Apologetics: witnessing to atheists

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
My seeking is for truth about ultimate reality in order to ascertain how to be saved from this one.
Thus, I am unimpressed by either reincarnation or PEAR as providing more hope for heaven than faith in God/Jesus.

Regarding Christ's resurrection, I would appreciate knowing the exact verses in Galatians and 1John that doubt the empty tomb.

Regarding divine inspiration, I think any open-minded truthseeker who compares the NT teachings of Jesus and Paul with the founding scriptures of other religions will reach the same conclusion as I have:

The NT is the most credible canon or collection of writings purporting to be a communique from God. The NT hope for heaven is based on evidence in support of Jesus’ claim to be Messiah/Christ, which includes: the prophecy or foreshadowing of His life (in various OT scriptures, including IS 53 and PS 22, and by the sacrificial system), the purpose of His death (as explained in the NT, such as Heb. 7:18-10:18), and the probability or credibility of His resurrection (in history as recorded by the last chapters of the Gospels and Rom. 1:3-4).

Having read the entire Bible in four translations taking copious notes, there is nothing I was not aware of before I forgot it. I have also considered many other sources during my seeking/research, most of which I have forgotten after deeming them worthless, but
the points I have considered worthwhile are those I have written down elsewhere and am sharing with y'all now here and on other CC threads as my witness/testimony before dying.

Regarding proving divine inspiration, I think the absence of disproof via one or more of the six ways discussed previously is sufficient to warrant belief per my opinion that it is logical to remain open to believing all credible possibilities (those which present sufficient evidence) and to hope the most desirable rational possibility is true. IOW, logical opinions are better than blind assumptions.

My opinion regarding logical argument is summarized by what I believe to be an insight that I call the Propensity Principle,
which I will share next if we are ready to depart this station.

Again, my interest in ultimate reality is ascertaining how to be saved from mortality, so you will understand why I find the
discussion of PEAR rather boring and the arguing demoralizing. Thus, I am waiting to see if anyone wants to get back on
the train I was conducting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
I noted you opining that human children surpass chimp children at about 3 years of age, but I think the age of moral accountability is closer to eight.

I reiterate that the evidence for reincarnation is weak and thus incredible for establishing a UMI, much less for being a means to achieve nirvana/salvation.

Regarding Christ's resurrection, I disagree that his body remaining in the tomb would not have discredited the faith of Paul and other Christians.

I saw that you liked with my post about potential disproofs of divinity well enough, and your discussion with HeIsHere indicates that PEAR is doubted rather than confirmed, so I await them being able to move a mountain into the sea.

So, I think we are ready to move on down the track that started at the station of philosophy, moved past the watershed of cosmaterialism and moralism and has arrived at the choice (second watershed) of believing atheism or NT theism, because
theocentric history reached its apex or spiritual climax with the NT teaching that there is one almighty and all-loving God,
who desires all humanity to live in harmony on earth and also in heaven, and who allows humanity to experience earthly existence including pain and disappointment (KOTH) for the purpose of teaching them their need for Him (cf. Heb. 12:10).

The choices involved in making the second watershed decision (the ground of meaning/morality) correspond to the following questions: For a humanist, “Is there any reason I should not be selfish?” [No/Yes, depending on how you feel or what the rulers decree or how the majority votes.] For a karmaist, “Does how I live ultimately matter?” [Not unless you can remember previous lives.] For a naturalist, “Does instinct negate volition? [If not, then why is evil/hatred not equally right or existentially lawful?] And for a theist, “What does God desire?” [That depends upon what message or revelation is from God.]

Which option and opinion is best or most true? Answering this question involves understanding how truth is acquired (epistemology). Some knowledge is gleaned directly from personal experiences and is available to all who seek to know the truth with an open mind (like Socrates or Buddha) by means of reflecting or meditating on experiences logically. The apostle Paul indicated the world reveals God’s “invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature” (Rom. 1:20) and that conscience indicates “the requirements of the law” (Rom. 2:15).

A second possible way of obtaining knowledge is by learning from the insights or inspiration of others. Divinely inspired knowledge was claimed by Jesus (in John 14:9-11), Paul (in Gal. 1:11-12 & Tit. 1:1-3). Insights could be a combination of reflection and inspiration, perhaps taught by God’s indwelling Spirit, who Jesus said would “guide you into all truth” (John 16:13).

The problem for truthseekers is evaluating the various teachers or claimants to knowledge, especially when their messages are contradictory. In my opinion humanism provides no hope for ultimate “oughtness”, because there is no logical way to avoid moral relativism without a superhuman Judge. Karmaism offers a rationale for reincarnation, but I have explained why I view it as incredible. Naturalism does not even provide a rationale for morality/the UMI, but rather it implies that what is, is right. However, I do find reasons to believe NT theism is true.

While conducting a comprehensive comparison of theistic religions is not my desire, I think any open-minded truthseeker who compares the NT teachings of Jesus and Paul with the founding scriptures of other religions will reach the same conclusion as I have: The NT is the most credible canon or collection of writings purporting to be a communique from God. The NT hope for heaven is based on evidence in support of Jesus’ claim to be Messiah/Christ, which includes: the prophecy or foreshadowing of His life (in various OT scriptures, including IS 53 and PS 22, and by the sacrificial system), the purpose of His death (as explained in the NT, such as Heb. 7:18-10:18), and the probability or credibility of His resurrection (in history as recorded by the last chapters of the Gospels and Rom. 1:3-4).

Christianity qualified OT theism, which emphasized God’s love for some people (descendants of Abraham), with a UMI to love everyone by reflecting His love, beginning with God and continuing with one-self and one’s neighbors (whether Jew or Gentile) and even including one’s enemies (per Matt. 22:37-39 & 5:44). The best reason to hope in God is Christ. Paul calls those who have saving faith/cooperate with God’s will the spiritual or righteous children of Abraham (Rom. 3:28-30 & 4:9-16).

Awaiting comments from y'all before moving to the station of Christology.

Getting the logical train of thought back on the track from philosophy through theology to Christology, let us consider the following insight I call the “Propensity Principle” (PP). The PP points out that until proof is provided in the future at the eschaton, humanity’s existential need and desire for eternal life and ultimate justice (the duo of desirables or DOD) make it logical for truthseekers to have a propensity to hope and believe a God who provides the DOD exists, to determine the most credible revelation of God’s requirement for attaining heaven, and to cooperate with His revealed will. IOW, it seems logical–given the existential facts of death and imperfect justice–that an unbiased truthseeker would have a propensity to hope the Christian view is correct, because there is no better (credible and desirable) way of attaining the DOD than NT theism. This PP restates Pascal’s wager in terms of reasonable comparison shopping (with all belief systems) instead of lucky/blind gambling.

The PP employs linear logic (rather than circular reasoning) to propose faith in the NT God as the best belief that solves the maze of reality as follows:

1. Current scientific knowledge cannot explain how the universe came to exist by means of natural causes, thus it is possible that the cause of the universe is a supernatural Creator/God.

2. The most creative species is humanity, whose traits also include language, moral conscience and God consciousness (personality), so it is possible that these human traits reflect attributes of a God who created humanity.

3. Existential reality indicates that humans are mortal and life is painful, but when life is happy, one wishes it would continue indefinitely. Thus, it is rational to seek how to be saved or to become immortal in a heavenly existence.

4. Comparing all possible ways of achieving the DOD, the best or most credible way/hope at this point appears to be the God who resurrected Christ Jesus.

5. When words from God are sought, the NT teachings of Jesus and Paul seem to be the most highly inspired when compared with other scriptures (including the OT), because its concept of one God as the just and all-loving Judge (rationale for morality) is spiritually highest or most advanced, and the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is most credible.

6. Thus, it is appropriate or wise to believe in the NT God and to accept Jesus as God’s Messiah.

Comments? Are we tracking?