Originally posted by Raul
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Presuppositional Apologetics
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Carrikature View PostThe alternative is self-caused which is incoherent.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostCaused things are contingent on there being an existence. An uncaused cause would be two things. Uncaused and being a cause. Uncaused needs to be an existence. A cause is contingent on an existence.I'm not here anymore.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View Post. . . Assuming uncaused existence is not a valid axiom. . . .Originally posted by Carrikature View PostSo maybe you should try to reconcile these statements with your previous claim that uncaused existence isn't a valid axiom (it is). You contradict yourself.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostIt was not a valid statement even as, "Assuming God exists is not a valid axiom. . ." was not a valid statement. God being the Self-Existent. God's identity being Uncaused Existence.I'm not here anymore.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostWell I would agree that a rational Creator is a good precondition for logic and an intelligible universe, whether or not God is a necessary condition is another story.
... argue that the very idea of logical laws presupposes the existence of God as the only viable metaphysical basis for such laws.
http://www.proginosko.com/docs/The_L...tradiction.pdf
Comment
-
Originally posted by David Hayward View PostYou might be interested in this paper. (Link downloads a pdf.)Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Carrikature View PostI don't understand what you're saying. Any form of uncaused existence is a valid axiom.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostAn uncaused existence is not in need of any kind of God. That is key here. So the only thing which could possibly even be a God would be that uncaused existence. Uncaused existence not having a beginning would be eternal. And an uncaused existence would effectively be omnipresent since there can be nothing else without it. And that is just for starters.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raul View PostI am a secular humanist, former Christian, and as a Christian I used a presuppositional approach to defending the faith. But I see so many problems with it now. Are there any Christians out there who are currently convinced that this is a good approach? I am looking to challenge and be challenged. It might include arguments like the atheist worldview doesn't have the necessary preconditions for logic, since for all he knows he is just a "brain in a vat". Or another popular one is that atheists don't have the necessary preconditions for morality, since they have no objective standard against which to judge what is right and what is wrong.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raul View PostSo there is no evidence that nature could produce the appearance of design? How about the whole field of evolutionary biology. Your answer completely ignores this. Even if you just take micro evolution, like the shape of the beaks of finches, or the color of people's skin, even there you have nature producing conditions that are incredibly adapted to their surroundings. How can this be? How can it be that nature would produce beaks so fitted for their tasks? I though nature couldn't do this? How could nature produce skin colors so adapted, each to its unique climate? I thought only an intelligent mind could do this. The fact is that as we have learned more and more about the world, we have found that nature can and often does create the appearance of design. This, combined with how often man has been wrong in the past when we attributed the mysterious to God, should cause us to be wary of this approach.
Where have you shown that 'nature' has intrinsic ability to cause evolution apart from deity?
At best the sciences can merely explain that animals seemed to change in certain sequences. The scientist can only document changes that found to have happened. Even if they identify the mechanisms which allow for such change, they don't have a method to identify whether those mechanisms originated accidentally or by, for example, divine design.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View PostYou are simply going with circular reasoning here. You assume that nature is able to cause things to evolve. Then, since things evolved, they are explained by nature.
Where have you shown that 'nature' has intrinsic ability to cause evolution apart from deity?
At best the sciences can merely explain that animals seemed to change in certain sequences. The scientist can only document changes that found to have happened. Even if they identify the mechanisms which allow for such change, they don't have a method to identify whether those mechanisms originated accidentally or by, for example, divine design.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostEternal Natural Laws could qualify for an uncaused cause of an eternal uncaused existence.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raul View PostDo you deny that things like skin color, or the shapes of finch beaks, or different breeds of dogs, or antibiotic resistant bacteria, or any other example of life adapting to its surroundings, have a natural explanation?Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
172 responses
608 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
04-15-2024, 11:55 AM
|
Comment