Disqus - Latest Comments for Trav

Re: A handful of Christian arguments & tactics - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Trav — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:45:45 -0000

Dent is right..this site uses some pretty poor arguments.

I mean, his first few dont even touch on the existence/non existence of God, so after accusing Christians of side arguments, he goes onto use a whole heap of side arguments on the whole apologetics issue.

Example, who cares if Hitler was a Christian? A careful look at the context of his political agenda and his statements from the early 1940's (not JUST mein kampf and other writings which were written much earlier), not to mention the broad goals of his regime will clearly show that he was a catholic who abandoned his faith in favour of the atheistic ideology he'd created...however, regardless of that, it has no bearing on the validity of the Christian faith. Absolutely none.

Secondly, argument from design. Why don't we apply the same principle to the creator? He exists in a different realm. If he DOES exist, then what makes you think you'd be able to understand him anyway? He clearly tells us in the bible that he exists outside of time, a concept which he created our finite minds within. What makes you think our finite minds should inherently be capable of stepping outside the concepts within which we exist? You see the universe is inherently physical in its nature, so we should technically be able to explain where it came from, using physical measures. Not sure why you'd assume the same of a supernatural creator.

And what sort of proof are you after, I wonder. Thats what this boils down to, ultimately.

Re: A handful of Christian arguments & tactics - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Trav — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:03:59 -0000

As I said, Hitler was not a Christian- he had a catholic upbringing and then abandoned it in favour of atheism Thats what all the evidence points towards. But my point was this- the only conclusive thing you can say in favour of your assertion that Hitler was a Christian was that he labelled himself as such, early in his life. In light of that, what negative consequences does that bring for the truth of Christianity? Absolutely none.

Secondly, you guys seem pretty intent on bringing down my "different realm" argument. But, unsurprisingly enough, none of you actually provided a solid answer to my question. What makes you think you can understand God? Can an ant understand a human? We are mere ants in comparison to the one who created us.

Look at the fine tuning of the universe- it provides solid evidence that the world in which we live was designed with us in mind. A claim repeatedly made, surprise surprise, in the bible. Of all places! And of course the appearance of design doesnt completely prove a designer. But it does unmistakeably point towards the strong possibility of such.

Look at the historical evidence for Jesus. Or even more importantly, look at the weakness of the alternative hypothesis. It never happened, the disciples made it up- People dying for the sake of a lie? The early Christians changed the bible- Why would they include the testimony of a woman as the first to see the empty tomb (woman's evidence wasnt even considered in a court of law in those days)? etc etc etc. The fact is, if you look at the new testament and the early church history with an open mind, the most likely conclusion is that Jesus did in fact rise from the dead, especially when you consider the prophecies he fulfilled, which were written hundreds of years earlier.

Re: Sincerely reading the Bible broke my faith - Testimonies of Ex-Christians

Trav — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:21:29 -0000

"I came to one of two conclusions:

1. The bible is a book which was written by some good men, many thousands of years ago but is not the word of god, therefore I do not need to live my life by it....or.....

2. The bible is absolutely the word of god and represents him exactly as he is. If this is the case then the unloving, devious, revengeful tyrant presented is not someone/something I want to spend my life trying to serve."

Firstly, I'd love you to expand on your reasons for believing that the truth has to be one of the above alternatives. Is there any inherent reason why the truth couldn't be in between?

Secondly, does the bible literally have to be written by the hand of God, or alternatively be completely fictional? Is there any reason why it couldn't be divinely inspired without being word for word from the mouth and hand of God?

Secondly, I'd like you to expand on why, if the bible IS the word of God, you would completely reject it? If it is the word of God, then you're offered salvation from your sins by grace-embodied, Jesus Christ who died for you. So why you'd reject that is beyond me!

Re: Sincerely reading the Bible broke my faith - Testimonies of Ex-Christians

Trav — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:46:25 -0000

"I got to the point where we would be debating and someone would come up with an excellent point about evolution, or sex before marriage, etc."

Another question for the author- What does sex before marriage have to do with the truth of Christianity? Are you honestly telling us that because friends were out-debating you on the subject of sex before marriage, that this made you doubt your faith.!?!? I sincerely hope that I am missing something here....?

Regarding evolution, I' m not sure about you (dont wish to put words into your mouth :- ) ) but I find that a lot of people are actually fairly ignorant of what it is. A few things to keep in mind:

- It's a theory of the development of life, not a theory on the origin of life.

And obviously, the implications of this are massive. Most leading evolutionists either believe God started the process (eg: Francis Collins), remain agnostic on the issue or choose to believe that aliens from another planet deposited life on earth (Richard Dawkins). Either way, it isn't even an aspect of the theory itself.

- It does a questionable job of explaining even the development of life.

This is shown by the fact that the leading evolutionists can't even agree on how the process of evolution took place- they differ on punctuated equilibrium, statis etc. Basically what timeframes the developments of species took place over, what factors caused the changes in species or helped it along. In other words, massive disagreements over the key factors of the theory itself.

- Evolution is taught in classes because it's the best scientific theory we have available to us.

This doesn't mean that it's infallible, or that there aren't huge problems with it (there are), or that other theories don't also have some solid scientific evidence (they do).

Re: Round 17 - If you don’t have anything nice to say…

Trav — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 08:36:50 -0000

Go the Sainters! What a game this was. It was like watching us train (not that I've ever watched us train, but its what I'd imagine it'd be like). Streaming down the wing, uncontested, time after time......

:-D

Re: The Greatest Show I’ve Ever Seen

Trav — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 07:55:30 -0000

I agree, it was a great show.

You didn't need to credit Analise either, you could've got the set list off their website.

Re: Duck!

Trav — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 21:41:25 -0000

HAHAHAHAHA!