Why do Christians get evasive, defensive or angry when faced with difficult questions

[Aldebaran]

Exactly.

Thank you for answering. I can't understand why horrible things happen to. But it doesn't stop me from believing in God and in his Son, Jesus.

I don't know why Christians would get mad at answering these questions. It's OK to say I don't know.

It's not really that we get mad at answering the questions. It's mostly when they ask the question, get an answer, then throw it back in the Christian's face with "That's not good enough", or "you don't know what you're talking about", etc. If they want to know our thoughts on something, it's ok to ask. But to argue and insult without end is something else. There are examples of it in many, many threads on this forum. It's usually the same atheists that do it, so they make the others look bad.

 

[Colter]

I think a better question would be, what motivated you to make a false claim about me, the one you call "intellectually dishonest"?

I stand by the claim that you seek to undermine the faith of people as a former Christian of 40 years who joins a Christian forum and argues against faith. When you play the innocent, misunderstood victim then I think you are not being honest about your motives.

I come here not to undermine anyone's faith belief, I come here to engage in discussion with those who may disagree with me and to learn why they feel differently then me.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Even if you apply the argument to an outside of time being, it still shows that nothing can have infallible knowledge of events which are yet to occur. Draw a timeline and put X and Y on the timeline and you'll see what I mean.

What I'm saying is that for some god concepts, there is no "yet to come". It's already happened. There would be no violation of free will if you simply know what someone did, rather than will do.

 

[Inkachu]

Please take the time to follow it through. Draw yourself a little time line and plot when X & Y each get their values. Then you'll see my point.

Sorry, but I'm at work and don't really have the time or energy to sort through something like that. If you want to explain it or phrase it in a way that's easy to understand, I'd be more than happy to answer your questions.

 

[Inkachu]

What if we do something which is in conflict with what God knew we would do?

How could it be "in conflict" if it's already known?

If I know that you're going to cross the street at 3:00pm, then you will cross the street at 3:00pm. That doesn't mean I'm forcing you to do it, it simply means I already know it's going to happen because I can see everything from the beginning of time to the end of time. If you say "But what if I change my mind about something at 2:59pm and wind up crossing the street at 3:01pm?" Then I would've already known that. It wouldn't "conflict" with anything.

 

[quatona]

Maybe the question that would be better to ask and discuss is this:

"Why do Atheists take such offense at the suggestion that an organized Atheist movement is referred to as a religion?"

I don´t take offense. I just think that for the statement to be accurate, it would require a couple of redefinitions.

What's the cause of such fear?

I don´t fear it. I think it´s nonsense at worst, and a poor play on words at best.

You'd think we'd held up a crucifix and sack of garlic in front of some of these folks' noses merely because we called a fact a fact!

Well, I don´t think it´s a fact. Maybe you could stay a relaxed as I am and have an objective discussion, instead of telling me what my emotions are?

 

[bhsmte]

I stand by the claim that you seek to undermine the faith of people as a former Christian of 40 years who joins a Christian forum and argues against faith. When you play the innocent, misunderstood victim then I think you are not being honest about your motives.

I play the misunderstood innocent victim?

Please show me your support for this claim.

 

[Aldebaran]

I play the misunderstood innocent victim?

Please show me your support for this claim.

You sure say this a lot. It's what you say when you run out of arguments, so you try to place the burden on the other person. No wonder threads like this get started.

 

[talquin]

What I'm saying is that for some god concepts, there is no "yet to come". It's already happened. There would be no violation of free will if you simply know what someone did, rather than will do.

Then one of these must not be true. Which one is it?

1) X (or God's knowledge as of day 1 of Fred's day 2 A/B choice) has a value of either A or B on day 1 and this value is fixed and cannot change. If it is A, it will remain A. If it is B, it will remain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

2) Y (or Fred’s day 2 A/B choice) receives its value on day 2. Once Y receives its value, it becomes locked. Prior to receiving its value, it could potentially become A or B, as Fred freely chooses A or B. This follows the assertion that Fred has free will or can freely make choices.

3) X is equal to Y. This follows the assertion that whatever Fred chooses is precisely the same as what God knew he would choose.

 

[Jesse2014]

It's not really that we get mad at answering the questions. It's mostly when they ask the question, get an answer, then throw it back in the Christian's face with "That's not good enough", or "you don't know what you're talking about", etc. If they want to know our thoughts on something, it's ok to ask. But to argue and insult without end is something else. There are examples of it in many, many threads on this forum. It's usually the same atheists that do it, so they make the others look bad.

I get it.

 

[talquin]

Sorry, but I'm at work and don't really have the time or energy to sort through something like that. If you want to explain it or phrase it in a way that's easy to understand, I'd be more than happy to answer your questions.

OK, I'll try to make it simple. Let's say it is true that right now I know what you will choose tomorrow - a or b. Let's say whatever you choose will be in alignment with what I know you'll choose. We'll say I know you'll choose a. You have free will and freely choose b. What happens?

 

[talquin]

How could it be "in conflict" if it's already known?

If I know that you're going to cross the street at 3:00pm, then you will cross the street at 3:00pm. That doesn't mean I'm forcing you to do it, it simply means I already know it's going to happen because I can see everything from the beginning of time to the end of time. If you say "But what if I change my mind about something at 2:59pm and wind up crossing the street at 3:01pm?" Then I would've already known that. It wouldn't "conflict" with anything.

So you're saying the sequence goes like this:
1) I cross the street at 3:00
2) You gain knowledge that I will cross the street at 3:00

If true, then prior to 3:00, you didn't have knowledge that I would cross the street at 3:00.

 

[Inkachu]

OK, I'll try to make it simple. Let's say it is true that right now I know what you will choose tomorrow - a or b. Let's say whatever you choose will be in alignment with what I know you'll choose. We'll say I know you'll choose a. You have free will and freely choose b. What happens?

It's not possible based on my beliefs. "Free will" doesn't mean you're acting outside of the scope of what God is aware of. IOW you cannot surprise God.

 

[Inkachu]

So you're saying the sequence goes like this:
1) I cross the street at 3:00
2) You gain knowledge that I will cross the street at 3:00

If true, then prior to 3:00, you didn't have knowledge that I would cross the street at 3:00.

No, God does not "gain knowledge", He already has all knowledge.

If we think of time as linear, God sees the entire line at once. He isn't restricted to slices of "the present" as we are. So if you're going to veer off and do something unexpected, He already knows about it.

 

[kristina411]

If true and they always have the same value, then X can't have a value before Y gets its value on day 2.


You're not addressing the central issue. What if we do something which is in conflict with what God knew we would do?

We can not do anything in conflict with what God knows we will do, that's just it. We are doing what God knew us to do. It is as simple as that. We can ask what if about anything, but what if does not mean it would actually happen.

Your issue with reasoning is with using words like the ones in bold text above.

God is likely not limited to restrictions of time as we are. How do we measure time? By measures found in our universe. But God is outside of this universe, there for outside of our measurement of time.

You can not apply restrictions of time to God who is not bound by our science or law. Why would an Almighty, Creator of our time Himself and our existence, be bound by His own creation?

 

[bhsmte]

You sure say this a lot. It's what you say when you run out of arguments, so you try to place the burden on the other person. No wonder threads like this get started.

Is it your position then, that someone can make claims about another person and they should not have to provide support for it?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Then one of these must not be true. Which one is it?

1) X (or God's knowledge as of day 1 of Fred's day 2 A/B choice) has a value of either A or B on day 1 and this value is fixed and cannot change. If it is A, it will remain A. If it is B, it will remain B. This follows the assertion that God has infallible knowledge of future events.

2) Y (or Fred’s day 2 A/B choice) receives its value on day 2. Once Y receives its value, it becomes locked. Prior to receiving its value, it could potentially become A or B, as Fred freely chooses A or B. This follows the assertion that Fred has free will or can freely make choices.

3) X is equal to Y. This follows the assertion that whatever Fred chooses is precisely the same as what God knew he would choose.

Your mistake is in number 1. There is no "Day 1" for the god concept I'm talking about. You're still under that assumption that this god views time the same way we do. Think of this god as a time traveller that starts from the last day the universe exists. Everything is the past.

 

[Aldebaran]

Is it your position then, that someone can make claims about another person and they should not have to provide support for it?

If they provided evidence or support for what they said, you'd reply by saying, "That's not evidence", and then proceed to ask for it again, and again, and again. You do it all the time, and it's really gotten old.

 

[Colter]

If they provided evidence or support for what they said, you'd reply by saying, "That's not evidence", and then proceed to ask for it again, and again, and again. You do it all the time, and it's really gotten old.

 

[talquin]

It's not possible based on my beliefs. "Free will" doesn't mean you're acting outside of the scope of what God is aware of. IOW you cannot surprise God.

Do you believe that a human can freely make a choice out of two or more options? In other words, up until a human selects option b out of an a/b choice, could he still have selected option a?