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

[talquin]

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.

If variable X represents God's knowledge as of our day 1 of what Fred's day 2 A/B choice will be, does variable X have a truth value as of our day 1?

 

[bhsmte]

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.

Wouldnt they have to present the evidence first?

I think what may get old to some, is being held accountable to support their claims about others. I could see the frustration building, when they have none.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

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.

Mind reading again I see...

So you do or do not think it's necessary to back up disparaging claims about a person? Because if you don't, then I'm sure there's all sorts of facts that people could be saying about you...

 

[Aldebaran]

Wouldnt they have to present the evidence first?

I think what may get old to some, is being held accountable to support their claims about others. I could see the frustration building, when they have none.

The frustration builds mostly from your insistence upon being argumentative, no matter what evidence is presented to you. It shows your real intention for being here.

Mind reading again I see...

So you do or do not think it's necessary to back up disparaging claims about a person? Because if you don't, then I'm sure there's all sorts of facts that people could be saying about you...

Not mind reading. POST reading. Read again what I said, since you have misrepresented what I said, and note the bolded part:

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.

And no, I'm not going to go through all his previous posts in order to show you where he's done it in the past. You can do your own research if you'd like to see what he's done.

 

[Colter]

Non-conformist are all alike. It's not mind reading, it's experience, you guys aren't that sophisticated. Atheist do the same thing wherever Christian sites give you a voice. It's like eating at the Chinese buffet, same from town to town.

 

[bhsmte]

Non-conformist are all alike. It's not mind reading, it's experience, you guys aren't that sophisticated. Atheist do the same thing wherever Christian sites give you a voice. It's like eating at the Chinese buffet, same from town to town.

Broad brush claims also dont require any sophistication.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Not mind reading. POST reading. Read again what I said, since you have misrepresented what I said, and note the bolded part:

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.

And no, I'm not going to go through all his previous posts in order to show you where he's done it in the past. You can do your own research if you'd like to see what he's done.

So you do or do not think it's necessary to back up disparaging claims about a person?

 

[bhsmte]

So you do or do not think it's necessary to back up disparaging claims about a person?

Indeed.

 

[Aldebaran]

So you do or do not think it's necessary to back up disparaging claims about a person?

About a person, or about the types of posts the person has made? There's a difference there. As for a "disparaging claim" about the types of things they post on this forum, I think his own posts back up what I said quite nicely by speaking for themselves. If you don't believe that he has made those types of posts, then look through his posts and show me that I'm wrong.

Aside from all this, I was addressing bhsmte about things he said, and then you stepped in on the discussion. He's the one who wanted evidence. Now, if YOU want evidence for what he said--well, you can always click his name, and then click on the tab to see his previous posts. If you want to prove me wrong in a claim I made, you have the tools to give it a try.

 

[bhsmte]

About a person, or about the types of posts the person has made? There's a difference there. As for a "disparaging claim" about the types of things they post on this forum, I think his own posts back up what I said quite nicely by speaking for themselves. If you don't believe that he has made those types of posts, then look through his posts and show me that I'm wrong.

Aside from all this, I was addressing bhsmte about things he said, and then you stepped in on the discussion. He's the one who wanted evidence. Now, if YOU want evidence for what he said--well, you can always click his name, and then click on the tab to see his previous posts. If you want to prove me wrong in a claim I made, you have the tools to give it a try.

Someone should show you you are wrong, as opposed to you needing to show that you are correct?

That is commonly called; shifting the burden of proof. In my experience, this tends to happen, when people cant support their claim and instead ask someone else to disprove their claim.

In my opinion, not the best way to have honest discussion.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

About a person, or about the types of posts the person has made? There's a difference there. As for a "disparaging claim" about the types of things they post on this forum, I think his own posts back up what I said quite nicely by speaking for themselves. If you don't believe that he has made those types of posts, then look through his posts and show me that I'm wrong.

Aside from all this, I was addressing bhsmte about things he said, and then you stepped in on the discussion. He's the one who wanted evidence. Now, if YOU want evidence for what he said--well, you can always click his name, and then click on the tab to see his previous posts. If you want to prove me wrong in a claim I made, you have the tools to give it a try.

As you'll recall, this started with a disparaging remark made to bhsmte by Colter. You jumped in after that and implied there was something wrong in bhsmte asking for evidence that it was true.

My question to you was, and still is "Should Colter have to back up his remark to bhsmte, or is it ok to say disparaging things about a person without evidence?"

 

[com7fy8]

Since each Christian is different I can only answer for myself.

I don't get offended in the least bit and I answer questions, when presented respectfully.

I often find that the people who are always saying the statement of OP always tend to ignore answers or discredit even when it is very helpful and proven. I also find that this type of person likes to label groups, especially Christians, as a whole. So the offense is taken mostly at argumentative questions, not valid questions. It is also aimed at disrespect toward God, and disrespect to belief system. A

But you know, this is just one Christians opinion.
This is not an open door to ask whatever you choose. I answer questions I am knowledgeable or have an idea about, or care to answer. I wont go off topic or feed into such bait as mentioned above.

I find it humorous that this thread is asking Christians a question but non Christians supposedly already "know" why? Do we have mind readers in here? Otherwise I do believe your statements are biased and inaccurate.

How did you get so smart and you're only 28????

One thing - Even if someone seems to be just dissing me with a question, I might give a prayerful and thoughtful answer which God can use. It can be a seed that will work, later. And here in forums others can read and benefit from what I offer

 

[kristina411]

How did you get so smart and you're only 28????

One thing - Even if someone seems to be just dissing me with a question, I might give a prayerful and thoughtful answer which God can use. It can be a seed that will work, later. And here in forums others can read and benefit from what I offer

I try that. The only reason I answer any questions from the argumentative type are when I believe it can benefit some reader on the page.

I do try to answer because the questions are common and I want to bring knowledge. But when I find a poster being argumentative I have to turn away.

May we all bring knowledge of Gods love to anyone who truly seeks it (and those who dont!)

 

[Cearbhall]

I'm going to point out that any question that starts out with an explicit or implied:

"How do you justify"

is more an attack than a question. That such questions often result in a counter attack is little surprise. Few have the self control to repeatedly turn the other cheek.

This is important. I wouldn't go up to a Muslim information table and ask the students "How do you justify the fact that your holy book says ____?!" There aren't any good intentions there.

 

[com7fy8]

How do you reconcile the problem of evil?

I believe there is the spirit of evil in existence and God who is good did not bring it into existence. So, He manages it, in vessels (evil spirits and evil humans . . . Romans 9:21) for the sake of organization of it, on its way to the flaming sewer which burns with fire and brimstone.

But no person I know has ever told me this or taught this, that I am aware of. But I do not believe God or any created being brought the spirit of evil into existence > there is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience," Paul says in Ephesians 2:2.

Right now, God is in control of all the evil, and with Him we can do any good that is possible, no matter what evil there is > "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." (Romans 12:21)

This is my main reconciliation > not the explanation above, but simply trust God and submit to Him and do the loving good that He has me doing with Him

How do you reconcile the problem of free will?

I think a number of people are major suckers for their own so-called free wills, and without God they get themselves into all sorts of major messes. They do not control themselves well. They do not freely choose to get free of their spiritual and emotional troubles and torments and bad relationships.

Because their own nature is their dictator. Their self-involving character has them wanting to believe they can operate themselves. Our character can have us believing what we want to be true. We see this in how we choose companions, among other things. We do not see the real truth about someone, but seek after what we want, while we filter out things which are evidence that we are making a bad choice.

But God can correct us, change our character so we are in His light for seeing how love has us seeing things. Then we discover being free from our own egos' free will ! ! !

But while we are operating on our own, or suppose we are (consider Ephesians 2:2), we do not have Jesus Christ's "rest for your souls" (please see Matthew 11:28-30). We have a way of not freely choosing to rest in Jesus and obey how He shares with us and leads us in His love's "rest for your souls."

And "God resists the proud," we have in James 4:6 and also in 1 Peter 5:5. So, God is not respecting our "free wills" of pride, but He is resisting us while we do things in ego. And our nature is our dictator; we are not really free, but slaves of our own selves, and yet really of Satan (Ephesians 2:2) while we are living like we are making choices on our own and not sharing all and submitting all to our Father.

However, we need to love others, not try to control anyone, but treat each one like one does have a free will, though ones without Jesus are not free > Romans 6:17 >

Only God is good to bring us to all that is so beautifully wonderful and personally sharing and caring of His Heaven-quality family love. We have not been choosing to live with Him in this, I would say. But our Father changes and corrects us, in spite of us. And then we choose, in union and communion with Him (1 Corinthians 6:17, Romans 5:5), to obey > Philippians 2:12-13 > God works us into obeying Him; He is the One who has given "the increase" of our obedience > 1 Corinthians 3:6-7, 2 Corinthians 3:5.

Therefore, I need to be patient and humble with each person, not trying to push and control anyone, understanding that only God can do all that is really right with any person; so I love each one by being a growing good love example, doing any loving things God has me doing, however trusting Him for the real results > "nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3) Because only God can bring any of us to all that is so good and so better than we could try to get anyone to seek and find and choose on their own.

If your free will has you choosing things apart from God's personal guiding, aren't you acting somehow in separation from God? I have been told that "sin is separation from God"; so, if I act in separation from Him, in my own free will, isn't my will free from God (Romans 6:20) and therefore in sin?? If my "free will" is my ego's freedom from God and His constant sharing and guiding in His love, then my "free will" is a major problem and subject to my selfish character dictating. This is slavery to self, not really free.

But if we are in sharing with our Father guiding us "continually" (Isaiah 58:11), we share in His freedom of His will ! ! ! instead of being free from Him.

 

[Cearbhall]

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.

And our point is, what has led you to make this claim, considering that many Christian scholars spend their whole careers doing the exact same thing? Why are you assuming he has ill intentions simply because he isn't a member of your religion?

Christianity and other religions are strengthened by historical truth, which is one reason why many people, Christian or not, engage in this discipline. I'd go so far as to say that these Christian scholars are the ones truly defending Christianity, since their faith is strong enough to believe that it will stand up to reason. They're more interested in learning the truth and seeing God's work in reality than sticking with preconceived notions regardless of evidence.

When you play the innocent, misunderstood victim then I think you are not being honest about your motives.

Or perhaps he knows himself better than you do, and you're simply having trouble grasping how scholarship works.

 

[Messy]

A few years back some atheists on a Dutch atheist forum asked me some tough questions and especially one ex christian, who writes books like Dawkins and first warned me to better leave because he thought I needed my belief. He tries to pull people from their faith and he admits doing this. I was forced to think about it and also asked God for answers.

I've got no idea if they did accept anything I said and I think it was quite stupid I went there, but my 8 year old is a very smart kid and he started to ask me those questions when he was 5 or 6: Why did God create the devil? Why did He make storms and earth slides? Hey!! I didn't do all that effort for nothing, there was one who was glad with the answers!

 

[Cearbhall]

A few years back some atheists on a Dutch atheist forum asked me some tough questions and especially one ex christian, who writes books like Dawkins and first warned me to better leave because he thought I needed my belief.

That was nice of him, I suppose.

The first time I had a theological discussion with a fundamentalist was when I started university. Another girl was talking to her about it, and I joined in. She believed that the Bible is historically accurate and that the world is only a few thousand years old. She came from a town where this was not questioned and she had never been expected to back it up before, so she became distressed by the lack of evidence and asked if we could stop talking about it. I, of course, respected that. It's not my place to upset someone like that.

He tries to pull people from their faith and he admits doing this.

Eek. The only reason why I would try to pull someone away from theism completely is if it became apparent that the person really just couldn't function as a theist (for example, if the person couldn't handle being a theist without having terrible anxiety about Hell).

 

[bhsmte]

I believe there is the spirit of evil in existence and God who is good did not bring it into existence. So, He manages it, in vessels (evil spirits and evil humans . . . Romans 9:21) for the sake of organization of it, on its way to the flaming sewer which burns with fire and brimstone.

Interesting. If God did not bring evil into existence, do you believe he simply allowed it to happen and had no desire to stop it?

But no person I know has ever told me this or taught this, that I am aware of. But I do not believe God or any created being brought the spirit of evil into existence > there is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience," Paul says in Ephesians 2:2.

If God or no created being brought evil into existence, then who did?

Right now, God is in control of all the evil, and with Him we can do any good that is possible, no matter what evil there is > "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." (Romans 12:21)

If you believe God is in control of evil, how do you believe he controls it and when does he allow evil to happen or not happen?

 

[keith99]

That was nice of him, I suppose.

The first time I had a theological discussion with a fundamentalist was when I started university. Another girl was talking to her about it, and I joined in. She believed that the Bible is historically accurate and that the world is only a few thousand years old. She came from a town where this was not questioned and she had never been expected to back it up before, so she became distressed by the lack of evidence and asked if we could stop talking about it. I, of course, respected that. It's not my place to upset someone like that.

Eek. The only reason why I would try to pull someone away from theism completely is if it became apparent that the person really just couldn't function as a theist (for example, if the person couldn't handle being a theist without having terrible anxiety about Hell).

I tend to adjust my actions to fit the history. Here I would have done the same as you. But if I were to later cross paths with the same person and they were browbeating someone else who was not ready for it then they get both barrels and I'd kick them where they were down. No mercy. All figuratively of course.

If I were feeling a bit nasty I might include 'AS yea sow so shall yea reap' as a parting shot.