Anselm's Second Ontological Argument
- Thread starter PuerAzaelis
- Start date
- Status
- May 28, 2018
- 13,233
- 5,726
- 68
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Widowed
There it is, again. Categorize, generalize. You misrepresent the situation. God doesn't tell people to kill their sons. He didn't even tell Abraham to 'kill' his son, as such, but to sacrifice his son.
Besides this, the story doesn't say that Abraham heard 'a voice'. It says, "God said". That's pretty definite.
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
- May 28, 2018
- 13,233
- 5,726
- 68
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Widowed
No. It says that God told him to sacrifice his son. It does not say that Abraham heard a voice telling him to kill his son, nor, certainly, did the voice tell him to murder his son, nor certainly is this story repeated with multiple players at different times.
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Ah, so Jesus was a CHRINO?
He taught:
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Matthew 19:16-19)
And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Matthew 19:16-19)
Got it. You say Abraham sinned when he offered up Isaac at God's command. If your God commanded Abraham to sin, maybe someday he will command you to sin, yes?
Yes, of course. I asked a simple yes or no answer. Was Abraham wrong to do this? Instead you responded with a cryptic answer and a red herring. It took me multiple attempts to find the answer: You think Abraham sinned when he obeyed God and offered up Isaac.lol, it would have been simpler for you!
But Hebrews praises Abraham for this sin:
By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, (Hebrews 11:17)
Uh, no Habermas' "minimal facts" come from the gospels and Acts, books that are not historical. Many secular scholars deny the thing Habermas claims. Ask them.
Ok, Easter weekend.
You missed the point. You declared that resurrecting from the dead proves that a person is God incarnate. I showed you that Matthew 27:52-53 says many people rose from the dead on Easter weekend. By your logic, they are all God incarnate.
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
If the voice didn't tell Abraham to kill his son, why did he set out to kill his son?
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Abraham didn't have Genesis, so that wasn't going to help him figure out who was talking.
Besides, how did the author of Genesis know who was talking?
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
I didn't derive a value. I derived a basis for a system of morality. Get with the program.
I did not clamp my hands over my ears. I listened to you Is-Ought problem, looked into it in more detail, and gave my response.
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
- May 28, 2018
- 13,233
- 5,726
- 68
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Widowed
What voice? It says "God said", not, "Abraham heard a voice". I thought I already mentioned that.
He set out to do what God told him.
In training academy they taught, when you must shoot your 12 gauge buckshot to stop an escaping prisoner, you are shooting center mass to stop him --most definitely not to kill him. Yet it is almost impossible to shoot center mass with 12 gauge buckshot at those usual distances without killing the escaping prisoner. When God created, he created two categories of vessels (Romans 9). The one he created for himself as his special people. The other he created for other purposes --not specifically for the purpose of relegating them to the lake of fire. Yet that is exactly what he uses to accomplish his purposes for the first group. Yet our accusers want to say we believe God created them for the purpose of damnation.
The fact that sacrificing his son to God would have killed him is not the point. God didn't tell him to kill his son but to sacrifice him.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- May 28, 2018
- 13,233
- 5,726
- 68
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Widowed
If you wish to argue from the POV that Scripture is unreliable, what's the point of talking about the story at all? That's like arguing that God can't make a donkey talk, because donkeys don't talk.
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
How did he know the being he called God was really God?
And what does it matter if it was Yahweh, being A, being B, or being C that spoke? How do you know that Yahweh has better morality than being A, being B, or being C?
I didn't say the story was true. I am asking for your opinion since you apparently think it is true.
Nope. See Are There Credible Witnesses to the Resurrection, Part II | Christian Forums .
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Enough with the spin.
If you tie your son up, lay him on a pile of wood on an alter, slash a knife down through his heart, light the wood on fire, and your son dies, you killed him. It's that simple.
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2003
- 9,703
- 2,335
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
The point is that you apparently believe this story about a man who killed his son as a sacrifice to God. Further, you seem to think the man who killed his son did the right thing. I would like to know how you can justify an act like that.
Upvote
0
Paulomycin
Well-Known Member
Justified opinions are justified by externally verifiable facts. You have no facts to verify.
Wow. You're claiming there's not only evidence for a flat earth, but Bigfoot too???
Where do you come up with your arbitrary rules?
But these are your imaginary rules. If you don't care enough, then by comparison they're none of my concern.
No. But I'm not going to be bullied into saying "I don't know," when at least some logical information to go on is staring everyone in the face. And that little bit is all we need, really.
I'm glad you brought this one up. No True Scotsman only applies in cases without a prior warrant, like a rulebook or set of standards.
No True Scotsman
^ See paragraph marked "Exception." BTW, the owner of the site doesn't appear even remotely theistic.
Description of NTS fallacy: When a universal (“all”, “every”, etc.) claim is refuted, rather than conceding the point or meaningfully revising the claim, the claim is altered by going from universal to specific, and failing to give any objective criteria for the specificity.
But your forced incredulous will keeps getting in the way, I understand completely.
Awesome. I'm glad we could finally settle that.
But I'm sure if it really happened, then one of your atheist cohorts would have.
1. Where's the direct quote of me calling you insane? You are far more important as a human being than your (trash) ideology.
2. I'm dealing with you on atheist terms. After all, it's the only terms that atheists will recognize. Wouldn't you agree that it's a lost cause to treat anyone like Jesus?
3. Pretty sure Mark 2:17 applies to self-righteous atheists as it does to Pharisees. Remember, atheists literally believe they were without sin. So from that POV, they're far worse than Pharisees, who at the very least acknowledged that sin existed.
You aren't stating the "why" of anything. All you're doing is asserting "unconvincing." You have zero objective justification. You literally think you can assert your way out of this as-if it were a substitute for a sound "why" explanation.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Paulomycin
Well-Known Member
That was the most amateurish quotemine I've seen in a long time.
He (actually) taught:
16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”
17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”
Jesus said, “‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ 19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ ”
20 The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept from my youth. What do I still lack?”
21 Jesus said to him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”
22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.
23 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
25 When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?”
26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
- Matt 19:16-26
The disciples in verse 25 understood the inevitable conclusion. Jesus then follows with the final declaration that salvation is not only 100% impossible for men, but entirely an act of God's grace alone.17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”
Jesus said, “‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ 19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ ”
20 The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept from my youth. What do I still lack?”
21 Jesus said to him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”
22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.
23 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
25 When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?”
26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
- Matt 19:16-26
You mean put to the test? Yes. Genesis 22:1
James 1:13 - No one undergoing a trial should say, “I am being tempted by God.” For God is not tempted by evil, and He Himself doesn’t tempt anyone.
There's nothing cryptic about it. "Sin" is not some disembodied violation of an abstract "right and wrong." "Sin" is direct violation of God's very nature of Holiness. One of my favorite theologians defined sin as, "eternal cosmic treason."
Again, with the quotemining. It's like second-nature with you people Hebrews 11:17-19
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, 18 of whom it was said, “In Isaac your seed shall be called,” 19 concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense.
Abraham: "If I sin, God will keep His promise. Therefore, if I sin, God will raise Isaac from the dead."
Angel: "Don't sin, you passed the test."
God will provide the lamb for sacrifice instead, by which He has elected to strike down His own Son. - Isaiah 53:10, Colossians 1:19-22
Uh, no. Habermas' compiled secular commentaries on the letters of Paul alone. Not the gospels, nor Acts. Try again.
^ Moving the goalposts. Everyone raised during the crucifixion was raised like Lazarus. Jesus was the "firstborn of the dead." -Colossians 1:18, Revelation 1:5 Meaning that Jesus was the first to be raised with a glorified and incorruptible body. Everyone raised from the dead before Jesus' resurrection would die again. <-- Pay attention. Don't play little games and skip this.
No. My point is that resurrecting Jesus from the dead proves His predictions were true. Therefore, everything He said about Himself was equally true.
Upvote
0
Paulomycin
Well-Known Member
^ Contradiction: Morals are values. You cannot derive a value from a (brute) fact of nature.
All while failing to solve the Is-Ought Problem. It's not "my problem." I don't own it. The irony is that it took an enlightenment-era atheist to observe the Is-Ought problem to begin with. And it didn't bother him at all. So then why does it bother you? Because you want your atheism and morality. You want it both ways, but you can't have it both ways.
Upvote
0
Paulomycin
Well-Known Member
Because I'm listening, whereas the audience of the OT prophets were not listening.
You will stop blame-shifting your failure to read my posts, as-if I weren't addressing your comments at all, because I am answering directly. You simply resent that I'm not giving the answers you want to hear.
Upvote
0
Paulomycin
Well-Known Member
And you're arguing as-if that is what actually happened in the narrative. When it's actually not.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Kylie
Defeater of Illogic
It helps the case for atheism by showing that what people think is God could be something else that is Not-God.
I'd be interested in seeing this evidence. Since it would be a derailment of this thread to post it here, I'd happily join if you started another thread to discuss that evidence.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
