God's Not Dead - the film has me pondering

Page 2 of 3 (45 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next >
This post has 44 Replies | 0 Followers

Posts 5194
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 5:27 PM

The problem for apologists who want to assign the Big Bang to YHWH, apart from the simple fact that it isn't what B'rei'shiytth describes, is the recent study which states that the physics and cosmological evidence has never pointed to a Big Bang. The "breakdown" of the math as one approaches the supposed singularity occurs because things never actually got that far. Instead, according to the theory, the universe doesn't have evidence of a beginning because, according to the math, it never had one. The proponents of this new theory claim it makes better sense of a number of weak points in the long-standing and virtually coronated Big Bang theory.

That's kind of the problem with saddling oneself (along with one's theology) to scientific theories. Science rarely stands still, which is, oddly enough, its strength. So long, Kalam cosmological argument! So long, William Lane Craig! But, of course, not so fast, right? WLC won't be going anywhere. Just like with the Great Disappointment, he'll just reset, pretend to recalibrate, and come out with another "conclusion, therefore premise" argument. I doubt Christian apologetics will ever comprehend the inherent weakness in such arguments, because, obviously, they are right and so they can't be wrong!

I think the real shocker will come when they ultimately recognize that YHWH isn't a fan of that kind of self-affirming nonsense.

ASROCK x570 Creator, AMD R9 3950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, Asus Strix RTX 2080 ti, 2tb m.2 Seagate Firecuda SSD (x2) ...and other mechano-digital happiness.

"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not."

Posts 8002
DAL | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 5:36 PM

Super.Tramp:

Lonnie Spencer:

The weakness of apologetics is that just because I can convince someone in their head that there is a God, it doesn't  mean their heart will automatically follow. 

 Well said. The real work is done by the Holy Spirit.

Bad said! The real work is done by the Holy Spirit, yes, but if the person is not willing to obey, then it doesn't matter if they believe the Gospel or not. It will happen onto them like the Jews "many of them believed, but wouldn't confess Christ because they loved more the glory that came from men than the glory that came from God. It all boils down to the hearts of the people and how receptive they are to the calling of the Word ---- unless, of course, you're a Calvinist..."come on be saved whether you like it or not there's nothing you can do about it, Forget about your free will..." LOL

The only good lesson the movie had, was that we all need to be prepared to contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints!  The rest was all pure entertainment mixed with some theological bias.

I may actually return some of my March madness purchases to get that Paul Cophan collection on apologetics (I hope I got his name right). When God goes to Starbucks seems like a nice title to read and learn from it...or I may just call my sales rep and see what kind of deal she/he can cut me.

DAL

Posts 525
Kent | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 6:26 PM

David Paul:
The problem for apologists who want to assign the Big Bang to YHWH, apart from the simple fact that it isn't what B'rei'shiytth describes, is the recent study which states that the physics and cosmological evidence has never pointed to a Big Bang. The "breakdown" of the math as one approaches the supposed singularity occurs because things never actually got that far. Instead, according to the theory, the universe doesn't have evidence of a beginning because, according to the math, it never had one. The proponents of this new theory claim it makes better sense of a number of weak points in the long-standing and virtually coronated Big Bang theory.

DP are you proposing a static and eternal universe, which the second law of thermodynamics will contradict? The Scripture talks of a void and anyway you translate it, it means nothingness.

Yes I agree that the math fails when taken to it's conclusion (Einstein divided by 0 in his relative theory work and there has not been anyone who has found a workaround for it).

Posts 5194
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 6:53 PM

Actually, I'm not proposing anything. This is the study I am referencing. As I stated, it's just a theory. Might be wrong...but none of this stuff, one way or the other, has anything to do with the Bible. I personally think there is a high likelihood that YHWH created the universe with mathematical laws deliberately suggesting a "truth" divergent from what He described in B'rei'shiytth. Why? To test, as He always says He will do, whether we will accept what He said or revert to plumbing the creation for the "real" story.

For those interested, this is the paper that presents the math. Note the abstract and the conclusion.

ASROCK x570 Creator, AMD R9 3950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, Asus Strix RTX 2080 ti, 2tb m.2 Seagate Firecuda SSD (x2) ...and other mechano-digital happiness.

"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not."

Posts 3578
steve clark | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 7:41 PM

JoshInRI:
Could we rely upon Logos to assist us in reasoning with others and show God is not dead as the film proposed?

The Gospel is all that is needed (pick a translation, there are several good ones in Logos or many other free apps with free good translations).

i don't believe that it takes the Gospel + anything else, the Gospel is the Power of God.

QLinks, Bibl2, LLR, Macros
Dell Insp 17-5748, i5, 1.7 GHz, 8G RAM, win 8.1

Posts 8002
DAL | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 10:17 PM

steve clark:

JoshInRI:
Could we rely upon Logos to assist us in reasoning with others and show God is not dead as the film proposed?

The Gospel is all that is needed (pick a translation, there are several good ones in Logos or many other free apps with free good translations).

i don't believe that it takes the Gospel + anything else, the Gospel is the Power of God.

Now, that, Sir, is WELL SAID!

DAL

Posts 10817
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 13 2015 3:21 AM

Lonnie Spencer:

The weakness of apologetics is that just because I can convince someone in their head that there is a God, it doesn't  mean their heart will automatically follow. 

Josh McDowell illustrated this truth long ago in Evidence that Demands a Verdict. After an evolutionary professor admitted that Josh had demolished all his best arguments, he still refused to admit the existence of God because that would have been an admission of responsibility to his Creator. And that was the very thing he refused to do. (Quoting from memory of something I read more than 30 years ago. Believe I have the thrust of the exchange even if a bit fuzzy on the details).

For a great many people the problem is not intellectual but volitional. Many who see the evidence for the existence of God will refuse to acknowledge Him from a rebellious nature. I personally tried very had to believe in evolution for that very reason. Romans 5:8 changed that more than 40 years ago.

Saw this after I posted the above:

Steve Clark:

The Gospel is all that is needed (pick a translation, there are several good ones in Logos or many other free apps with free good translations).

i don't believe that it takes the Gospel + anything else, the Gospel is the Power of God.

That would be my reference to Romans 5:8 above. It was not intellectual assent that gripped me, but the power of God's Word. The intellectual arguments are nice to know for one's own confidence, but don't expect them to win over a determined atheist. His/her problem most likely lies deep within the will, not in the mind.

Posts 508
Nord Zootman | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 13 2015 5:29 AM

Jack Caviness:
That would be my reference to Romans 5:8 above. It was not intellectual assent that gripped me, but the power of God's Word. The intellectual arguments are nice to know for one's own confidence, but don't expect them to win over a determined atheist. His/her problem most likely lies deep within the will, not in the mind.

Yes

Posts 1602
Deacon Steve | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 13 2015 7:13 AM

Just as I like using Logos, I like apologetics and music, and math, and logic, and astronomy, and rhetoric, and logic, and art, and literature, and philosophy, and law, and human beings and all the things in God's creation.  Of course, God's revealed Word.  I'm not good at any of them.  But they help me understand more about Him. 

Posts 11433
DMB | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 13 2015 7:17 AM

Looks like we've successfully moved ChristianDiscourse back home.  

The problem with proofs of God, is the use of the upper-case 'G'.  Given the limits of humans, a non-human always has X% probability.

And the issue is highlighted in both the OT and NT.  Which non-human? 

Returning to Logos, the key data is the basis for the validity of the texts.  And this is Logos' weakest area.  Tov anyone? 

"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."

Posts 3578
steve clark | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 13 2015 11:11 PM

God is NOT dead

Rev 22:12-13   “Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.

Rev 1:17-18  And He placed His right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.

QLinks, Bibl2, LLR, Macros
Dell Insp 17-5748, i5, 1.7 GHz, 8G RAM, win 8.1

Posts 31873
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 13 2015 11:51 PM

I've not read this thread as it was clear from the title it belonged on ChristianDiscourse ... but I accidently opened to the last entry read the first line and have a request. If you are going to ignore the guidelines, let me know if you decide to discuss something interesting like "does the concept of dead apply to God? and if so, how?

I've now glanced through the thread and offer a partial apology. The portion on apologetic resources definitively belongs here - the remainder belongs on Christian Discourse. As for the topic of does the concept of death apply to God, I would note that God became incarnate, took on the nature of man, in order to die.

Steve, your post did not offend me ... it merely implied that the thread had reached a point of little or no contact with the purpose of the forums ... and a glance up the page from your post seemed to confirm that view. I needed to see the preceding page before the thread was on topic.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 5194
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 14 2015 2:12 AM

MJ. Smith:
"does the concept of dead apply to God? and if so, how? (I'd argue the concept doesn't apply).

Jn. 19:30 Huh?

I know...you meant the other God.

ASROCK x570 Creator, AMD R9 3950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, Asus Strix RTX 2080 ti, 2tb m.2 Seagate Firecuda SSD (x2) ...and other mechano-digital happiness.

"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not."

Posts 5194
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 14 2015 2:20 AM

Kent:

The Scripture talks of a void and anyway you translate it, it means nothingness.

Where is this nothingness void mentioned?

ASROCK x570 Creator, AMD R9 3950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, Asus Strix RTX 2080 ti, 2tb m.2 Seagate Firecuda SSD (x2) ...and other mechano-digital happiness.

"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not."

Posts 10817
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 14 2015 3:06 AM

MJ. Smith:
I've not read this thread as it was clear from the title it belonged on ChristianDiscourse

Then perhaps you should have read Josh's request for Logos resources before you begin to criticize his thread.

Posts 3578
steve clark | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 14 2015 7:46 AM

Hi MJ,

MJ. Smith:
but I accidently opened to the last entry read the first line and have a request.

sorry if my post offended you. (as my post was obviously the last one before you posted)

MJ. Smith:
If you are going to ignore the guidelines,

As Jack mentioned, you probably missed Josh's point in his OP. From what i have seen in this thread there doesn't seem to be a heated argument here. i believe that helping others find scripture is directly related to Logos and its use. It is a little scary to me if we become too politically correct here on the forum that we may not be able to speak about the Gospel freely. i beseech you to have mercy on us poor sinners.
May our LORD bless you and protect you and use you!

MJ. Smith:
let me know if you decide to discuss something interesting like "does the concept of dead apply to God?

Ahh but it does. That is the Gospel, Jesus died and on the 3rd day He arose. How does that not apply since Jesus was God and He did die. Something related to the thread topic was how Paul approached the Philosophers of his time on Mars Hill (found in the book of Acts). [So Josh you might want to use Logos to investigate that perspective as it does directly relate to the your question].

Love ya'll in Christ Jesus,

steve

QLinks, Bibl2, LLR, Macros
Dell Insp 17-5748, i5, 1.7 GHz, 8G RAM, win 8.1

Posts 812
Cynthia in Florida | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 14 2015 3:44 PM

Jack Caviness:

JoshInRI:
What would you all suggest as more concise more accessible and more reasonable/convincing please?

I would look to Norman Geisler. Apologetics is his area of expertise. He is not always an easy read like Comfort, but I have more confidence in Geisler.

I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist

When Critics Ask

I completely agree with this.  I am currently going through IDHEA with 12 high schoolers (there is a high school curriculum and dvd options available that I am also doing with them, and they love it.  95% of what the college student said in the film you can find in this book.

Cynthia

Romans 8:28-38

Posts 10817
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 14 2015 4:34 PM

Cynthia in Florida:
95% of what the college student said in the film you can find in this book.

Maybe the script writer had read the book.

Posts 1602
Deacon Steve | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 14 2015 5:35 PM

MJ. Smith:

Steve, your post did not offend me ... it merely implied that the thread had reached a point of little or no contact with the purpose of the forums ... and a glance up the page from your post seemed to confirm that view. I needed to see the preceding page before the thread was on topic.

Sorry about that MJ.  And no explanation on your part is required, at least by me.  I had just posted excerpts from the resource I thought would be helpful to the OP.  I didn't realize that the content thereof would be controversial. I think David Paul had some comments about it.

Tongue Tied

Posts 1602
Deacon Steve | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 14 2015 5:53 PM

... on another note...

I will be very careful next time before I post a sample from a resource for the benefit of another forum member.  Other than the TOC, the two very introductory samples have seemed to stir up all manner of disagreement.  That was not my intention.  What I had provided is like reading the back cover of a book.

The resource I mentioned is a valuable tool in regard to the question proposed.  That is why I posted the TOC and the samples.  It requires thinking and reflection and research.  Not a flippant response based on samples as some have done.

Page 2 of 3 (45 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next > | RSS