Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Three irrefutable miracles.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    That is the problem. Yes our physical existence is just potentially eternal physical existence and Natural Law is the potentially eternal cause.
    If our physical existence is eternal, then I don't think it makes sense to say that it had a "cause."

    Comment


    • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      That is the problem. Yes our physical existence is just potentially eternal physical existence and Natural Law is the potentially eternal cause.
      What is eternal having no beginning has no cause. Only uncaused existence can be said to be self existent.
      Last edited by 37818; 09-09-2018, 11:21 AM.
      . . . 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 Post
        What is eternal having no beginning has no cause. Only uncaused existence can be said to be self existent.
        Right, only the eternal substance of existing things can be said to be uncaused.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
          If our physical existence is eternal, then I don't think it makes sense to say that it had a "cause."
          The cause of all cause and effect outcomes in our physical existence would be Natural Law, which is possibly simultaneously eternal. I believe I have made this view about the possibility of the eternal in terms of our physical existence and Natural Law. The possible eternal nature of our physical existence, would preclude that there was necessarily a first cause prior to the their existence.
          Last edited by shunyadragon; 09-12-2018, 11:43 AM.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
            1) Creation (the natural revelation).

            2) Special revelation of Holy Scripture (the 66 book Bible).

            3) Salvation (By God's grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone).

            Mere denial does not refute anything.
            There is more to atheism than mere denials.

            A
            reason I find the quoted suggestion defective, is that *no* argument or proposition is credible, if one’s philosophical position excludes it. E.g. I don’t find Hindu theism, scriptures or miracles credible for that reason, except in so far as they are compatible with Catholicism, b/c the premises of each, at least in part, exclude the premises of the other.

            Atheists likewise have their basic philosophical premises & positions, however undeveloped - so their POV excludes the possibility that Christianity’s claims are or could be true. So I don’t see how atheism can be overcome by argument.

            Entities referred to by Christians as miracles can be admitted to the atheist world/universe-view. What is not admitted, is the miraculousness of them. That Jesus of Nazareth was an historical person, like the Emperor Augustus or Boadicea queen of the Icemi, is compatible with atheism; the supernatural claims for Him, are not: just as the claim that Augustus Caesar was a god, are not.

            Historical claims, if supported by adequate evidence, are acceptable. Value-claims are disputable. To claim that an entity is super-natural is to make a value-claim. Atheism can admire the qualities of a sunset or a Handel oratorio - doing so, does not commit an atheist to positions that are incompatible with atheism. But there is no “room” in an atheist view of the universe for any “super-natural”. There is a place for wonder & delight & admiration, & for respect for the fact that people have very different views of the universe - but the “super-natural” has, & can have, no more reality in such a universe than unicorns or Flying Spaghetti Monsters.

            From an atheist POV, the Christian super-natural view violates Occam’s Rasor; it posits - & insists on, & insists on the reality of, & significance of - a “super-natural” for which there is no evidence, and no logical need. Atheism has no more time for the Resurrection of Christ, than most Evangelicals have for the allegedly miraculous picture on the tilma of the Virgin of Guadalupe. ISTM that the atheist position is the more consistent.

            To the atheist, the Christian is making the same *kind* of claim as an historian would be making, if he asserted that the White House had been damaged in the 1812-14 war by the dragons sent to destroy it by the British Army. The *data* for studying that war, do not require explanation by dragon - the war can be understood perfectly adequately by the available *data*, so the explanation by dragon has no explanatory function or usefulness, and there is no reason for historians of that war to take it seriously. So it can safely be ignored.

            There *may* be evidence of the employment of war-dragons by the British Army, whether in that war or another - but in that case, what is this evidence ? People have no right to assert the historical reality of the use of war-dragons by the British Army, unless they can support those assertions. So too with claims about the reality of a “super-natural” entity, order, or quality.

            Mere lack of a “natural explanation” for an entity, is no argument for the reality of a “super-natural”. That would be a fallacious argument.

            That is my impression of why Christian apologetic argument makes no impression on atheism.
            Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 12-24-2018, 02:43 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JimL View Post
              If our physical existence is eternal, then I don't think it makes sense to say that it had a "cause."
              The nature of our physical existence and whether there is a cause is not dependent on it making sense to you.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                The nature of our physical existence and whether there is a cause is not dependent on it making sense to you.
                Irrelevant to the point I made shunya. If the natural world is eternal, then it makes no sense period to say that it has a cause.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                  Irrelevant to the point I made shunya. If the natural world is eternal, then it makes no sense period to say that it has a cause.
                  It still remains your reasoning of a very biased fallible human being.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by JimL
                    Irrelevant to the point I made shunya. If the natural world is eternal, then it makes no sense period to say that it has a cause.
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    It still remains your reasoning of a very biased fallible human being.
                    I thought I would add that you are trying to rationalize and logically define what is impossible something you do not believe in.
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                      I thought I would add that you are trying to rationalize and logically define what is impossible something you do not believe in.
                      No, that's just the meaning that words have shunya. The eternal, that which has always existed, can't be caused.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                        No, that's just the meaning that words have shunya. The eternal, that which has always existed, can't be caused.
                        Nothing in the definition of eternal states that it cannot be caused. God is not defined by human logic.

                        Again . . .

                        You are trying to rationalize and logically define what is impossible something you do not believe in.

                        The concept is that all the worlds of God including our physical existence are eternal with God.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          Nothing in the definition of eternal states that it cannot be caused. God is not defined by human logic.

                          Again . . .

                          You are trying to rationalize and logically define what is impossible something you do not believe in.

                          The concept is that all the worlds of God including our physical existence are eternal with God.
                          Well, I'm game, tell me how that which has existed eternally, i.e. that which has never not existed, was also caused to exist.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                            Well, I'm game, tell me how that which has existed eternally, i.e. that which has never not existed, was also caused to exist.
                            I am a fallible human,I cannot 'tell' you anything. I already explained the Baha'i belief. You do not even believe in the possibility of God.

                            The concept is that all the worlds of God including our physical existence are eternal with God.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                              Well, I'm game, tell me how that which has existed eternally, i.e. that which has never not existed, was also caused to exist.
                              Imagine that for a certain effect to occur you need a specific set of requirements to exist. As long as these requirements are met it will inevitably lead to this effect. If something exists eternally, that meets all the requirements to produce aforementioned effect, will the effect also be eternal?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                                Imagine that for a certain effect to occur you need a specific set of requirements to exist. As long as these requirements are met it will inevitably lead to this effect. If something exists eternally, that meets all the requirements to produce aforementioned effect, will the effect also be eternal?
                                No, the effect would not be eternal also. For instance, if there were an eternally existing god (the requirment) who decided to create the universe 14 billion years ago, then that universe (the effect) would not be eternal with its cause. But, if the cause were of one and the same substance as that of it's effects, then you could argue that the two, the cause and the effect, are forms of one and the same eternal thing.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                159 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                426 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X