Yes, but in a naturalistic way

Naturalistic in the sense of not positing anything beyond matter. Of course multiverse theory, string theory, and the like are a) unverifiable (and unfalsifiable) and therefore metaphysical b) lacking in any interesting explanatory power. What phenomena do they explain? These are huge hypotheticals which, when compared to the ontologically simpler theistic paradigm, violate Occam's razor.

Miracle and Creationist/ID, yes.

Science can't talk about miracles because they are unrepeatable events caused from outside the material world. If you grant the existence of God, there's nothing impossible about miracles. In calling the possibility of miracles into question, you also beg the question against theism.

As for ID folks, what they are doing is exactly the kind of argument given by St. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century:

1. Some things in nature which lack intelligence act for an end (Thomas cites “natural” or celestial bodies). That is to say, they act in such a way as to achieve some good result.
2. Since they lack intelligence, these things must be acting in this manner by design and/or direction.
3. Design and/or direction implies a designer and/or director.
4. Therefore these things are designed and/or directed by an ultimate designer and/or director whom we call “God.”

To elaborate on what I said earlier, you have to look at how music/art/literature (and morality, which is how this started) in their earliest forms might have had survival value in small groups of hunter-gatherers on the savannahs of East Africa- that's one question, the question of origins.

Why do we appreciate them now? Because this big sack of gray jelly on top of our spinal cord has evolved to become an incredibly flexible mechanism (by biological standards) to help us succeed in both the physical and social encounters we face.

I'm still not convinced of how my appreciation for the music of Ralph Vaughan Williams has survival value. I simply enjoy it.

This theory just seems a bit absurd---what if humans, instead, have a basic aesthetic sense. A ridiculous story about how stimulae activate certain parts of the brain does nothing to explain why I find a particular piece of music or art beautiful---it simply indicates some connection between mind and body. The trouble is that equating the mind with the brain in this way transgresses the bounds of sense (to use Wittgenstein's terminology). Seriously, do we speak of "mind surgery"? How about "cranial imagery." When you say "great minds think alike" don't you really mean "great brains think alike"?

Try, for a moment, to replace every piece of mental terminology with a piece of neuroscientific terminology and you'll see just how ridiculous it is to equate the mind with the brain. When neuroscientists do this, they're talking nonsense.

The trouble is that we as humans just can't think in accordance with a consistently naturalistic paradigm. Our language is loaded with terms that naturalism can't explain without being ridiculous and talking nonsense.

TBG

I saw a video posted by a friend on Facebook yesterday that pretty well almost embarrassed me. It was a 30 second clip from a speaker at a evangelical school (the vid didn't say which one). He was talking about how science and the Bible split off in two branches on world-views and attempts to make a startling point. We know in Romans 5, Paul talks about Jesus being the new 'Adam' and how in Adam all sinned, and in Christ all have hope to be redeemed. This guy is bold enough to say Paul has no business bringing Adam out of the Old Testament, because "it gives science problems". Who is this guy to judge what belongs in the Bible and what doesn't?

I'm not here to bring back the creation/evolution debate, but the dangers of compromise. If Adam doesn't belong in Romans 5, then the Book of Hebrews doesn't either, and all the prophecies of Christ in the OT don't belong in the Bible either. I said earlier that Christianity MUST be dogmatic. It's Jesus 100% or not at all. Same thing with the Bible. You MUST take 100% of it and live it as the True Word of God, or you must reject 100% of it and deem it a mere fictitious tale.

What amazes me is how many people who truly profess to be a True follower of Christ try to fit God, the Bible, and any aspect of Christianity into their own box. Of course nobody is innocent of this in someway shape or form, but if there is something in the Bible that gives conflict to your theology, hypothesis, or theory, then CHANGE YOUR THEOLOGY. That's the way science is supposed to be done. God will take us from one level of understanding to a deeper one, but if its from God it will never conflict with the Bible. Humans are fallible and finite. We can't truly grasp what God intends for us or intends to say in the Bible, but he will always take us closer to that point as we grow in him. The only constant we truly have is God's Word. Everything else will pass away, but the Word should be our top most authority and resource.

Hey guys, sorry I haven't been on the last few days I just haven't been in the philosophical mood. It looks like the current arguments going on don't involve me anyway. I found this argument on another forum I occasionally visit and thought I would share for thoughts, if anyone is interested:

Intelligent Design

If this is so, explain cancer.

Cancer is caused through cell reproduction, for instance lets say you smoke
a lot and damage your lungs. Your body on a cellular level tries to repair
the damage by reproducing the cells. If the DNA has become damaged in the
new cells they form tumors. If they should happen to be "Malignant", you
have cancer.

So one of the following must be true:

1-God is stupid.

2-God cant use a Lexmark for *censored*.

3-God is fake.

In any case you should remove the word "Intelligent" from the theory's
title-

I would say something like "smoking is unnatural so the argument doesn't work," but people get cancer naturally all the time, so I think it holds some water. Any thoughts?

Andrew, you're right that in nature there are things like cancers that are malfunctions of the design plan. However, does this mean that God messed up or is stupid? No. In fact, in the Christian story, God tells man that because of sin, things like death, disease, and suffering are going to be part of life until the consummation. That's the world we live in---a world that has been cursed and yet will be renewed.

TBG

It DOES say that you will go to hell if you don’t accept Christ. I don’t believe in that anymore—I’m just saying, yes, the Bible says that.

and that's a thing I found interesting- and debatable, for that matter- because if you believe in God the Father (without knowledge of Jesus, for whatever reason that may be) then you're also believing in Jesus- as God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one, right?

But I’ve had experiences where people have been horrible to me even in a Christian environment. Did it change what I believe? No. Do I think I’d still believe this even if I lived in another country? Yes. In fact, I might believe it even more so. It was the bad experiences and the times when I felt alone and mistreated that I came to discover myself the best.

I'm sorry that happened to you. A taste of Christianity in a form like that merely proves that those "Christians" don't know what they "preach". Christians are supposed to be loving. By what you've said here, I wouldn't say that describes them at all. {affectionate hug}

I would see praise not just as music and singing, but seen through loving acts. I always pictured heaven to be a perfect society where everyone demonstrated complete unselfishness and honesty. The whole world would be one big family where you can trust anyone you meet and everyone loves and understands each other perfectly. So we’d praise God by our actions and by the way we live and treat others. Everyone had individual talents and we could spend eternity building on these talents in order to advance the world to a place of perpetual beauty.

Technically, Heaven is already a place of perpetual beauty. I've wondered if, perhaps, Heaven is as you just described... and it was a pretty nice thought. Lol Although, I'd prefer to live in a perfect world than have to "advance" the world into perfection. I'm pretty sure that since Heaven is God's "palace", it would be no less than the best. Just my thoughts.

I think I’m a good person and that’s all that matters to me.

Yes, there's no debate that you're a good person. But- to quote the Donut Man... (:P) you need something to "plug the whole in your heart" ... aka, Jesus.

I do it for myself and others. If it was just for myself I wouldn’t enjoy it so much. And why shouldn’t I be thinking about myself when I do good acts? Again, this is why I was miserable and I was a “Christian.” I was commanded to be good but to take no pleasure in it and give all the credit to God for redeeming me—but I was the one who had redeemed myself! I was the one who made myself into a better person. Giving the credit to God for this was a lie. God didn’t make me into who I am today…I did.

Nobody "commands" you to do good works for the love of God- but to store up treasures in heaven. Jesus redeems us spiritually- and this redemption helps us do good works for the love of Him.

James chapter 2, verses 14-26: What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, keep warm, eat well" but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it? So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

Indeed, someone might say, "You have faith and I have works". Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works. You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe and tremble. Do you want proof, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his sin Isaac upon the altar? You see that faith was active along with works, and faith was completed by the works. Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness, and he was called "the friend of God". See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out a different route? For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead."

pretty straightforward.

I enjoyed living Christianity like a religion. I like going to church, I like the Christian friends that I have. I enjoy reading the Bible. I liked praying for people. I like being a loving person and doing volunteer work. I like some Christian worship songs. The reason I felt like a failure was not because I did not like acting like a Christian. It was because I didn’t believe in it anymore.

To live Christianity as a religion IS to believe in it, not the social communities that come with it, the music, or even the Bible. The point of Christianity is Christ. I mean no disrespect, but I think you missed the point in your answer entirely, making it a weak response. (Sorry if I misinterpreted this. )

Question... what made you come to disbelieve in Christianity?

Christianity isn't just about love. It's also about truth and God is Truth and Love (all good things originate from his goodness). Without him we're nothing. Saying Christianity is all about love isn't sharing the complete picture. Yes, we need to love those around us but we also should share God's Truth with them through careful correction.
Also, Jesus says, 'no-one comes to the Father (God) except through me (Jesus)'. So you have to have faith in Christ, not just God.

Also, Jesus says, 'no-one comes to the Father (God) except through me (Jesus)'. So you have to have faith in Christ, not just God.

Right. But without further knowledge that Christ exists, (say, someone on an island finds a booklet that talks of God, but not of Jesus. He comes to believe in God) wouldn't belief in God cut it? Surely you're not limiting God's mercy and almighty power?

Also, Jesus says, 'no-one comes to the Father (God) except through me (Jesus)'. So you have to have faith in Christ, not just God.

Right. But without further knowledge that Christ exists, (say, someone on an island finds a booklet that talks of God, but not of Jesus. He comes to believe in God) wouldn't belief in God cut it? Surely you're not limiting God's mercy and almighty power?

I certainly wouldn't want to. However, I also don't want to go beyond what the Scriptures say on this matter. The Scriptures say a) that God's works are evidence of His reality so that all are without excuse b) that we are to preach the Gospel and make disciples of all, and that this is a fairly urgent task. In many ways I'd like to think that God sometimes reveals Himself in this way, but the bottom line is that I have only Scripture to go on with regard to how God works in salvation, and what it says is that you must believe in Christ and His work alone.

TBG

I'm going to follow Dr. Elwin Ransom's lead and label the parts of my post, so it's easier to tell who I'm responding to.

Responses to FencerforJesus

Terresact, you and several others are missing a key component to the whole 'why did God allow original sin'? issue... we also have to understand we have a villain in this grand story... since Satan can't do anything to God directly (he already tried and failed miserably), his next best option was to destroy God's most prized creation: man.

And so God just let Satan destroy his most prized creation? What was he doing, sitting up in heaven watching football or something?

I think that God allowed it to happen because wanted Satan to "destroy" man. Satan wasn't even destroying man anyway, he was just corrupting man. Now man could choose either to stay corrupt or choose to turn back to God. God ultimately wanted man to have to choose him anyway, so Satan was really doing God a favor.

And whether you believe in Jesus as Lord and Savior or not, every one of us has been caught up in this war between God and Satan. Satan seeks to prevent you from getting any closer to God, and God prefers to work through man. He could easily do it on his own, but God chooses to use us to carry out the battle. Not as pawns or soldiers, while he sits up in heaven like a general on a hill, but acting directly in the battle along side us and through us.

So God likes to use humans as his puppets in his war against Satan. He sticks his hands inside us, and has us do battle with Satan. If we get snatched out of God's hand by Satan, we go to hell and God retracts his hand, unharmed. Why doesn't God just annihilate Satan by commanding it to be so, instead of making it this long drawn-out battle where the majority of the humans will inevitably be sacrificed?

It's a day-in, day-out battle. But one thing we learn from Job, one of the purposes God has for allowing us to sin and act on our own is for ultimately showing Satan 'I told you so'.

Really? I would hope that God's not using me and my fellow humans to prove a point with Satan, painting bulls-eyes on all of our stomachs and telling Satan to fire away at us, then watching some of us fall over dead and pointing to those of us that are still standing and say to Satan, sneering, "Ha! You didn't get them all!"

The first thing is why were Adam and Eve by that tree to begin with? We tend to imagine this small garden, but I'll bet that it was pretty huge. I'm thinking the size of a country big, not someone's back yard. They knew exactly where that tree was. And it wasn't necessarily like the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was right next to the Tree of Life, even though both were in the middle of the Garden. I don't picture the serpent going to Eve at just any tree. I picture him doing it right at the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. So why would Adam and Eve be hanging out there? Something to think about.

It seems that you are subtly implying that Adam and Eve were already harboring subconscious thoughts of rebellion against God, and that the serpent was just the one who tipped them over the edge. If that's the case, then Adam and Eve already had evil inside them, and the story of man's fall from grace falls apart.

Also, it is commonly accepted that Adam and Eve were immortal before they ate of the fruit from the tree of Knowledge. Now, I know the Garden of Eden is pretty big, but did God really expect Adam and Eve to not eat from the tree of knowledge for all of eternity? With creatures such as the serpent slithering through the garden that are smart enough to convince Adam and Eve to do so, it would be inevitable that God would be disobeyed eventually.

And there is a Proverb that says "All it takes for evil to triumph is for men to do nothing." Saw that happens there at the beginning. So before we start accusing God of doing things, let's be sure we are really getting the full picture.

Of course, looking at the full picture we would see that a more correct proverb would say "All it takes for evil to triumph is for God to do nothing". But we can't have that, can we? We must blame only ourselves for being tricked into disobeying God. We can't be reminded that God just stood there and didn't say a word while we were being tricked.

You MUST take 100% of it and live it as the True Word of God, or you must reject 100% of it and deem it a mere fictitious tale.

I think this is the wrong thing to say, because many books in the bible are of questionable historical accuracy and are perhaps only there to prove a point, such as Jesus' parables. For example, the book of Job...

From http://www.cresourcei.org/books/job.html
"Most scholars believe that the author of Job composed the dialogues to show the different theological positions used in Israel to explain suffering. The final dialogue between God and Job then reflects the way the author believes a personal encounter with God will move one past logical explanations of suffering."

I think that Christians who take the Bible literally word for word do a bit of a disservice to other Christians, because this leads them to make assumptions that the world is only 6,000 years old, etc.

Responses to FoodforThought

While I was reading this, I was not thinking, "But hey! You can't do that Iluvatar! What of all the sufferings of the peoples of Middle Earth!?" Perhaps this is just because I was far too engrossed in the story, but I think that it was because I was part of the Bigger Picture. I knew that things would end in the good, I knew that things would work towards Iluvatar's theme, no matter what hatred was sown into the song. I knew that even though there was evil in Iluvatar's song, it would be used for Iluvatar's glory, and for the betterment of all of his creation.

This is where I think the argument "it's all part of God's plan and will make the world better eventually" is fundamentally flawed. The evil won't be used for the benefit of all of creation, it will only be used for the benefit of those who reject it. Those who are captured by evil are just doomed.

Even if God eventually creates a new heaven and a new earth where everything is perfect and all of the universe showcases his glory, he will never have full control of all of time and space because he screwed part of his creation over. People right now are being brought up in extremist Muslim countries and trained to kill for Allah, and once they die with their corrupt minds, they are going to hell and nothing can be changed. They have forever put a stain on the fabric of God's spacetime because, as far as I know, God does not undo the past.

Could Iluvatar have silenced Melkor in the singing of the Music? He most certainly could have. And yet, if he didn't, we would have lost all of the beauty that would spring forth from this evil because of Iluvatar's love and benevolence, which would not become clear to the peoples of Middle Earth for a while.

If we apply this to Christianity, such a worldview would be incredibly selfish. Essentially, a Christian is saying that they don't mind that part of the world has to suffer in hell so that they can go to experience the beauty of heaven.

Bilbo and his adventures would have never come forth, Frodo and the War of the Ring would have never happened. Great adventure and merriment could never have been held so dear to their hearts. The world of Middle Earth would have lost its splendor and beauty. We can look at this world so fondly because we have the Bigger Picture.

Yes, Bilbo and Frodo can look back at their great adventure and merriment, but what about the orcs? It is apparently their fault that they were born orcs and had to fight for Sauron until they were eventually killed in epic battles.

Responses to Narnia_Fan12

and that's a thing I found interesting- and debatable, for that matter- because if you believe in God the Father (without knowledge of Jesus, for whatever reason that may be) then you're also believing in Jesus- as God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one, right?

I would say no, because if that's the case, then Jews believe that Jesus is God - which they don't. Otherwise, someone who did believe in God but didn't believe in Jesus because they didn't know about him wouldn't be believing in God, because they wouldn't be believing in Jesus and Jesus = God.

Although, I'd prefer to live in a perfect world than have to "advance" the world into perfection.

I find this quote very interesting because it looks like you're saying that you would prefer to live in a world of only good and not a world of some good and some evil. But many Christians in this topic have said in the last page or so that you cannot see good without seeing evil. Could you elaborate further on this preference of yours?

Nobody "commands" you to do good works for the love of God- but to store up treasures in heaven.

Wait, what the heck? As a Christian, you're arguing that we're not doing good works out of the love of God, but so that God will fix us up a nice place when we get to heaven?

You went on to quote the famous passage in James that Martin Luther wanted thrown out of the bible, and that every Catholic holds dear to their hearts when they debate a protestant. Although this passage backs up your argument on the value of good works, it says nothing about storing up treasures in heaven. Now I'd like to quote another passage that does talk about that.

Matthew 6:2-5
So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

The passage makes it pretty clear that if you do your good works in secret and don't boast about them, you'll get your reward in heaven, not on earth. Now my question is this - wouldn't heaven be a bit unfair if not everybody was treated equally? Some would be rewarded in heaven with who knows what because of all the good works they had performed in secret while on earth, and some would just barely scrape by means of deathbed conversion and have no special prizes waiting for them in heaven. By saying that we are storing up treasures in heaven, you have reduced life to a game in which the more brownie points with God you rack up, the better your heavenly experience will be.

To live Christianity as a religion IS to believe in it, not the social communities that come with it, the music, or even the Bible. The point of Christianity is Christ. I mean no disrespect, but I think you missed the point in your answer entirely, making it a weak response.

I think what she's saying is that she likes the social benefits of Christianity, even if she doesn't believe God exists. You should take that as a compliment, because not many atheists/agnostics will say that!

It seems that you are subtly implying that Adam and Eve were already harboring subconscious thoughts of rebellion against God, and that the serpent was just the one who tipped them over the edge. If that's the case, then Adam and Eve already had evil inside them, and the story of man's fall from grace falls apart.

Man's fall from grace didn't happen when Eve actually took a bite out of the fruit. It hapenned when she decided to do it.

God explicitly told them not to eat of the fruit. And so they knew it would be a wrong thing to do. They knew they would be disobeying God if they ate it. Then Satan tempted them, and Eve was presented with a choice: To sin, or not to sin. And she chose sin. She chose to be corrupt.

Sin was available to us from the beginning. It just wasn't inside of us until Eve let it in, which she decided to do when she was tempted for the first time.

~Riella

Sin was available to us from the beginning. It just wasn't inside of us until Eve let it in, which she decided to do when she was tempted for the first time.

But wasn't Eve's choice to eat from the Tree evil in itself? She would have already had to have evil inside of her to even consider doing something evil.

If one argues against this and says that without the serpent tempting her, she would have never chosen to eat from the tree, then all of the blame shifts from Eve to the serpent, since without the serpent, Eve would have never disobeyed God.

But wasn't Eve's choice to eat from the Tree evil in itself? She would have already had to have evil inside of her to even consider doing something evil.

Eve "became evil" when she decided to be evil. And this hapenned in the very part you said -- when she made her choice. You don't have to be evil beforehand in order to become evil. So, first she is not evil. Then, she's given the opportunity to become evil, and she takes it.

~Riella

So are we establishing that eating from the Tree of Knowledge of evil was not what made Eve evil, and that Eve instantly gained all knowledge of good and evil when she made the mere choice to decide to eat?

^^ I don't know if she gained all knowledge of it. That probably came after she ate it. But what I'm saying is, she did at least know this particular thing was something she was not supposed to do (because God specificly told her beforehand), and it's when evil first started to take root inside of her.

~Riella

I will try and go back and answer the other points later. Like I said, I don't have a lot of time during the week. However I wanted to quickly address this.

Narnia_Fan12 wrote:
Question... what made you come to disbelieve in Christianity?

I just love this question. Although it will be hard for me to give a concise answer I will try. I wrote it all out once and it was about 20 pages long, but I'm not going to post all of that! I will say that it was a process. It did not happen overnight. I was not a Christian one day and an agnostic the next (although I don't like using that word to describe myself!!!!). It was really a journey of finding myself and discovering who I am and what I truly believe. There is not just one reason why I could not believe in Christianity anymore. There were multiple reasons and endless factors. Believe it or not, giving up Christianity was incredibly difficult for me. But when it finally came together and I realized that I couldn't do it anymore, I felt peace with myself for the first time. It felt like I was ending a long and bad relationship and moving on, becoming single, and seeing what that would bring. It was a great feeling. Christianity to me was small, constraining, and just close-minded. I am not small, constrained, or close minded. I would say for me, it was like growing up and moving on with my life. Moving towards new and better things--open doors, new possibilities, and new experiences that Christianity did not offer me. Not only that, but I had given credit to God for helping me through difficult times, but I came to realize it was never God who helped me--I had helped myself!

We can't all stay in Narnia forever.
I was just getting too old.