Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes, after having considered the answer, they might conclude that it's not good enough. You seem be under the impression that any answer, no matter how poor, is a good answer, and that the questioner should therefore just accept it as is. That's not how a dialogue works.
If the questioner concludes that the other person's answers are "not good enough" or poor, then the questioner should just move on and start a conversation with someone they feel gives them the answers they believe are up to their standards, rather than putting down the person. That just results in arguments which go nowhere.
If the questioner concludes that the other person's answers are "not good enough" or poor, then the questioner should just move on and start a conversation with someone they feel gives them the answers they believe are up to their standards, rather than putting down the person. That just results in arguments which go nowhere.
Ask me some difficult questions. I won't be evasive. I won't get angry. I won't get defensive.I think you described humans, not one specific subset.
I am an atheist and I don't have a doctrine of death which you can challenge. But if I did, I wouldn't be bothered if you did challenge my doctrine of death. BTW, what exactly do you consider a "doctrine of death" to be?Yes, atheist, who get off mocking the faith of Christians all dressed up as "intellectual stimulation" don't like having their doctrines of death challenged, and a guy who is the spokesman for some people at his office.Have you not noticed that I'm not seeking your good opinion of me?
Actions speaking louder than words is a concept and practice that transcends all religions.Maybe they do, maybe they don't. So do non-religious people get to dictate how religous people are supposed to act?
Is this definition from a human perspective or in the eyes of the Lord? If the latter, what is a Lord?a devil can be many things
for example, a devil may be someone who forecloses on the right of others to express their emotions, in order to make the point that they should be less emotional for no reason (in the eyes of the Lord)
Asking people questions to help them critically evaluate their positions should help them develop character. It shouldn't cause them to get evasive or defensive.this can be done with evil intent, with good (or with neutral)
the point is, when you play the devil with people that have not developed enough character to be able to deal with it, in many cases you will get frustrating results (simply because you have not employed enough Wisdom yourself)
Reasonable Faith and William Lane Craig don't adequately address the Problem of Evil.Podcast on the problem of evil (reasonablefaith.org/problem-of-evil)
podcast on reasonable faith answers a lot of questions (reasonablefaith.org/reasonable-faith-podcast)
podcast on Christian doctrine (reasonablefaith.org/defenders-2-podcast)
Christians often make the claim that God knows everything. If asked for specifics, theyll say this includes knowledge about the future (foreknowledge) and that such knowledge is infallible. Christians also often make the claim that man has free will. Upon being asked for specifics, theyll agree that free will entails the ability to freely make a choice and that up until the time an option is chosen, a different option could have been chosen. At quick glance, these claims may not appear to be in conflict. However, if we dig a little deeper into each of these claims, well see that they are.Who says God is all loving?
If you were going to do something different, God would already know it.
God isn't like a puppy, where you pretend to throw a ball, but hold on to it and the puppy chases it and looks for it anyway.
God has ordained every move you make, to the day of your death.
I think the problem here isn't a contradiction between free will and omniscience, but a misunderstanding of free will on your part.
Yep. Sam Harris destroyed him there. Dan Barker destroys Craig's Kalam Cosmological Argument here. Cosmological KalamityI am quite familiar with him and have watched many of his debates.
He is a terrific debater, his arguments just don't hold up to scrutiny. He also only chooses certain debates, where he can make the ground rules. One of his best tactics, is to misrepresent his opponents position, so they have to spend time correcting this misconception, as opposed to presenting their own case.
This is excerpt from his debate with Sam Harris at Notre Dame, in which IMO, Harris destroyed him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HthQ6a7FZeA
Yet Christians tend to get defensive, evasive or angry if I try to get them to think through what they believe. Are they not aware of the message they're sending by responding this way?Not all do. Just the ones who haven't developed a deep faith life by actually thinking through what they believe.
And who is the questioner and how do you know this about him/her?I'd agree. There is the "my church is the only real one; too bad about yours" crowd and they seem to be determined to argue about anything, with or without any facts. But the average Christian here, or Christians in general, seem to have been more than willing to answer just about any sincere question posed without obvious animosity towards the faith.
Of course, it it's posed this way:
The questioner has already stated that he will accept only the answer that agrees with his distaste for "most religious people."
Many atheists used to be Christians. Some, such as Dan Barker and Jerry DeWitt used to be ordained ministers or preachers.Why else post to a Christian forum? It can't possibly be curiosity, atheists seem to "know" more than Christians do about our beliefs.
Many atheists used to be Christians. Some, such as Dan Barker and Jerry DeWitt used to be ordained ministers or preachers.
After having a short glance on some of your posts there I can surely see why that is.That's usually not what happens though. Someone will ask the Christian a question and then when they get the answer, they decide themselves that it's not good enough. I'm dealing with someone telling me repeatedly in another thread right now that my answers aren't good enough. http://www.christianforums.com/t7865165-46/
I am an atheist and I don't have a doctrine of death which you can challenge. But if I did, I wouldn't be bothered if you did challenge my doctrine of death. BTW, what exactly do you consider a "doctrine of death" to be?
While I don't get off mocking the faith of Christians, I am highly entertained by their persistent use of conflicting positions and conflicting claims and how they respond when it is pointed out that such positions and claims are conflicting.
Why do Christians get evasive, defensive or angry when faced with difficult questionsDecided atheist are committed to a godless faith, the final accomplishment of a life devoted to any values is eternal death. There is no recollection in death. Atheist can't disprove the God of religious people so in that discontented state they make a hobby out of joining Christian forums to undermine faith. When these big bad wolves can't stand the exposure of their deviant motives they run whine to the mods.
Not good enough? I think you mean that the answer didn't meet with the satisfaction of the questioner. That's bound to happen in any discussion.
Like whom?Many reasons I suppose.
What kind of a person would dedicate so much effort trying to undermine the faith of others?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?