A question for Young Earth Creationists

[djbcrawford]

Except not many writers will be tortured and murdered for refusing to say that their story was just made up.


for a modern example see LDS.
for a older one see Islam.

the evidence is that people will often believe something enough to die for it, and there exist other people who think them foolish for doing so. As well as many who are equally willing to help them along on their route to martyrdom, see General MacArthur's statement about dying for your country.

i'd suspect that nationalism is an even better and more persuasive example but on that course i'd point out that the survival rate for both Vietnamese communists and Mao's Chinese communists was far lower than any persecution that the Christians saw for 3 centuries . And i don't see anyone arguing that their sacrifice means that the ideal of communism must be true.

perhaps the examples abounding of martyrs actually show dedication, inspiration, sincerity are no evidence of truthfulness only of motivation and desire.

General MacArthur wasn't on the front line facing the bullets. Mohammed wasn't tortured and killed to try to make him recount the Koran. Mao wasn't tortured and killed to make him change his little red book. My point is that the gospel writers themselves, the people who witnessed Jesus first hand and claimed to have seen him after he rose, knew if it was the truth or a lie. Why would they go through that if the knew it was a lie?

In Christianity it's not just the footsoldiers who do the sacrificing, it's the leaders.

If you made up some story about God talking to you and someone tortured you, would you keep claiming it was the truth or would you suffer and die just to keep the pretence that the story was the truth?

 

[djbcrawford]

You hide from God? Where, behind the couch?

It says Adam and Eve tried to hide from God amoung the trees. You can also hide by saying he doesn't exist and you can live as you please.

See above. It's made quite clear in Exodus that God himself is the one forcing Pharaoh to take a certain course of action.

Yup, it's hard to argue, but I still think it's just a way of speaking (chinese translation looks pretty weird if done directly to English) and the Jewish way of looking at things. I still believe he had a choice.

You forget the third option - that the people willing to die for their belief really believed it to be true and accurate, but were wrong.

But you said they made it up which means they are not dying for something they believe to be true and accurate, but something they know is a lie.

 

[RichardT]

Who knows, maybe he isn't aware that Jesus ministed to EVERYONE.

2 Corinthians 6:14-17


14Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.




<edited SJ>

 

[rmwilliamsll]

General MacArthur wasn't on the front line facing the bullets. Mohammed wasn't tortured and killed to try to make him recount the Koran. Mao wasn't tortured and killed to make him change his little red book. My point is that the gospel writers themselves, the people who witnessed Jesus first hand and claimed to have seen him after he rose, knew if it was the truth or a lie. Why would they go through that if the knew it was a lie?

In Christianity it's not just the footsoldiers who do the sacrificing, it's the leaders.


If you made up some story about God talking to you and someone tortured you, would you keep claiming it was the truth or would you suffer and die just to keep the pretence that the story was the truth?

only the leadership's martyrdom is important?
everyone else can be deluded except for the leadership?

ok:

by your criteria:

If you made up some story about God talking to you and someone tortured you, would you keep claiming it was the truth or would you suffer and die just to keep the pretence that the story was the truth?

Joseph Smith
Thomas Munzter

these two off the top of my head had visions and died as a result founding movements which followed them. and i bet with just a few hours with google i could find 100 more.

the point is that making things up and dying for these things is not all that uncommon, nor is it a sign of truthfulness that people do so.

 

[RealityCheck]

General MacArthur wasn't on the front line facing the bullets. Mohammed wasn't tortured and killed to try to make him recount the Koran. Mao wasn't tortured and killed to make him change his little red book. My point is that the gospel writers themselves, the people who witnessed Jesus first hand and claimed to have seen him after he rose, knew if it was the truth or a lie. Why would they go through that if the knew it was a lie?

The gospel writers did not witness Jesus "first hand". Although some theorize that Matthew was written by the apostle of that name, and John was as well, the more likely case is that each was written by one of their students/disciples, and the name given to give the gospel authority. John is very unlikely written by the Apostle John because of the theology of the gospel, which is at odds with the other three and is more closely related to gnosticism than the theology of the original Jewish Christian churches.

None of the gospel writers claims to have witnessed Jesus's resurrection. They claim that other people witnessed the resurrection.

 

[djbcrawford]

only the leadership's martyrdom is important?
everyone else can be deluded except for the leadership?

That is the point of your arguement, not mine. Your point was everyone who was martyred was deluded (your words, not mine) by what they were told. My point was that the people who told them and KNEW the truth were martyred as well and they weren't deluded. It's easy for leaders to send their deluded followers off to be sacrificed, but much harder when it's you. In this case the leaders who knew the real truth died with the troops, which makes it more likely they died for a truth. This death wasn't a glorious charge into battle, but individually in dire and miserable unglorious circumstances.

ok:

by your criteria:

If you made up some story about God talking to you and someone tortured you, would you keep claiming it was the truth or would you suffer and die just to keep the pretence that the story was the truth?

Joseph Smith
Thomas Munzter

these two off the top of my head had visions and died as a result founding movements which followed them. and i bet with just a few hours with google i could find 100 more.

the point is that making things up and dying for these things is not all that uncommon, nor is it a sign of truthfulness that people do so.

Unfortunately I don't have a few hours to search Goggle and I'm not sure who the people you mentioned are. I've just about time for this reply until tomorrow.

A simpler example. I'm standing with a group of people on a building. I tell them if they jump off, they won't fall. However I know they will fall. It's easier for me to tell them to jump first than it is for me to jump with them.

I can't "prove" the truth. I know enough to believe myself. I can point to things which indicate the truth to me. Things that make it more likely to be the truth, but there always has to be room for faith.

Again I ask, what do you believe? Truth, Delusion or Lie?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

In this case the leaders who knew the real truth died with the troops, which makes it more likely they died for a truth. This death wasn't a glorious charge into battle, but individually in dire and miserable unglorious circumstances.


Joseph Smith died in a jail he founded the LDS
The LDS are the fastest growing Christian-claiming group ever in history, far exceed apostlic Christianity's growth curve.

Thomas Muntzer had visions and claimed to be the returned Christ and is influential in founding the Anabaptists. he was beheaded.

certainly meeting all criteria of:
individually in dire and miserable unglorious circumstances.

but like my big point:
dying for a cause, no matter what the conditions, nor if you in a leadership or first instigator or prophet or whatever, is not a criteria for truthfulness.

people can be sincerely deluded. this does not prove the truthfulness of what they believe, only evidence for their sincerity or strength of character, it says nothing about the content or truth value of what they believe.

or do you contend that there has never existed anyone but the Christian apostles that died for what they believed?

 

[Jase]

Genesis 2:

16The LORD God (Q)commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;
17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it (R)you will surely die."

Genesis 5:

4Then the days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters.
5So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years, and he died.


Now unless you're going to argue that 930 years is as one day to God...

I think you misquoted me. I was agreeing with you. The Bible says he would die that day, but he lived another 900 years after that.

 

[Melethiel]

RealityCheck is buddy with NathanPoe, an Atheist....

Are you saying that one can't have atheist friends? That we should shun all those who don't believe, because the only way to evangelize is to preach down to them?

 

[djbcrawford]

In this case the leaders who knew the real truth died with the troops, which makes it more likely they died for a truth. This death wasn't a glorious charge into battle, but individually in dire and miserable unglorious circumstances.


Joseph Smith died in a jail he founded the LDS
The LDS are the fastest growing Christian-claiming group ever in history, far exceed apostlic Christianity's growth curve.

Thomas Muntzer had visions and claimed to be the returned Christ and is influential in founding the Anabaptists. he was beheaded.

certainly meeting all criteria of:
individually in dire and miserable unglorious circumstances.

Actually, according to Google, Muntzer took back what he had said and took Catholic Mass before he died and doesn't count as dying for his belief.

With J Smith we are left with the truth, deluded, lied option.

but like my big point:
dying for a cause, no matter what the conditions, nor if you in a leadership or first instigator or prophet or whatever, is not a criteria for truthfulness.

people can be sincerely deluded. this does not prove the truthfulness of what they believe, only evidence for their sincerity or strength of character, it says nothing about the content or truth value of what they believe.

or do you contend that there has never existed anyone but the Christian apostles that died for what they believed?

I believe I covered this in my last reply. I note you haven't answered what you believe yet...

 

[RichardT]

Are you saying that one can't have atheist friends? That we should shun all those who don't believe, because the only way to evangelize is to preach down to them?

I'm not saying anything, the BIBLE speaks for me.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Actually, according to Google, Muntzer took back what he had said and took Catholic Mass before he died and doesn't count as dying for his belief.

With J Smith we are left with the truth, deluded, lied option.



I believe I covered this in my last reply. I note you haven't answered what you believe yet...

pretty much run of the mill, conservative orthodox reformed Christian.
heavily influenced by reading Calvin, the Princeton late 19thC theologians and church history.

covenantal and anti-dispensationalism
mildly anti-Sabbatarian
cessionist
anti-theonomic
hopeful amill
infallibilist and not inerrancist
framework on gen 1, influenced by kline
presuppositionalist, influenced by Frame and Van Til
providential evolutionist much like BB.Warfield or H. Van Till
i'm a member of a PCA church.

i'm sure there is more.

what difference does it make to the argument?

either martyrs are truthful because of the manner of their death or not?

or that evidence of truth is independent of those believing it and reliant on the evidence not the passions of it's adherents or sincerity is a criteria for truth.

 

[Melethiel]

I'm not saying anything, the BIBLE speaks for me.

The verse that you quoted, if read in context, is referring to marriage.

 

[RichardT]

The verse that you quoted, if read in context, is referring to marriage.

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.

.....

2 Corinthians 6

1We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.
2(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)
3Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed:
4But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses,
5In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings;
6By pureness, by knowledge, by long suffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned,
7By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left,
8By honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and yet true;
9As unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed;
10As sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things.
11O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is enlarged.
12Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.
13Now for a recompence in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged.
14Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.
18And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.



Marriage?

 

[Melethiel]

You are correct; I was thinking of a different passage. My mistake.

However, I still think you are reading too much into it. It is telling us not to live as the unbelieving do. It says nothing about fellowshipping with them. Look at Christ - he was eating with tax collectors and "sinners". Eating with, not talking down to.

Anyway, this is getting very off topic. If you want to continue this discussion, should I split this to a new thread?

 

[RichardT]

You are correct; I was thinking of a different passage. My mistake.

However, I still think you are reading too much into it. It is telling us not to live as the unbelieving do. It says nothing about fellowshipping with them. Look at Christ - he was eating with tax collectors and "sinners". Eating with, not talking down to.

Anyway, this is getting very off topic. If you want to continue this discussion, should I split this to a new thread?

Yes, I am correct

 

[Melethiel]

Yes, I am correct

Don't read too much into that statement. I am by no means agreeing with the way that you used those verses.

 

[djbcrawford]

pretty much run of the mill, conservative orthodox reformed Christian.
heavily influenced by reading Calvin, the Princeton late 19thC theologians and church history.

covenantal and anti-dispensationalism
mildly anti-Sabbatarian
cessionist
anti-theonomic
hopeful amill
infallibilist and not inerrancist
framework on gen 1, influenced by kline
presuppositionalist, influenced by Frame and Van Til
providential evolutionist much like BB.Warfield or H. Van Till
i'm a member of a PCA church.

That didn't really help...

what difference does it make to the argument?

I wanted to know whether you were a believer testing my debating skills or a non-believer testing my patience...

I suppose I could just have looked up your profile...

either martyrs are truthful because of the manner of their death or not?

or that evidence of truth is independent of those believing it and reliant on the evidence not the passions of it's adherents or sincerity is a criteria for truth.

Someone, who is in a position to know the truth, is more likely to die for the truth than a lie. If you believe your country is fighting a just war it is easier to lay down your life on the battlefield than if you find out your country is fighting an injust war. This is not proof of truth, but moves the needle in that direction. I cannot point to one thing that convinces me 100% that Christianity is the truth, but given time, I could point to many things that nudge the needle enough in that direction that my faith can fill in the rest.

Passion and sincerity are more likely to convince someone of truth, whether real truth or a lie, but too many Christians seem to have lost their passion and sincerity which makes it harder for others to believe.

Evidence of truth can be independent of those believing it. If there is a truth no-one believes, it is still the truth. But much of our knowledge comes second-hand, we have to rely on what others tell us. (Jesus to Thomas - You have seen and believed, but blessed are those than have not seen yet believed). Once we take this step however we begin to find the truth for ourselves through our experiences

 

[Smidlee]

Genesis 2:

16The LORD God (Q)commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;
17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it (R)you will surely die."

Genesis 5:

4Then the days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters.
5So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years, and he died.


Now unless you're going to argue that 930 years is as one day to God...

The reason Adam didn't die that day was because of the Second Adam! Genesis 3:21 " Unto Adam also and to his wife the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them." (lambs?!?) This is the heart of the NT message. Just like in the book of Esther the King's law couldn't be changed (death) but A new law (Grace) could come into effect.
That's what make it Amazing Grace

 

[Jase]

The reason Adam didn't die that day was because of the Second Adam! Genesis 3:21 " Unto Adam also and to his wife the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them." (lambs?!?) This is the heart of the NT message. Just like in the book of Esther the King's law couldn't be changed (death) but A new law (Grace) could come into effect.
That's what make it Amazing Grace

This doesn't make sense. The Bible says Adam would die that day, not some distant time in the future.