Fallen and Flawed

Hey Demian,
Our pastor, Dr. David Platt (Church at Brook Hills, Birmingham, AL) is my role model. His teaching is radically God-centerd, saturated by the Word and is challenging in a wonderful way. The way he lives out what he preaches with humility and grace is the icing on the cake. He’s helped me to see the grace and mercy of Christ that I had not seen before (even though I thought I was a Christian all my life). His teaching can be found here, and I would encourage anyone to check it out, it’s a wonderful resource. http://www.brookhills.org/media/page_audio_main.htm

I’ll have to echo your sentiment on John Piper too, his books and website have help me to learn more on my journey every day. I also appreciate your dedication to this blog and ensuring that it is a great resource and theologically sound. I’ve read a bunch of posts and articles, but I figured it was time to comment now. Hope all is well, and be encouraged, the Holy Spirit is working through your blog.

Take care,
Richard

Richard: Thank you very much for the kind words. I can’t tell you how encouraging they are.

By the way, I was born in Bama [Montgomery], so Platt is automatically close to my heart. Look forward to checking out his sermons. Thx.

Richard, I echo you on Dr. Platt. Though I attend another church, I go to the Secret Church meetings and Dr. Platt has been God’s instrument in my life on more than one occasion.

Demian, Piper has probably been the single most influential pastor I have learned from in recent years. It is not Piper, but the Spirit that works through the devoted man, that has accomplished so much. Good to hear you were born in Montgomery! I knew there was some reason I was drawn to the blog My dad grew up there, we still drive over from Birmingham to visit relatives there.

Another to add to the list: Dr. Harry Reeder, pastor of Briarwood Presbyterian Church (Bham, AL). Being pastor of 4000 didn’t stop him from sitting down with me, one-on-one in his office, to work through questions that arose during this past semester of college in philosophy. Dr. Reeder has spent valuable time teaching me how to make a reasonable defense of the faith. His teaching on Church Revitalization and leadership have been priceless. And it seems that half the books on my shelves either were given or recommended to me by Reeder the continual reader.

Ray Banana-man Comfort? Ray Croc-o-duck Comfort? Ray “No Christians Accept Evolution” Comfort?

Ray Comfort? Seriously?

I didn’t think anyone could respect that anti-intellectual, delusional boob and still string together coherent sentences. If I had to name pastors who represented the worst of American Christianity, he would be one of the top five.

I’m just shocked. Maybe a topic for another post would be a list of those whom you strongly disagree with, sort of a palate cleanser

Tyro,
No need for an ad hominem on this post. If Ray Comfort was able to wake Demian up in his faith, then Ray did what Demian needed. The rest of Ray’s intellectual views (such as those on evolution) are not relevant to the discussion on God’s use of Ray to bring Demian out of a delusion and into true, Biblical conversion.

As this post is about holding up specific individuals for respect or reverence, it is entirely relevant if they have a long, well-documented history of deceit, ignorance and inanity. Since Comfort has chosen to use his Creationism schtick to boost his public profile in media appearances, YouTube pieces, interviews and now his blog, it definitely is relevant.

Prominently singling out a preacher who is so virulently anti-intellectual is very relevant to Demian’s story. If you have to go back months on Comfort’s blog without finding one with lies, anti-intellectual attacks and smug ignorance (assuming that it can even be done), what are we to think about his apologetic arguments? I’m sure he’s scrupulously fair and honest with those even though he’ll say anything on other issues if they agree with his conclusions, regardless of the truth.

And, just to be pedantic, an ad hominem is a fallacy where one ignores the substance of an argument through the use of irrelevant personal attacks. No argument has been presented and my attacks have been relevant, assuming we’re all interested in the search for truth. Responding to his croc-o-duck argument by calling him a wife-beater would be an ad hominem, calling it a gross misunderstanding of evolution and riddled with grade-school misunderstandings as a prelude to ripping the argument to shreds would be combative but not an ad hominem. As he’s listed as an expert or an authority, listing some absurd arguments that he champions is definitely not ad hominem.

(Though calling him a “boob” and implying his followers were mouth breathers was probably uncalled for. But seriously, Ray Comfort? It’s like listing Kent Hovind. Can’t a guy can be excused for reacting to the shock?)

Tyro,
Demian’s point was that these men had influenced him, not that they were perfect or that they are to be imitated in every respect. Specifically with Ray Comfort, Demian said that Ray “put me on the search for the meaning of a true, biblical conversion.” Demian was not endorsing everything Ray says or does, but pointing out that Ray spurred Demian to search for truth. The truth Demian found was not from Ray Comfort. The truth came from Demian’s own search, ending with a discovery of God’s truth. Even if everything you said about Ray is 100% true, it does not diminish the fact that Ray influenced Demian’s life by causing Demian to search for the meaning of true conversion.

And yes, reactions in shock can be excused. You can take the rest of this up with Demian. Now that I have stirred you up for him.

Great question!

I have two. My youth pastor growing up, Pastor Tim Stark, who poured out his life for the kids in youth group; many who were from broken homes, often very poor. He taught me to care about and respect people (other kids) as image-bearers of God, when my tendency was to get in a clique. He taught me how to share the Gospel. And that doing so is the life-blood of the Christian faith.

And he loved (loves) God’s Word; it motivated him, even though I’m not certain where he came down on every theological issue.

After that it’s Pastor John (piper). His humility while standing unflinchingly for the Word of God and Jesus and the Gospel has been very influential for me. How he has handled his imperfections in personality, marriage, parenting, and discouragement have encouraged me greatly. Namely, that in all our sin, we fall on Christ’s atoning sacrifice and are clothed in His perfection.

Christ’s grace is free and undeserved and it gives me the strength to put one foot in front of the other each day, as I wage war on sin.

My heart is very thankful to God for these two pastors.

Tryo, you get one “shocked” comment a year. [Just teasing.] What it boils down to is one sermon from Comfort. That’s all. Honestly, I do not like his foray into science–probably not as strong as you, though. His strong suit is evangelism.

Abigail: Great stories, thank you sharing. Piper seems to be a perennial fav.

D,
While it’s a bit late in the day, I still thought it would be okay to chime in.
~
For me, my initial pastoral influence is a man named Dr. Samuel Bombara. He pastors a church in Massachusetts, and was responsible for my conversion. I remained under his wing for five years and to this day still hold his handling of the Word, his wisdom, compassion, trust and self-sacrifice in the highest regard.
~
The next most influential would be Bob Mumford. From the mid 70’s to the early 90’s, he was the leader of our church among other related churches. And while the whole “shepherd movement” that we were involved in had its downside, I still love his humor, wit, intelligence, humility and insights into the Word and his ability to make Scripture come alive in his teachings.
~
And lastly, I’m enjoying Mark Driscoll. He clearly has a deep grasp of Scripture and a very real, approachable and practical teaching manner that I find very appealing.

Demian, our church got a new website today, so here’s the working link for Dr. Platt’s teaching. Sorry about that! http://www.brookhills.org/media/

Hmmm. Well, my story is a little different. I’ve never sat under the consistent preaching of an outstanding pastor. I don’t mean to infer that all my pastors have been bad. But in years past I was subjected to much questionable teaching and (worse) the virtual absence of sound doctrine.

I suspect that the greatest influence that has been borne toward me has been that of the prayers of faithful members of the body of Christ who were obedient to the urgings of the Holy Spirit. Similarly, the greatest measure of my education in God’s Word has come in personal discussions with godly individuals and in adult discussion groups and studies led by godly men. And I am grateful for all of this, for the body is built up by the ministrations to each other of every member.
——————————————
Personal connections with the above comments of others:

I was personally acquainted with Bob Mumford in the mid-to-late 1960s, and he was once a guest in my home. I found him a man of consistent encouragement and good humor.

In the late fall of 1961 I spent about three months attending a US Air Force tech school at Gunther AFB in Montgomery, AL. I was not a Christian at that time, but I was a Yankee, born & bred, from Ohio, the state that had contributed the largest portion of Union troops in the War Between the States. The Montgomery of 1961 was for me the very most severe kind of culture shock. Racism was rampant and virulent. It lierally turned my stomach. When I arrived there by train, I entered the station and was greeted by the sight of a bright, shiny stainless steel drinking fountain under a sign that said WHITE. From the fountain ran a rust-encrusted pipe to a small, stained porcelain bowl beneath the word COLORED. I remember thinking, I’m in hell. Upon reporting to my base, I was told to never leave the base in the company of anyone but caucasians, and that to ride with a black taxi driver could cost me my life.

All of this had a profound effect at the time, but became much more meaningful after my conversion to Christ.

This is a wonderful blog. Thank you for sharing your faith and your with God so openly. May he continue to bless your testimony.

I would have to say that my reply to this post begins the same as al’s. The biggest influences in my life have been, and still are, my father and my mother. They have been rocks for me and have inspired me to go to God for answers. I love them and I’m so thankful that God put us together.

Thank you, Richard D., Al and Sincerity [and thank you for the encouragement!] for sharing…
–
Al, very intriguing story. Very intriguing.

The Chandler and Driscoll duo shaped me a lot. I was caught in the “Rob Bell trap” until someone introduced me to those guys about 4 years ago (well, Driscoll four years ago, chandler about three, really got into listening to him after I saw him at a conference).
A pastor who mentored me, Jim Holland, had a profound effect on my life. He taught me leadership skills and showed me humility. He would ask simple questions or make simple statements all the time that would challenge me for days on end.
At one point in my life, he demonstrated what the word “Mercy” really means.

Demian,
When you say that Tim Keller “taught you the importance of distributing your time equally between Christians and non-Christians”, are you referring to a specific resource by Keller (a book, sermon, study, etc)? I’m curious because this is something I’ve considered a lot and I’d love to hear Keller’s arguments for this position. Thanks!

Don, thanks for pointing up two phenomena by stating:

He would ask simple questions or make simple statements all the time that would challenge me for days on end.

The man asking the thought provoking questions and the man who is challenged by them enough to pursue the matter are raities today. I hope to be both when I grow up…

Julie, yeah, it was a workshop called “Preaching Christ in a Post Modern World.” Scroll down to the heading, Important Media Messages.

Ok, it’s probably too late to comment on this in a way that it will get viewed/read by most, if not any. I read Tyro’s comment the day it was written and it’s been like a bee in my bonnet since.

I like Ray Comfort. I don’t think he’s a boob. Does he have flaws? Sure. So do we all. Not one individual that Demian could have put up there is not a “boob” in some way. I like Ray Comfort for only one reason. He is in a small category of individuals who truly want to seek God’s will and do it. He has a strong conviction regarding the Law of God and its design to bring about true repentance in the sinner. That is his message and I see clearly where it is corroborated by scripture. I’ve listened to hours of Ray’s teaching. I wonder how much Tyro really knows about him. Maybe a lot…maybe not much. It doesn’t matter. What I write here won’t change Tyro’s mind. That’s fine. I just wanted to state my view.

I laud Demian for placing him on the list. If I were to make a list, Ray Comfort would make it too…not because he makes me feel warm and fuzzy or because I agree with him on social or political issues, but because he leads me to the cross where my Savior died for me, where I found forgiveness and where I will remain for the rest of my life.

Blessings to all!

Andrew Eunpu

Andrew – Isn’t this an end vs means thing? Would you support someone that you thought was less-than-honest, even if they did so to support a goal that you believed in?

I think the practice makes it look like Christian beliefs can only be supported through lies and deceit. For that reason alone I would distance myself. (There are a handful of people like this in the skeptics movement and I’ll attack them even more vigorously because they make me look bad just by association.)

Tyro,

Thanks for getting back.

I don’t fully understand your post, but here are my thoughts.

I would not “support” someone who was “less than honest,” even if they support a goal I belive in. An intent to deceive is my definition of dishonesty.

I do not believe that Christian ideas need the support of lies and deceit. I read above your reference to the banana and “no evolution.” Is his dogmatic approach to creation what bothers you? If that’s the case, from all I’ve learned of him from listenting to his messages is that they are more vignettes meant to engage the individual’s mind on matters that may interest them. I believe the Bible where it says that God created the world in 6 days and that he rested on the 7th. Is that troubling?

I’m not sure I’m getting your full view, though. I still like to focus on the veracity of God’s word, the total depravity of mankind and the need for repentance and forgiveness. Those are all points that Ray Comfort stands for as well, from what I can tell.

Andrew,

Certainly his discussion of evolution is the clearest. Unlike religion which is lamentably subjective and nebulous, evolution is a science supported by a huge volume of data and what he says is wrong on many, many levels. He ridicules genuine experts, presents outlandish strawmen and never changes his claims even after the counter evidence has been presented. At best, Comfort is guilty of the arrogance of ignorance but considering the number of times he has been corrected, it’s hard to imagine that he doesn’t know what he says is a lie. It’s a zingy lie with graphics and plays well in soundbites which is why I think he continues. Truth and accuracy seem irrelevant to his ideology.

To me these are very important. As Christians often try to claim the moral high ground, I expect they should be even more important to you.

As a personal example, I’m a vegetarian but I will actively fight against PETA. We both advocate similar goals but they’ve show the same disregard for truth that Comfort does. Once someone first realizes how PETA has fooled them, every time they sees an ad, press release or billboard from PETA they’re inclined to believe the opposite. When other vegetarians are silent on PETAs claims, people tend to believe that we accept their claims and that we’re all as loopy. I remember cringing while watching a Penn & Teller episode “debunking” vegetarianism (and one on organic farming) because some fringe nut jobs keep exaggerating or lying to make their case; it makes everyone look bad.

Christians talk a lot about Truth with a captial-T so what could be more toxic than association with someone who either knowingly deceives or who doesn’t care about whether anything he says is true or not?

Isn’t there an expression which goes roughly when one finds a rotten apple at the top of the barrel, don’t assume that it’s the only one? When we catch Ray out in places where it’s easy to verify (and where he must know he’d be caught), what should we think about the rest of his barrel of speeches?

Tyro, a very well thought-out response. Thanks for taking the time to put your thoughts into writing.

As a Christian, I have no problem with someone putting great credence in the assertions of the veracity of evolution. Evolution vs. Creationism is not the main point that I focus on. Although we could go round and round on the specifics of the topic, I choose to focus on what I feel God has given us as the (dare I say) only important question each of us needs to answer: what do you do with Jesus? There is a great book, if you’re into the empirical approach, by Lee Strobel called Case for Christ. It leads one through the steps of what it would be like to see the claims of Christ and his followers put “through the ringer” in the court of law. If you have not come to a personal commitment to Christ, it will challenge you on a very intellecutal level to do so. If you have already committed to Christ, it will not disappoint nor bore you as the arguments presented are very enlightening.

By the way, Demian’s website states my position clearly. I am fallen and flawed as well. Althought I’m a Christ follower, I rarely try to “claim the moral high ground,” as you state. Yes, many do, mostly hypocritically, but that is not for me to judge. I’m responsible for my actions, inactions and thoughts. I have a hard enough time keeping myself on track much less look for the flaws or shortcomings of others. that said, this kind of dialogue is a wonderful opportunity for all of us to consider “the other side of the mountain” that we sometimes cannot see from our own perspective.

Thanks again for your thoughts. I apreciate them

Andrew – thanks for the reference. I have read “A Case for Christ” and a couple other books by Strobel. They used to be beside me on my bookshelf until I had a moving sale and cleared everything out (except for CJ Lewis, my grandmother would kill me if I sold that). They’re pretty typical of the genre, presenting strawman opponents and having a carefully chosen group of people tear them down. It isn’t as anti-intellectual as Comfort or Hovind but most of the book seems to be devoted to finding excuses to sidestep the evidence or to accept unsupportable positions rather than to seeking the truth or examining the evidence. The strongest impression it left was that, if there was any validity to this technique, then literally any historical belief could be justified. In that sense it’s even more insidious as it tries to subvert science where others merely ignore it.

Tyro, thanks again for your thoughts.

So, what guidelines are important for your to determine history, specifically, the claims of the Bible that Jesus lived, died, was buried and was raised from the dead?

I’m not sure who the strawman opponent to the following would be, as described in Strobel’s book, but give me your best shot. Here’s the scenario.

As Jesus was being taken to Pilate, his followers all but abandoned him. He was literally rode hard and hung up wet by his followers the disciples. They denied knowing him. After he was crucified and buried, they cowered in fear over what would happen to them. If the Jewish leaders did what they did to Jesus, what would happen to them, they feared. Then, on the third day something miraculous happened. Am I referring to the resurrection of Christ? Yes, but not only that. The cowering whimps who feared for their lives suddenly were emboldened to speak out and testify of their Lord’s resurrection. The evidence I have that verifices the veracity of this is that each of them (save John) died for the belief in the risen Christ. If it was a lie or deception, I just don’t see 11 individuals submitting to martyrdom to keep face with their followers. How do you view this chain of events? Do you reason them away or is there something in your mind that says, “I wonder”?

Andrew,

I’m not a professional historian so I may miss some features but some things I look for are: agreement with external writings and archaeological evidence, hostile sources, contemporary sources, Bayesian probability, and physical evidence. In a written account, I’d like to see attention to accuracy over ideology, scepticism, first-hand accounts where possible and named sources where not possible, and proximity to the events.

What do you look for? I see a lot of people do what you’re doing – listing some features of Christianity without explaining what process of methodology they use. Every religion, every miracle claim will have a list of supporting features like this, many similar, some unique. How should an unbiased observer react? Treat these claims as if you were an outsider and not as someone that already has a belief and seeks justification.

Taking the bible in general it fails on virtually all of my criteria. The gospels are anonymous and dating is a minefield, there are no contemporary accounts even though there were many contemporary writers whom we could expect to write about the events, no physical evidence, frequent signs of embellishment and fictions, frequent inconsistencies, frequent signs that historical accuracy is not important, and no hint of where the information came from in the first place. Even if all of that were different, how does one establish that something like a resurrection happened based solely on written records? We know that fiction is not only easy but extremely common. What methodology lets us conclude Jesus was a miracle but doesn’t have us accept every other miracle claim throughout history? How can we resolve the problems where one miraculous account contradicts another (e.g.: angels telling Muhammed that Jesus was not divine)?

It seems to me that these are vital issues to resolve before starting any investigation and these are all questions Strobel never touches. He’s interested in providing justification for a specific belief without realizing that if these were valid then we could justify virtually any belief. That’s a huge problem that should concern anyone purporting to care about the evidence.

As to the specific claims:

* Pilate and abandoned by followers – this is only in the gospels and much of the story appears fictitious, such as Pilate offering to release a prisoner, not to mention there being no record of this arrest and crucifixion. What is real and what is fiction? How do you know?

* Crucified – this is only described in the bible so already there are problems. The dates of his crucifixion are different in the different gospels and the means of crucifixion itself is not consistent with the other historical records for his alleged crimes. How does this impact the reliability of the account? How do you deal with these sorts of discrepancies?

* “died in the belief in the risen Christ” – you talk about “evidence”, but what actually is your evidence? If you say “the bible”, should I scream or weep? =) What reason do we have to accept this really happened? How do we know what was in their heads when they died? How confident can we be in these conclusions? Why do you think that people die for verified facts as opposed for unverified ideology?

* “individuals submitting to martyrdom”. That’s a fine claim, where’s your evidence? How many examples can you think of where someone martyred themselves for a verified fact instead of dogma or ideology (especially a falsified one)? I can think of many examples of people dying for things they didn’t know or for things they should know were false but meekly recanting when they knew the facts. I can’t think of one where they knew it was true but perhaps you can think of some. What general psychological studies can you point to which give us general probabilities? We know cognitive dissonance is very powerful and has led people to martyrdom, yet this arises only when their hoped-for event fails, not succeeds. This implies that the martyred apostles knew that Jesus failed them. I’m not saying it’s definite but it’s a strong possibility that you (and Strobel) neglect to consider.

Regardless, people die for things all the time. Can you seriously tell me that you accept their claims as well, merely because they died for them? If you won’t accept this argument for others, why make it yourself? If you do accept it from others, how do you deal with conflicts – they can’t both be true.

* “Do you reason them away or is there something in your mind that says, “I wonder”?” I don’t reason anything away and try to consciously avoid this by paying special attention to conclusions I “want” to be true as these are places we’re most likely to fool ourselves. I try to accept all observations and incorporate everything. It seems that you Christians who pretend to have evidence are in the business of ignoring contradictory evidence and explaining things away. How can you not, when the same evidence exists for so many other mutually-exclusive claims?

I always “wonder”, always examine new ideas to see if they have validity and scrutinize their evidence, but there’s more riches in the real world without trying to jump to conclusions.

Just for the record…it was a sermon on the difference between an authentic and false Christian that Comfort used to influence me…it had nothing to do with evolution, unless we’re talking about me “evolving” as a Christian.

Tyro,

Thanks for the response. I appreciate all the time you put into it. I won’t be able to give a response to all your questions here, but will address a single point that is very important to me.

Before I became a Christian, I was seeking truth. I was listening to radio programs, reading the Bible (without understanding, I’ll add) and praying to God in the only way I knew. One night when I was 17 years old, God revealed Himself to me in a dream. I was in a dark alley, as if in London in the middle of the night. It was foggy, cold and dark. I was sitting against a building, miserable. I was filled with despair, lonely and unhappy. Suddenly, Jesus came to me and spread out His hands. Suddenly, I was covered with a wave of joy, peace and fulfillment. He had replaced the misery with exultation. He said, “if you want this, it’s yours. You just have to receive it.” I woke up crying, no bawling, knowing that what I had just experienced was real. No one can tell me that it was not. I know it was. A few days later I decided to give my heart to him. Things have not been smooth as silk since then. In fact, many things have happened that I’d prefer would not have. I did not follow him to have a “better life.” I followed Him to get away from the consequence of my sin. This is why I’m filled with thanksgiving for what He revealed to me that night.

Honestly, I have not had a lot of experiences since then that containted this magnitude of wonder. Once again, I don’t follow Him for experiences or “warm fuzzies.” I follow Him because I have a very real sense that in the end, there is a reckoning of all good and bad. I also cannot look at the world, ANY component of it, without knowing that this thing could NOT come out of chance. Look at any component of creation and you’ll see that things are not “building up” or “evolving” but winding down, or “devolving.” Take the human eye for example. There are proteins that must be in place, there are the smallest of components that move with exactitude not able to be mimicked by man, given that they are “alive.” This is one component of the human body and there are many other components. THere are multitudes of other organisms that involve the same complexities. I just can’t dismiss this and assume it just “happened” some time in the past eons. I feel like I’m digressing…but not really. My faith is founded on the big whys, not on the details of specific events. I’m not conceding that the specific events as described in the Bible and other non-biblical sources are made up. I believe them to be true. What I AM saying is that my line of thinking starts with the big picutre and gets more specific.

I will take more time in the coming weeks to sort through your questions, but I cannot guarantee I’ll have answers for you. Based on the extent of your research and thinking, I’m sure you would have found them by now. In the end, God is a God who chooses to reveal certain things and chooses to keep other things secret. This is because he requires us to walk by faith. According to Hebrews 11:1, faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Christians are not asked to check the intellect at the door, but there is a place where one must go on the information he has and make a decision. I know this doesn’t come out quite the way I want it to. Honestly, I’m here with my 4 kids who want to go outside and hike in the woods with me. I’m going to give your questions some thought and do what I can to answer them. Like I said, I don’t expect I’ll be able to give you answers that lead you to suddenly answer, “I get it now.” It’s a journey you are on by yourself. I believe that if you ask God to show you Himself, He will do so. It may take some time, but He promises that those who seek Him will find Him. I believe this fully.

Once again, thanks for your time. I’ll do my best to honor it by systematically going through what you have written.

Take care …

Andrew,

I woke up crying, no bawling, knowing that what I had just experienced was real. No one can tell me that it was not. I know it was.

That does sound powerful and I don’t doubt that you had the experience. I wonder though, if you were born in Tehran would you say this was Muhammad’s grace bringing you to Allah? If you were born in Mumbai, would you say this was experiencing the Brahman? If you were born in Denmark, would you say this was an incredible sense of euphoria and leave it at that?

You had an incredible experience and appear to be interpreting it in the light of your existing beliefs and desires, after all you say you were already searching for reasons to believe and had fixed on Christianity. Maybe you see this as convincing but how should an objective outsider interpret this? How should someone who wasn’t already invested in Christian teachings interpret it?

Look at any component of creation and you’ll see that things are not “building up” or “evolving” but winding down, or “devolving.” Take the human eye for example.

First, may I ask why you describe a powerful emotional experience and admit that it was this which convinced you and then list some intellectual-sounding arguments? Do you think these are good reasons or would they only appeal to people who have already accepted your major beliefs and are looking for further signs of what God has done?

I don’t want to delve too much into these specifics unless you want to. Darwin dealt with the eye in 1859 and our knowledge has only grown since. It looks marvelous and like it was divinely designed but is actually a powerful line of evidence for evolution without an intelligent designer. The evidence and arguments are available should you ever be interested but you’ll pardon me for saying that it sounds like you are more interested in validating and protecting your faith than learning about what really happens. If I’m wrong, you can start with the Wikipedia entry and move on to “The Blind Watchmaker” by Richard Dawkins (which is strictly about evolution, despite the infamy he has garnered lately).

While eyes appear miraculous superficially, the huge variety of different types of eyes, their poor design and the multiple “hacks” that arose point to evolution alone, not design.

I just can’t dismiss this and assume it just “happened” some time in the past eons.

Only ignorant or dogmatic pastors say it “just happened”, no cosmologist or evolutionist will. Physics, chemistry and selection are not random and they don’t “just happen”. You’ve been badly misinformed.

Christians are not asked to check the intellect at the door, but there is a place where one must go on the information he has and make a decision.

It sounds like an admission that the only way to accept Christian claims are to already accept Christian claims and to know which questions to avoid asking. Is that right? Why do you live like that? Why would a designer grant us such powerful minds and then construct a world which leads us away from Him if we follow the evidence without a bias?

The more we learn, the less room their is for a God. Is God deceiving us?

Tyro,

There are so many issues you bring up here, so I’m going to suggest we deal with one at a time. I’m going back to your post before last to deal with the first comment you made in resposne to mine.

Here’s what you wrote:

Blessings!

…how should an objective outsider interpret this? How should someone who wasn’t already invested in Christian teachings interpret it?

Such experiences have occurred to people who had no knowledge of Christ or Christianiy. You might check the biography of Samuel Morris for an example http://www.amazon.com/Samuel-Morris-African-American-University/dp/0871239507. But that is really neither here nor there. Regardless how real and convincing Andrew E’s experience was, his relationship with Christ is ultimately dependent upon God’s Word, which is established forever in heaven.

…it sounds like you are more interested in validating and protecting your faith than learning about what really happens.

I agree with this statement, but you and I mean different things by it. This should become clearer as I continue, but at this juncture suffice to say that the believer in Christ inundates himself in the holy Scriptures to grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ because that IS “what really happens.” Let God be true and every man a liar. This present evil world is passing away, but God’s Word endures forever.

Only ignorant or dogmatic pastors say it “just happened”

Here you display your own ignorance of both Christianity and atheism: there are many professing Christians and atheists who will say “it just happened– some are ignorant, some are dogmatic, some are both, and some may be neither. Most are not pastors, but simply common folk who are content to let others do their thinking for them and tell them what to suppose and say.

…no cosmologist or evolutionist will. Physics, chemistry and selection are not random and they don’t “just happen”.

Assuming you refer to the intelligentsia, that is because they choose to dissuade disagreement with pseudo-scientific argumentation, seeming to take the acedemic high ground and to cow any resistance into submission. This usaully appears to work because believers, once convinced that science doesn’t disprove Scripture, are usually content to drop the matter and return to their study of God’s Word, having no need nor compulsion to “prove” anything to anyone, because we know that only the Spirit of God can convince a sinner of his wickedness and show him his need of Christ. [I am, in fact, writing this more for the encouragement of Christians, who can understand it than for the lost, who cannot.]

You’ve been badly misinformed.

Au contraire, mon ami– it is you who are misinformed. Check out http://www.answersingenesis.org/ and http://www.icr.org/ to see how science and the Bible complement one another (notwithstanding God’s Word always takes precedence).

Why do you live like that? Why would a designer grant us such powerful minds and then construct a world which leads us away from Him if we follow the evidence without a bias?

That is a question you must ask the Designer and not His followers, for we see only partially in this life and world, without hope or promise to know as we are known until we have been resurrected in glory. Why won’t you ask Him? Not once as a lark, but persistenly until He answers? Is it because you can’t see Him? Have you seen subatomic particles? Witnessed the “big bang?” Seen evolution actually occurring? Been to the borders of the universe? And yet these things you will accept, and even profess, at the word of other human beings. Why will you not express your doubts (and fears) to God at the word of others?

The more we learn, the less room their is for a God.

Here is the profound difference between the believer in Christ and everyone else: The more WE learn, the MORE room there is for God.

Is God deceiving us?

No, we all do that to ourselves. But God will dispell our self-deceptions, IF we will ask Him and allow Him to work in our lives.

Andrew E: Hope you don’t mind my stepping in here…

Al,

ICR and Answers In Genesis as experts in science? Come on. They openly admit that where reality and their faith collide, they reject reality. They are the absolute worst source possible for demonstrating how to reconcile science with the bible as they don’t care one whit about science.

From the AiG Statement of Faith:

The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer and Judge.

and

By definition, no apparent, perceived, or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

They go one to list a series of issues that must be taken on faith! How could this possibly demonstrate how science validates the bible if these are faith-based principles? Did you even read these sites?

ICR is as bad:

Its unique, plenary, verbal inspiration guarantees that these writings, as originally and miraculously given, are infallible and completely authoritative on all matters with which they deal, free from error of any sort, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological.

These are the hallmarks of people who are uninterested in truth or learning but only in justifying their pre-determined conclusions, regardless of validity, evidence or reason.

No, we all do that to ourselves. But God will dispell our self-deceptions, IF we will ask Him and allow Him to work in our lives.

A classic non-answer. Everything about the earth from the ground we stand on, the organisms around us, the air we breathe and the stars in the sky down to the invisible constituents of our cells all point directly to evolution. It’s clear and unambiguous. Humans didn’t do this. If the world was created, the creator did so in such a way as to lead us to believe in evolution. The Creationist God is the deceiver, the liar.

Andrew,

Sorry, the first link doesn’t work, can you double-check that?

The second link about dating is much fuzzier than these clear dates imply. Here’s a long but illuminating essay on the difficulties with dating: http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2008/09/ignatian-vexation.html

But that aside, it’s flawed from the start as it just deals with the bible and not any independent sources. The evidence from outside the bible is virtually non-existent.

My personal observation is that the Bible is a miracle…the cataloguing of tens of thousands of events over century upon century that is accurate to the point of “gospel truth.”

I don’t understand what you mean here. Can you elaborate? To what events are you referring and why does their accuracy make the book anything more than human?

I personally have a hard time applying a system of probability to something that really happened, but that is beyond our ability to reason. It’s like saying, “let’s use our language to describe something we’ve never before seen.” It’s not possible, really.

Yes of course it’s possible. It just means that the more an event flies in the face of our well-established understanding of the world, the more evidence is necessary. If I tell you I ate bananas with my breakfast cereal, you may raise an eyebrow but would probably take my word: you know bananas exist, they’re commonly available in most homes, people eat cereal for breakfast and many people eat bananas on porridge or as snacks so eating bananas with cereal is consistent with our understanding and has a high probability of being true.

If I told you I drank bleach and lived, you would be much more surprised and ask for an explanation. I could say that I chugged a gallon after school and doubtless you wouldn’t believe me because you’d know this would kill me. Or I could say that I added a capfull to a gallon of water because the tap water was contaminated and after letting it sit for an hour to let the chlorine evaporate, I drank it, then you would accept it, possibly after checking if my tap water really was bad.

If I told you the moon grew 20 times and shouted at me to change the channel because it wanted to watch “Friends”, this would contradict so many features of the world you’d never accept it. The evidence I would have to muster would have to be good enough that it would overthrow a lifetime of experience and knowledge that the moon is lifeless rock, doesn’t move, doesn’t talk, and doesn’t watch sitcoms.

A more conventional example: some people believe that they can read minds, ESP. When tested, their performance never exceeds that expected by random guesses. It’s possible that they can see into the future but it’s so weak that it can’t be detected using our tests but because the evidence against is so strong and the evidence in favour is so weak, we discard and ignore this possibility. We wait for the evidence.

When Einstein proposed that Newton’s Gravity was wrong, he made predictions and gathered evidence that showed certain observations were impossible to explain according to Newton. The evidence was unambiguous and incontrovertible and so Einstein was vindicated.

So when someone says that a man was hung and stabbed and killed but then came back to life, this flies in the face of everything we know about biology and chemistry. The evidence would have to be good enough to overthrow all of this. Right now we’re given ESP-quality evidence (an ancient book written by True Believers with a demonstrated track record of ideological exaggeration and embellishment) and asked to overthrow Einstein. Jesus may have risen from the dead (just as psychics may see into the future), but the odds are strongly against both and the evidence should tell us to avoid committing to any conclusion.

I want to make it clear: I’m not saying that any of this proves that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, only that the evidence doesn’t support this conclusion. If we adopt a neutral, objective methodology then we must reject this conclusion until better evidence comes in. If we adjust the methodology, then we must also accept the miracle claims of all other religions which quickly becomes a problem. You may believe, but it is a form of special-pleading and wishful thinking. You may be right, but considering the number of competing claims made with equal justification, virtually everyone is wrong. You can say that you’re sure you’re right but you’re no more sure than people with the exact opposite beliefs and that’s the problem.

Tyro, you virtually break my heart. Reading your objections is to me like watching a blind and deaf child playing pickup sticks in the middle lane of a freeway during rush hour. You have no idea the danger you court in your flippancy toward the God of creation and your professed confidence in the finite pseudo-science of fallible mankind.

I told you from the outset that God’s Word always takes precedenve over the observations of men– why then feign shock and awe that the two sites I gave say the same. They don’t reject real science; only the would-be science that rejects the God of science.

They go one to list a series of issues that must be taken on faith! How could this possibly demonstrate how science validates the bible if these are faith-based principles?

These are believers who hold various science degrees and positions in the scientific community. It is because of their faith that they are able to discern between true science which validates God’s Word and false science which does not.

These are the hallmarks of people who are uninterested in truth or learning but only in justifying their pre-determined conclusions, regardless of validity, evidence or reason.

No, this is the singular hallmark of people who know Who has redeemed their lives from destruction, who know that His words are true, and that to deny Him before men is one of the worst, most self-serving things they could do. They most certainly ARE interested in truth, but they know that God’s Word is truth and that conclusions of validity, evidence or reason which clash with Scriptural conlusions are false and not to be entertained.

…God will dispell our self-deceptions, IF we will ask Him and allow Him to work in our lives

A classic non-answer…

It is as plain and clear an answer as one could state. There is one true God. He lives. Now. He can be approached and asked by those whose minds are open to Him and whose hearts hunger for His truth.
What holds you back? Pride? Fear? These are realities in every life, but ought not prevent honest inquiry IF there is desperation enough towards finding out the truth instead of settling for the majority-approved easier way.

The bottom line remains, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but the end of it is the way of death.” “The fool has said in His heart ‘No God.’” Jesus said, I AM the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one can come to the Father except through me.”
And, “To whoever received Him was given the authority to become the children of God; even to those who believed on His Name.”

These truths were valid in biblical times and are equally so today. That they are rejected by the multitudes need not keep the individual from receiving them. The Spirit of the living God moves throughout the world seeking and speaking silently to those who will hear Him; who will forego the sham treasures of this world, things which pass away and cease to be and will receive from Him the wealth that can never perish.

Please, refuse to be a fool: ask God to reveal His truth to you…

Al,

No problem joining in. You are speaking truth; I appreciate your viewpoints and think they add to the discussion.

Tyro,

The HTML version of the first link is here.

Additionally, this conversation has lead me to the following conclusion: I was saved by grace almost 25 years ago. Since then, I have been through college, gotten married, went overseas as a missionary, had four children, changed careers over six times and have finally gotten to a place in life that provides me the opportunity to “return to my first love,” that is, Christ. I realize that my investigation into the truth (or fallacy) of the Christian faith included many of the questions you are asking, but in the whirlwind of life, I have grown a bit dull. Although none of my foundational beliefs have suffered in the busy-ness of life, my enthusiasm to put them into action has waned somewhat. This is going to change. What I realize at 42 years old is what I could not see during the past 15 years of flux…that my peace and joy, my eternal assurance and my reason for living are all found in Christ.

That said, I WILL say that I found a great resource for you, and I’d be willing to buy the book and send it to you if you agree to read it with an open mind. I’m re-reading it now. It’s called “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” by Josh McDowell. It is written from a very analytical perspective, in my opinion. Much of what I believe about the authenticity of the Biblical record, the inspiration of scripture, the fact that Jesus really is the Son of God and that He really was raised from the dead (plus a whole lot more) are addressed in this book. It is written by a Christian, one who is a great mind and who has a passtion for the pursuit of truth. One person told him that he found Jesus because he “found what he wanted to find.” His reply: “I found what I had tried to prove wrong.” He did not go into it with his eyes closed. IN fact, he was somewhat of a skeptic who was convinced once he saw the evidence.

A quick note about a previous post. You seemed to interpret that my conversion was wholly based on a dream and an emotional experience. Much to the contrary. God came to me, I did not go looking for Him. It’s the Holy Spirit who draws us to God. In fact, without the drawing of the Lord, none of us will ever desire to step outside of our selfish, sinful ways by way of conviction for our falling short of Him. It is by God’s grace and favor that I serve Him now.

Let me know if you want me to get you the book.

In response to the blog, wow! Richard Carrier. I have done a bit of reading on-line about him and comes across to me as someone who has an agenda, not someone who is seeking truth. I have started to listen to, but not yet finished, a debate between him and Mike Licona. Take a look if you like.

YOu say “it deals with the Bible and not any independent sources.” Of course you know that the Bible as we read it today was not composed by one author in one place or time. As such, it actually IS a number of independent sources, just all in the same volume. In that sense, I suggest it is a collection of independt sources.

The Bible is a miracle because of its authorship over centuries and the consistency found within it.

As far as Jesus’ resurrection is concerned, there are other examples of miracles that “fly in the face” of what is “supposed” to happen. There are people who have been raised from the dead in modern day (a missionary friend of mine prayed for his dead wife and she was raised) and there is my personal experience of being healed from a knee injury in a 24-hour period when it would have taken much longer. Because there is a God, who you cannot put in a box, there are things that are not able to be explained away, but that do not fit into rigidly defined “life as we experience it most of the time” constructs. Jesus’ resurrection is the most important miracle in the history of mankind.

You wrote: You may be right, but considering the number of competing claims made with equal justification, virtually everyone is wrong. You can say that you’re sure you’re right but you’re no more sure than people with the exact opposite beliefs and that’s the problem.

What would you say to those who today are starting to say that the killing of 6 Million Jews never took place? What about 1,000 years from now (if Christ hasn’t already returned), when virtually everyone asserts it never took place? Who’s right? Those who assert it never took place or those who insist it did? If the crowd believes a lie and the minority believe the truth, it doesn’t mean the crown is “unsure,” or that the minority is “unsure.” Both ARE convinced. The MAJOR difference is that the crowd is wrong and the minority is right. I have found that many times the “crowd” is wrong. Say what you will, but due to sin, selfishness and a bent away from God, I’m thinking that the crowd who denies Christ is numerous and wrong. Time will tell, won’t it?

I will continue to pray that God works in your heart.

Andrew

Al,

It could be as you say but it could also be as the Muslims say, that anyone who believes that Jesus is divine will burn in Hell forever. There’s just as many Muslims as Christians, they believe just as fervently and their arguments have as much strength.

Christians and Muslims can’t both be right but you can both be wrong. Since you have chosen to reject God’s greatest creation – the earth and the universe itself – in favour of your own ego, I’m pretty confident you are wrong. When someone is so sure in their own beliefs that they close their own “lying eyes”, the path to truth has long since been abandoned.

And if you’re right and God just faked genetics, biochemistry, bioregionalism, taxonomy, astronomy, cosmology and biology to make it appear that evolution happened when it didn’t, he’s such a twisted, deceptive god that he’ll surely screw you as hard as us. There’s no way to win. If he would deceive with his own creation, he would certainly deceive in his books!

ask God to reveal His truth to you

If there’s a God and a truth, the way to find it is through setting aside prejudice, preconception, and wishful thinking and studying the world without bias.

And if you’re right and God just faked genetics, biochemistry, bioregionalism, taxonomy, astronomy, cosmology and biology to make it appear that evolution happened when it didn’t…

Tyro, I don’t know why you attribute that viewpoint to me. God has been perfectly forthright in all He has done and said. It is only those determined to deny His truth, in order to justify their refusal of His Lordship and their illusion of maintaining control of their own lives, who have created the pseudo-science that seeks to prove evolution exisits and creation is invalid. Genuine science denies evolution and validates intelligent design at every turn.

If there’s a God and a truth, the way to find it is through setting aside prejudice, preconception, and wishful thinking and studying the world without bias.

If there’s a God, that is a REAL God, Who creates a universe out of nothing, He is so far superior to mankind (just one of His millions of creations) that the human intellect must be incapable of perceiving Him in any definable way, and be utterly dependent upon His self-revelation for any awareness of Him and His truth whatever.

We may honestly believe that we are “setting aside prejudice, preconception, and wishful thinking and studying the world without bias,” but if so we deceive ourselves. We are by nature self-seeking, self-serving, self-promoting and utterly self-preoccupied, which is precisely why we are only willing to accept a god on our terms, but not to subject ourselves to THE God on His.

Since you have chosen to reject God’s greatest creation – the earth and the universe itself – in favour of your own ego…

You are right about me– I am egoistic. Mankind has been born that way ever since Adam and Eve sinned against their Maker and incurred His wrath and curse.

But you are mistaken about God’s greatest creation– it is not the earth, nor even the universe, but man. Of all God made, only man was created (male and female) in His own image and likeness, with the potential to be Godlike. Not even the holy angels were so honored.

…I’m pretty confident you are wrong. When someone is so sure in their own beliefs that they close their own “lying eyes”, the path to truth has long since been abandoned.

Right about me again– I have “lying eyes,” that try to see things the way I want them to be, especially if the way things really are is NOT the way I want them to be.

But you are also wrong about me– I have no confidence in “my own” beliefs. My own beliefs have always failed me. All my life. The only beliefs I hold to be true are those that were given me by God’s Holy Spirit from His Scriptures: That Jesus Christ of Nazareth was God in the flesh, that He sacrificed His life to bear God’s punishment for guilty sinners (Himself being free from any guilt), that He was raised from death by His Father to effect the justification of those who receive His atonement as the Father has, and that He has ascended to His Father’s right hand in heaven to prepare all things for His final return to reign forever over a new heaven and earth. I could never have come up with such a belief system in my wildest imagination, but knowing its source I do have faith in its truth.

But you have piqued my curiosity, Tyro– what is the basis for your being “pretty confident” about anything? And upon what absolute truth do you base your definition of “the path to truth?” How do you know for certain what constitutes “abandonment” of that path?

Andrew,

What I realize at 42 years old is what I could not see during the past 15 years of flux…that my peace and joy, my eternal assurance and my reason for living are all found in Christ.

Not in your family or in your growing maturity? I find that very hard to believe. Methinks you doth protest too much.

I’m re-reading it now. It’s called “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” by Josh McDowell. It is written from a very analytical perspective, in my opinion.

I read it. Actually, my very first apologetic book that I read was “More than Just a Carpenter”, also by McDowell. Like all of the other books, he makes the same predictable mistakes and wishful thinking. Perhaps if you already accept his claims it’s nice to be told you’re right but as with Strobel it is just as uninterested in open inquiry.

I know McDowell talks a lot about trying to prove it wrong but I don’t think he understands this facet of sceptical inquiry. First of all, one doesn’t try to prove claims wrong, one waits for a claimant to prove them right. I can’t “prove” that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead but then I can’t “prove” that Muhammed wasn’t told by God that it’s a sin to believe Jesus was divine, that aliens don’t make crop circles or that Joseph Smith wasn’t visited by the angel Moroni. The evidence is equally strong/weak for all of these claims, they’re all incompatible.

All of the evidence from the Bible to the rise of Christianity to, wait, what other evidence is there again? Anyway, all of the evidence is compatible with a failed resurrection and an embellished or fictitious biblical account. That’s the hurdle that must be overcome, not some ridiculous “prove me wrong” claim that McDowell keeps making.

Richard Carrier. I have done a bit of reading on-line about him and comes across to me as someone who has an agenda, not someone who is seeking truth.

I’m sure his critics say that but are they right and does this undermine anything he says? I’ve given a long list of problems with the shoddy “scholarship” of the people I disagree with and to Al I’ve even pointed out over statements of bias in his sources. While Carrier’s writing may be long, I think his only bias is in establishing the facts. When was a book written? He lists his sources and his issues – any competent scholar should be able to address these, but you can see the results of his search. Dismiss him as biased if you wish but don’t imagine that this will change the facts he presents.

a missionary friend of mine prayed for his dead wife and she was raised

You have something to back that up?

You’ll pardon me if I don’t take this too seriously. In fact, I find it hard to take you seriously after you said this. It sounds like what Sam Harris says, once you swallow one piece of nonsense then the rest come easy.

my personal experience of being healed from a knee injury in a 24-hour period when it would have taken much longer

Right. Because it’s a misdiagnosis is so unlikely that the only explanation is divine intervention.

It’s also a perfect example of the sort of banal and trivial miracle that I hear so often. Far from dealing with disease, famine and genuine tragedy, Christians imagine that God has let Africa and Bangladesh go to hell (figuratively and perhaps literally) while focusing his efforts on the minor bumps and scrapes of the lives of Westerners. I can’t tell if this is totally self-absorbed or racist but it makes God into little more than a magic elf doing minor good deeds, not a god.

Bad reasoning and very bad theology.

What would you say to those who today are starting to say that the killing of 6 Million Jews never took place?

The evidence shows they’re wrong. The support for the holocaust is very strong, ranging from evidence of the mass graves, gas chambers, photographs, German documentation, accounts from survivors and former guards, census figures and on and on. There is plenty of physical evidence, hostile accounts, and contemporary accounts, all of which is available. Critics do not address the evidence (much as, say, YEC do not) but instead push an ideological and generally racist agenda.

I wonder where you see yourself in this analogy. You certainly aren’t the ones holding the evidence, you aren’t an oppressed minority struggling to be heard.

If the crowd believes a lie and the minority believe the truth, it doesn’t mean the crown is “unsure,” or that the minority is “unsure.”

I don’t care about professed confidence, I care about evidence, I should think that was clear by now. I can’t speak to your hypothetical since I have no way of knowing what evidence is available to them.

Al,

Genuine science denies evolution and validates intelligent design at every turn.

Do you even know what the twin nested hierarchy is? What a pseudogene is?

You’re radiating the Dunning-Kruger effect like few I’ve met.

Before bothering with you anymore, please give me some indication you are even passingly familiar with the evidence. Smug ignorance is as tiresome as it is unmovable.

Ty,
Smug anything can be tiresome and immovable if you let it. You seem to be under the impression that we are debating one another. Perhaps you are debating me, but not I you. I am telling you what I know to be true, and I no longer need to test it against the egocentric professions of self-serving men, as I once did. So, if you find me or my attitude a “bother,” you needn’t.

On the other hand, I have found you, to date, well worth the investment of my time and energy in both posting to, and praying for you. I find it difficult to think that you hang around this blog because you are making converts to your religion. You must be here (I surmise) because you sense a ray of hope for yourself, and hope to discover why we ignorant throwbacks are satisfied with our faith while all your accumulated knowledge and wisdom leaves you ill-tempered and intolerant.

Am I smug in saying this? Hardly, since my satisfaction is not with myself, but with my Lord Jesus who has liberated me from slavery to serving myself. I am a wretch and a villain– He is the Saver and Deliverer of wretch/villains.

You desperately need someone like my Lord Jesus, Ty. But there is no one like Him– there is only He.

Tyro,

I can add nothing to Al’s last post. If you’ve read the information that I find very enlightening and find it not to address facts, if you fully get behind a man (Richard Carrier) who mocks God by saying that he’s more compasstinate than He, if you think that the God who made me, Andrew, would consider a small miracle for me as banal and trivial versus the “larger” needs of this world, if you are unwilling to accept the testimony of an individual who has, as you put it, “professed confidence,” then you are right, we probably don’t have a lot more to talk about. However, I would agree with Al, that I neither regret nor despise the time I have spent communicating with you. I also have been praying for you, not in the typical “I’ll pray for you” and then do nothing sense, but truly asking God to open your eyes. I KNOW who I was, I KNOW the conviction of the Holy Spirit for my sin, I KNOW the presence of God in my life, leading me not to do that which I lust after, but to do that which serves my fellow man out of love, I know the life that fills me with hope. I know WHOM I have believed and will never turn from Him. There is a very good quote in McDOwell’s book that goes something like this: That which the mind rejects, the heart cannot embrace. I encourage you to consider that you are a rational being, yes, but one who has a spirit that will live forever. If that is not true, then what DO you have to live for? A world economy that’s falling apart, selfish neighbors who irritate you, family members who seem indifferent, flat tires that are inconvenient, the load and burden of looking after all your needs, then there’s getting old, losing your hearing, etc. All for what?! When it’s over, in your thinking, do you just go away, disappear? If so, NOTHING you are doing or thinking or saying is worth ANYTHING. There is no purpose in life and, I imagine, you must be miserable. The hope I have stored up in myself is not “a way to deal with all that’s undesirable” that I list. It’s an assurance that my heart, which cries out for purpose, for meaning, for love, for belonging, is much more able to perceive reality that most give it credit for. I guess what my heart cries out for is a reflection of the fact that God has put eternity in my heart.

Blessings to you, Tyro

Andrew,

Do you know what an ‘ad hominem’ is? Daniel accused me of using it near the top. It’s a fallacious argument which attacks a person’s character rather than dealing with their argument. This is exactly what you’re doing with Carrier (and me for that matter). Personally I think that Carrier and virtually every other personal alive is more compassionate than the god of the bible but who cares what we think on this matter, it doesn’t change the evidence we present.

I’m also struck by how quickly you & others run from evidence-based arguments like skittish rabbits, turning to emotive pleas and claims that you KNOW (despite failing to give reason to believe, let alone KNOW). Is this for my benefit or your own? It looks like desperation to me. Does it sooth your own thinking to list what you think (or would like to think) are facts? I don’t want to leap to conclusions but I see this a lot and it always comes out of left-field.

If that is not true, then what DO you have to live for? A world economy that’s falling apart, selfish neighbors who irritate you, family members who seem indifferent, flat tires that are inconvenient, the load and burden of looking after all your needs, then there’s getting old, losing your hearing, etc.

Wow, what a bitter reflection on the world. Is this the hopeful & optimistic outlook that I’m supposed to get by converting? I think I’m doing better than this on my own, thanks.

There is no purpose in life and, I imagine, you must be miserable.

There is no reason for life but I have purpose and I’m anything but miserable. Frankly after reading this diatribe I wonder that you find solace in the thought of eternity – if the day-to-day struggles of dealing with others causes you so much pain, eternity will be sheer torture for you.

Anyway, whether eternity is good or bad, whether you find an afterlife hopeful or dreadful it doesn’t make it any more or less likely. I see no point in pretending that I’ll live after I die so I’ll only believe when I see evidence. You’ve given me no reason to believe and plenty of reason to doubt your own reasoning.

Until that changes, why should I believe? Comfort? Hope? Do you know how intellectually dishonest that sounds? You’re asking me to delude myself.

Tyro,

You wrote Al:

Do you even know what the twin nested hierarchy is?

Here is what I found at http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=10&t=206&m=1 I find it very enlightening. I know what the twin-nested hierarcy is now and don’t see why you use it as a “Big Gun” to prove evolution. Here is the text from that link:

Goddy (my creationist alter-ego) is back!
One of the key evidences presented for common descent is the twin-nested heirarchy. That is, the hierarchies created from both the morphological evidence and the genetic evidence are correlated far more than would be expected by chance.

But what they (the evilutionists) don’t tell you is that similarities are not evidence of common descent. They can also be indicators of common design.

Seeing as the DNA provides the instructions for building the organism, one should not be surprised that the two trees match up fairly well. Just as one would not be surprised that smaller cars would have smaller engines, we should not be surprised that organisms that look like people have genes similar to those of people.

Because these criteria used to create the two trees are not independent of one another, a correlation between the two offers no evidence for evolution or common descent.

In addition, if common design of phenotypes between kinds is valid, then so is common design between genotypes. While it is true that the genetic code is redundant and there is a lot of plasticity available in the amino acid sequence of proteins (e.g. conservative mutations), it doesn’t follow that the genotype should vary more than it does. The designer clearly would have known about mutations, and so if one genome is good (i.e. sequence is arranged in such a way that it minimises information loss via evolution) for the dog kind, a very similar genome would be good for the cat kind too.

So, the twin-nested hierarchy doesn’t disprove special creation at all, does it?

Next, you asked: What a pseudogene is?

I can now say I at least am aware of them. Although my mind doesn’t understand all the technical terms, I understand the idea. Here is an interesting article that proposes that pseudogenes are not a problem for creation at all. http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/pseudogenes.html

Once again, with there being such a simple explanation, why would you use that as your “Big Gun” as you taunt Al?

Thanks for reading!

Andrew

Tyro,

We’ll have to agree to disagree on our views of the compassion of the God of the Bible. He is patient and longsuffering, holding out his hand to a rebellious and obstinate creation that ignores His plea to turn to Him for forgiveness. As far as your character goes, I did not mean to attack yours or Richard’s. I don’t doubt that you believe you are more compassionate than God. What I’m saying is that I disagree. Disagreement with you should not be taken as an attack on your character.

On running from evidence-based arguments, I don’t see it that way. There is evidence for Creation, evidence for Jesus as the Son of God. YOu just look at it through a different lense. My viewpoint includes the whole man (emotion AND intellect). You mis-interpret my permitting my emotional side to show as some sort of weakness. It is backed by my reasoned evaluation of the evidence which I have considered.

On my “interpretation of the world,” you miss my point. This is not what you are to “get by converting,” but what you are leaving behind by following your Maker who gives you purpose. I don’t personally have the view of life I protrayed. I was suggesting that someone who didn’t have a hope of eternity in their heart would most likely come to the logical conclusion that if all they do is live and die, then disappear into nothing-ness, they have truly nothing to live for. Really, what this world promises is short-lived and fleeting. My purpose in going down that path was to show that. Once again, the day to day dealings with others doesn’t cause me such pain. That is not what I’m saying.

Finally, I’m not asking you to delude yourself. If you don’t see the need for forgiveness, then clearly you won’t consider what God might be saying to you. I get it. There are billions who are in the same boat. And I’m not saying that “I’m better than anyone who doens’t follow God.” No, I’m just thankful to truly see the reality of my position…a flawed man who needs God to cover my sin.

Thanks for your patience with me, Tyro. Anyone who knows me will attest that I’m not one to get in someone’s face and insult them. The written word lacks the ability to communicate everything intended in such an interaction. The non-written components of what I want to communicate, that don’t always successfully come through are centered around a desire to show compassion for everyone (as much as possible) I come in contact with. I think Demian might be willing to attest to this.

Blessings

There is evidence for Creation, evidence for Jesus as the Son of God. YOu just look at it through a different lense.

There is so much contradicting evidence against Creationism that it’s hardly worth mentioning. The debate ended over a century ago and has just gotten worse. To believe in Creationism, you must be ignorant of the facts or you must reject reality.

You’re right that there’s evidence for Jesus as the Son of God but it’s so poor that if we would treat it fairly we’d have to reject it or accept that Muhammed spoke to God (and denied Jesus’s divinity) and all of the other wacky religious claims out there. The question isn’t the evidence, it’s the quality and the methodology which leads to conclusions. The quality is terrible and the methodology seems to be wishful thinking and special pleading.

But yes, there’s evidence. I hope I didn’t create the impression I denied that.

I don’t personally have the view of life I protrayed.

So why should my family be more negligent, my tires more flat, my neighbours more bothersome, my goals less fulfilling? None of these issues have anything to do with a belief in the afterlife.

I might as well ask how you could bear any small turmoil in life knowing that you could end it all and be in eternal bliss at the drop of a hat (or trigger). As least there’s some logical connection, though I wouldn’t seriously make that argument. You deal with the struggles of life like all other organisms deal.

Tell me: when your family causes you grief, do you really have to say to yourself “all this will be over in the afterlife”? I’d bet that is far from your mind. Why should it be an issue with me?

If you don’t see the need for forgiveness, then clearly you won’t consider what God might be saying to you. I get it.

No, I don’t think you do get it.

Even if I did think I was unworthy in some cosmic scheme, that doesn’t mean there’s anyone to apologize to! I don’t believe in a god and whether I wish there was a god or not, whether I wish for forgiveness or not it doesn’t change anything. God exists or not and our wishing won’t change that. I think that we should treat the question of God’s existence like we treat all other questions. A sceptical, objective, scientific approach has been the only one which has ever yielded any answers. Faith has never, ever improved our knowledge and I see no reason to think this is an exception.

So please, your wishes, your desires, your emotions are irrelevant to the existence of God. Wishing for something in spite of the evidence is just wishful thinking and I won’t be a part of that. (See Sam Harris’s analogy of a diamond mine in his backyard.)

Until you understand that, you won’t get anything I’m saying.

Tyro,
“You deal with the struggles of life like all other organisms deal.” You can say that my eternal bliss in the afterlife is not a huge player in my day-to-day living, but I am not sure how you make the jump from that to saying I handle everything the same as you do. What are you claiming when you say “handle everything the same way”?

“Faith has never, ever improved our knowledge and I see no reason to think this is an exception.” If you assume God does not exist, then faith will do nothing for you (you can’t have faith in something you don’t believe in anyway). Yet God says that faith is the only way to approach Him (Hebrews 11:6). God doesn’t approach us on our terms, meeting our every demand for evidence. God tells us the terms to approach Him on (faith), and everyone who wants to approach Him finds an open door to walk through. But if you don’t want to approach God, you never will. So if you don’t know God, it is only because you don’t want to.

What are you claiming when you say “handle everything the same way”?

Only that the emotional process for reacting positively or negatively is the same in all people, and probably in most animals in general. We see the outward signs of grief, depression, happiness and contemplation in other apes. They deal with at least as much hardship as we do, probably more, yet they cope well enough despite the lack of a chimp-Jesus.

More specifically, the beliefs and values of a person are best predicted by their nation & culture, not their religion. That says to me that these rhetorical flourishes arguing that atheists are depressive, apathetic creatures is falsified by the evidence.

If you assume God does not exist

Hopefully not too pedantic but I don’t assume God doesn’t exist, I start with no position and the wait for the evidence to compel belief.

God tells us the terms to approach Him on (faith), and everyone who wants to approach Him finds an open door to walk through.

The Bible tells us to approach God on faith.

And why is that, do you suppose?

Either (A) God desperately craves relationships with us yet perversely and contradictorily refuses to give evidence of his existence (also contradicting the repeated claims that God does give plenty of evidence!) to the point of punishing disbelief for all eternity. For extra perversity, God gives us minds capable of reason and rational thought and the ability to examine nature to plug all the gaps God once occupied, giving us even more reason to disbelief.

Or (B), God doesn’t exist and the bible authors knew unsupported leaps of faith were necessary?

For the sake of argument, let’s assume that Paul wrote Hebrews. He only knew of Jesus through revelation in dreams and visions so he clearly thought that this was the way to go.

I think these passages give no insight into the mind of God (lest God be a schizophrenic) and more into the minds of modern & ancient Christians.

Further, it’s trivial to make the claim that evidence doesn’t apply to your pet cause. Every crank, kook and quack out there makes the same claim. They all claim to be certain that their cause is right and equally certain that evidence and reason aren’t appropriate. And you know what, that hasn’t led to new knowledge, ever, for anyone. Why should your special pleading be any better?

Tyro,

We definietly see these issues from completely different perspectives.

“Even if I did think I was unworthy in some cosmic scheme, that doesn’t mean there’s anyone to apologize to!”…

Apology gets you nowhere with God.

A sceptical, objective, scientific approach has been the only one which has ever yielded any answers. Faith has never, ever improved our knowledge and I see no reason to think this is an exception.

A sceptical, objective, scientific approach has been the only one which has ever yielded any answers. Faith has never, ever improved our knowledge and I see no reason to think this is an exception.

Reference Daniel’s input:

If you assume God does not exist, then faith will do nothing for you (you can’t have faith in something you don’t believe in anyway). Yet God says that faith is the only way to approach Him (Hebrews 11:6).

For whatever reason, God is a God who requires faith. He does not parade himself around. This is tied up intricately with love and our free will.

From my perspective, I can see that we see things from vastly different points of view. I have written enough here to reveal where I’m coming from as have you. For me, I’m sticking with a supernatural (true) book called the Bible, a life that’s lived in obedience to that Word, laying down my life for my friends and becoming more and more transformed into the image of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I know he lives, for He lives in my heart.

Blessings to you, Tyro. Perhaps we’ll touch base again on another topic.

Andrew

Andrew,

While I’m a little gratified that you’ve taken the time to look up a couple definitions, you’ve really proved my point. (Of course, I was talking to Al,so it would be Al that would really prove my point, but let’s run with this…)

That you’ve even had to look these up says to me that your knowledge of evolution is superficial bordering on non-existent. These aren’t examples of evidence, they’re just the categories, something anyone who presumes to propound on the subject should know about. I don’t think Al knows and yet he feel free to talk as if he were an expert. Indeed, confidence correlates inversely with education as he clearly demonstrates.

Even after these light readings, I doubt you have much insight into how deep and profound these two small-sounding categories really are either. Your comment about a common-designer is ludicrous as design has never once resulted in a hierarchy of any sort, let alone a multiply-nested one. Design is marked by features being borrowed from disparate areas, not re-invented (often poorly).

My point wasn’t to try to argue for evolution but rather to show that the people who are most confident that it is false are the people who know the absolute least about it. It sounds like you are no exception.

For whatever reason, God is a God who requires faith. He does not parade himself around. This is tied up intricately with love and our free will.

You’re fooling yourself but not me. God paraded around happily throughout the bible, both NT and OT. Their free will wasn’t affected then. Plenty of Christians claim to have firm evidence of God, to KNOW that God exists yet what about their free will? There was no problem then, there’s surely no problem now. It’s only because knowledge and science has triumphed over ignorance and superstition that we no longer see God “parading” about.

Perhaps we’ll touch base again on another topic.

Indeed, I’d like that.

Anyone who will accept information only on his own terms is seeking not truth, but validation.

Do you know what an ‘ad hominem’ is? …It’s a fallacious argument which attacks a person’s character rather than dealing with their argument.

If you deplore the ad hominem so much, why do you continually employ it against those you are unable to cow with your superior intellect and scientific method?

In fact, why does it bother you at all that some of us won’t play by your rules? Why are you compelled to demean and belittle those who refuse to recognize your cerebral prowess?

There is no reason for life but I have purpose and I’m anything but miserable.

With that perspective, why does it matter to you what believers in God think? You reject out of hand everything told you, so you are obviously not willing to entertain even the possibility that anyone of faith could know something of value that you do not.

Your attitude toward, and treatment of those who disagree with you belies your claim of not being miserable.

I don’t think Al knows and yet he feel free to talk as if he were an expert. Indeed, confidence correlates inversely with education as he clearly demonstrates.

I didn’t answer your three questions because I was sure you knew they lay outside the realm of my interest and that you were only posing them to lay grounds to demonstrate yur superior knowledge of such matters of evolution, which I readily concede. No believer in Christ needs to prove His existence nor to disprove arguments against Him.

I have made no claims of expertise in anything, not even Christianity. You are employing a technique the shrinks call transference; attributing to me the motives and attitudes that you suppose might move you to speak and behave the way you suppose I am doing. But you make no effort to understand where I’m coming from. You don’t even consider that there is any possible merit to my thoughts because they disagree with yours, as is evident in your utter disregard to reply directly to stated matters of faith. (Generally belittling faith and those who practice it doesn’t qualify.)

Diligent study can truly result in education. But the study of bad information will not produce a good education, and the accumulation of prejudiced data will not result in an unbiased viewpoint.

I wish I could say I have enjoyed conversing with you but, to be honest, it has been very like dialoguing with a spoiled child who is used to having his own way and unused to discipline; a selfish and inconsiderate brat. But I’ll concede that you put up a strong front and your act will probably be popular among your peers.

These comments are not sour grapes, as I have lost nothing in our exchange– in fact, you are the loser for scoffing at the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Rather, I have gained valuable insight into how fallen human nature behaves– i.e. I better understand the “dark side” of myself from having been subjected to your tirades.

I mean to continue praying for your deliverance from self-deception. Whether we’ll engage in further discussion remains to be seen. But know that I bear you no ill will, and am only being truthful and direct with you as any true friend would do. [Yeah, I know: With friends like these...]

There is none so blind as him who will not see.