many if not most Christians claim that since all humans have sinned, God is not obligated to save anyone. They sometimes use Romans 3:23 as a reference. The verse says “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God”. If God is not obligated to save anyone, then he is not obligated to reveal his specific existence and will to humans in this life either, or ever for that matter.

Since the God of the Bible allowed hundreds of millions of people to die without revealing his specific existence and will to them, it is a reasonable possibility that the creator of the universe plans to eventually reveal his specific existence and will to humans in the next life.

In the NIV, Isaiah 55:8 says "'For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways', declares the Lord." Christians typically refer to this verse when they cannot explain some of the strange things that God does that many people find to be questionable. So, I am now using the same verse to support my position that the creator of the universe might not be the supposed God of the Bible, and that his ways might be strange, including not revealing his specific existence and will to humans in this life.

Luke 10:25-28 say “And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.” The word “all” requires a commitment that is not possible based upon the evidence that is available to us. Therefore, regarding people who believe that an intelligent being created the universe, the logical approach is to conclude that there is insufficient evidence to conclude that Being A has OR has not revealed his true intentions to humans. Any notion one way or the other is nothing more than unsupported speculation and guesswork.

Hypothetical arguments are acceptable. Christians frequently use hypothetical arguments when they feel that it suits their purposes to do so. C.S. Lewis’ Lord, Liar, or Lunatic is a good example.

Dean Anderson

The point being that the reliability (or lack of it) of the prophecies give us a good yardstick by which we can measure the reliability of these other "crystal clear" statements.

No-one is denying that the Bible says that Jesus healed people, or that the Bible says that we are sinners.

The point is that we need a reason to trust what the Bible says - since every indication we have shows that it is not reliable.

So if the prophecies in the Bible are shown to be reliable, then that can give us confidence that what it says about Jesus and sin might be reliable too.

On the other hand, if the prophecies are a load of bunk, then why should we believe anything else the Bible says unless it is confirmed by outside sources.

The problem, of course, is that the prophecies in the Bible are bunk.

Amaleq13

Despite the absence of any objectively verifiable evidence supporting such a notion, yes, such a possibility exists. Why you believe this helps your case of flawed reasoning, however, remains a mystery.

IIUC, your deity is capable of anything that is logically possible but that does not appear to be relevant to the flawed reasoning you have presented.

These two statements make no sense and do not even appear to follow from your flawed reasoning. You have proved nothing except that you do not understand why circular reasoning is to be avoided if one intends to convince anyone valuing rational thought of your conclusions.

Sven

As long as there's no argument which logically leads from saturn to god, there's no reason to claim that he was in charge. I don't deny that the possibility that a (your) god was in charge - but since there's no argument in favor of it, I don't believe in it. It's as simple as this.

Is it possible that you are simply not able to provide a logical argument?

Your "argument" was that one can not deny god's existence when viewing a picture of Saturn. Simply positing god's existence in no way explains how this argument is supposed to work. Admit it: You have no argument.

So you understand the difference between
A => B
and
A <= B
?

If not, there's no point in arguing this.

Hey, you made a point about denying his existence. Nobody here ever suggested that Saturn could prove either way. Nice back pedalling, indeed.

So do you retract your "argument" about Saturn => god now? Thanks! It never ever made any sense.

lee_merrill

Actually, not!

You may rebuild Babylon at any time, to refute the prophecy that Babylon will not be rebuilt, or just reinhabit it.

Isa. 13:19 "Babylon, the beauty of kingdoms, the glory of the Chaldeans' pride, will be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. It will never be inhabited or lived in from generation to generation; Nor will the Arab pitch his tent there, nor will shepherds make their flocks lie down there."

Jer. 25:12 "Then it will be when seventy years are completed I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation," declares the Lord, "for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans; and I will make it an everlasting desolation."

Jer. 51:26 "And they will not take from you even a stone for a corner nor a stone for foundations, but you will be desolate forever," declares the Lord.

Regards,
Lee

spin

Oh, Lee, Lee.

With the great number of cities in the dust from the time -- cities in the dust was the way of cities then, wasn't it? -- there was a fine chance that any city would eventually end up that way, so to say that Babylon would join the rest would be a no-boner. However, it took several hundred years after the time of Jeremiah for Babylon to lose its relevance, so the poor old folk who had to listen to the stuff certainly didn't see the "prophecy" come to fruition, but the fullfilment was not the point.

When Shelley wrote his sonnet Ozymandias, he was foretelling the downfall of the British empire as just one in a chain, but such prophecies don't really attract the sort of interest you are trying to instill in this sorry obvious foretelling of the destruction of a city, in your case Babylon. Hey, wow, Babylon did eventually fall into ruin. Gosh, amazing!

You've been trying your darned hardest for a l-o-n-g time to make this prophecy stuff something wow-special, but this example sure ain't gonna do it for us. It only elicits a "well, no shit!?" from anyone here.

You need to get beyond the obvious. Find something that is seriously specific -- you know, like aeroplanes flying into buildings or some such. Maybe then, someone might give it an analysis.


spin

Helpmabob

I don’t deny that the Greek’s believed they existed. I do deny that their Gods were any good to them.

Mainly because the Greek’s ‘gods’ were no gods at all. There is only one God – surely that much is obvious to you? He alone is by definition capable of inspiring prophecy.

Oh, but there is evidence aplenty: the beautiful world; where good triumphs over evil; forgiveness defeats hatred; and the Holy Spirit that confirms that man is saved by the free grace of Christ. I could not possibly believe the scenario you are painting there.[/QUOTE]I am more concerned with what is God’s purpose. You raise several reasons why you do not personally believe in a God, but prefer to believe that nothing can be known. That is clear, but what specific bearing does your point have on prophecy?

If you read back closely and impartially then you will see that previous correspondents have rejecting the prophecies on the basis that the Bible is unreliable. The fact is that the prophecies, miracles, witnessed and recorded facts and currently visible evidence don’t support this view. You have that opinion. I have this experience: I trust on its word and rely on it daily and it doesn’t fail.This appears to be your main objection to the actual matter of biblical prophecy. Can you expand please?

Capable of anything that is humanly logically possible as well as anything that is divinely logically possible.

I think there is a slight misunderstanding: I have never claimed to be able to prove God. If you can find where I havs written as much, I will gladly retract, and offer a full apology. (I am however convinced he is there). For the purposes of this discussion only, my argument is that if there is a God, then atheists are denying plenty in the light of what Hubble has snapped over the years.No: as I said already, there is no proof of God. But at the same time, your favoured flowcharts are impotent in the search of the Creator.

Jesus himself was a fan of prophecy. He used the following from Isaiah:

The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me,
because the LORD has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim freedom for the captives
and release from darkness for the prisoners,
to proclaim the year of the LORD's favor
and the day of vengeance of our God,
to comfort all who mourn, [Isaiah 61:1,2]

Clearly about Jesus, and authenticated by Jesus' use as noted in both Matthew and Luke's gospels.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to Helpmabob: Consider the following post that I made today at the EofG Forum:

Since a Mafia member will sometimes bear pain for his child, and sometimes give his life for his child, your argument is obviously not valid. Now here is something that I doubt any Mafia member would do: Exodus 20:5 says “You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.” Now is that fair? Well of course it isn't. I also doubt that any Mafia member would create hurricanes, indiscriminately kill people with them, sometimes heal his enemies while refusing to heal members of his own family, and try to get away with calling himself good.

The Bible endorses eternal punishment without parole. I assume that some Mafia members would not want to sentence even their worst enemies to eternal punishment without parole, which means that some Mafia members are more merciful than the God of the Bible is.

If God has adequate explanations for his frequently odd, apathetic, even barbaric behavior, let him say so, tangibly, in person. It is impossible for me to will myself to accept the God of the Bible without having more information than we have at this time. If God wishes to send me to hell for not doing what is impossible for me to do, that is his choice. I am not able to do anything about it. If you can convince me that you would be able to will yourself to endorse practices that you believe are wrong, I might consider becoming a Christian.

Perhaps the most important topic is whether or not God is perfect. If the God of the Bible created the universe, that would be an example of power, but it would not necessarily be an example of good character. Please give us your definition of the word "perfect" as it applies to God, and then provide us with evidence that God is perfect.

You cannot be 100% certain that the Bible is true. If it one day turned out that some other being is the one true God, and he endorses parole for people in the next life, you would certainly approve of that policy, especially if YOU were among those who were paroled. You would consider such a being to be merciful. Hypothetical arguments are valid. Christians frequently use hypothetical arguments when they feel that it suits their purposes to do so. C.S. Lewis' 'Lord, Liar, or Lunatic' is a good example.

Doug Shaver

Here is a prophecy for you.

If Babylon ever is rebuilt, Christian apologists will discover a proof that it does not constitute a refutation of the prophecy.

Johnny Skeptic

And you, as the challenger, may deliver your challenge to the challengees, the Iraqi government, at any time, but for some strange reason you are reluctant to do so. This is quite odd. You have delivered your challenge to skeptics, but skeptics do not have any authority to rebuild Babylon. If your challenge is valid and useful, then surely at least one U.S. government official who agrees with you would have made the challenge via world media, but obviously, that hasn't happened. In addition, why haven't Pat Robertson or Jerry Fallwell issued the challenge via world media? Why don't you contact Robertson and Fallwell and ask them to issue the challenge? They both have access to world media. No challenge can be accepted or declined unless the challengee is aware of it. How far do you think you will get telling Muslims that Islam is a false religion and that Christianity is the one true religion because you claim that attempts to rebuild Babylon have failed? If you convince just one Muslim to give up Islam and become a Christian based upon that argument, I will send you a check for $100. In addition, if you issue your challenge to the Iraqi goverment and get a reply, and post the reply here at the Secular Web, I will send you a check for $100.