Absolute Truth

[MorningGlory]

Yes, exactly. It IS their form of government that's the problem. Their government is based on atheism, i.e. absence of a belief in God.

I am utterly baffled by the pointlessness of this argument. Even if you substantiate your assertions, you have proved nothing.

One: you have failed to show that the degree to which a country "thrives" (whatever that means) is connected in any way with the extent to which one religion or another is predominant.

Two: take the popularity of a belief, or the extent to which it is connected to a particular nation, or even the extent to which believers "thrive". These things have no bearing whatsoever on the truth of those beliefs. In other words, even if you could prove that more Christians thrive than atheists, you couldn't logically claim that therefore Christians are right and atheists are wrong.

well said.

Glory, how is communism based on atheism? Does this mean that Democracy is based on Christianity?

The founding father of Communism was Karl Marx, an atheist. And, no, democracy isn't based on Christianity but IS greatly improved by it.

[Joshua-777]

Glory2000

And I CAN logically claim that Christians are right and atheists are wrong. The Bible tells us that those who do not believe are going to hell. That's about as wrong as you can get, my friend.

Can't you see the circularity?

The bible is true and it says that atheists are wrong.

If atheists are wrong, then Christians are right.

If Christians are right the bible is right.

The bible is right and it says atheists are wrong.

etc.

Anyway, your original point was "Those "other sources" always lead to falsehood. Just look at countries where Christian influence is very small; you cannot say that they are thriving." But the "other sources" are, for atheists, predominantly science. Science doesn't always lead to falsehood.

I would have to say we all fall into circularity, the only difference is how big is our circle.

I believe the bible is true, I believe what it says, the bible says, I AM WRONG, I am a sinner, we all fall short of the glory of God and we all sin, if I am wrong then how can I be made right? Jesus was given to this world as a sacrifice for my sins, because I am wrong, and because I am a sinner. The Wages of sin is death, one paid the price, I am free from the Wage of sin. I do not believe that Christians are right, for I am not right, I believe we are made right through the blood of Jesus, I do know Jesus personally, he is not some theory I grew up with, he came to me when I didnt know him, and took me in, called me his own. So God is real, the bible is true, I am wrong, but I am made right in God, and I grow in my personal relationship with God through the bible.

I just had to make my circle bigger, lol sorry.

alright I don't believe science always leads to falsehood, but I do believe that with anything, if you set the course away from the path of truth, your going to find falsehood.

[Joshua-777]

I would have to say we all fall into circularity, the only difference is how big is our circle.

Where is the circular reasoning in atheism?

1. There have been thousands of religions and world views since humans started thinking about stuff.

2. Many religions have doctrines and scriptures which conflict with each other. They're not all true.

3. I am not personally convinced that the Bible's claims about God and Jesus are true.

I'm not seeing the circle here.

Where is the circular reasoning in atheism? read your posts. I do happen to agree with what secondeve is saying in this thread. I do believe all has circular logic, we all rely on what we know, it comes around full circle, when we learn something new, our circle gets bigger.

ya know do not see where you are going with your points against circular logic, 1. yes there have been thousands of religions, many have fallen, now from a christian perspective, say I wanted to lie to you about what color my shirt is, how many colors could I tell you that are a lie? infinate, so now you know satans logic, if there is a God, and there is a satan, then satan would do exactly what he's doing/ Satan doesn't want anyone to see the truth in God, so his tactic, through a million false truths to decept. Now picturing religion, and relationship can be hard for someone who doesn't know, or has never had a personal relationship with the creator. He corrects me.

I know your not convinced, I wasn't eather, until the Lord opened my heart to know him.

[Joshua-777]

I know your not convinced, I wasn't eather, until the Lord opened my heart to know him.

Circular reasoning isn't that hard to spot. And I try to identify it and get rid of it wherever possible in my own thinking at least. Where have you seen circular reasoning in my posts?

I will not deny that I hold a few core views a priori, but I don't see this as being the same as circular reasoning.

I don't mean to pick a fight. I understood you to claim that everyone uses circular reasoning to an extent; my goal was to offer myself as a counterexample.

What I meant about circular reasoning may not be in the same way others put it, or it is defined, my personal beliefe is that we revolve around what we know, Like you say your few core views, your knowledge will circle around those core views, you learn more and add more to the circle. If I'm not making any sence I'm tired, lol sorry. And I apologize for saying look at your posts for an example. What I meant is that you always circle back to your few core points, as everyone.

[MorningGlory]

I am utterly baffled by the pointlessness of this argument. Even if you substantiate your assertions, you have proved nothing.

One: you have failed to show that the degree to which a country "thrives" (whatever that means) is connected in any way with the extent to which one religion or another is predominant.

Two: take the popularity of a belief, or the extent to which it is connected to a particular nation, or even the extent to which believers "thrive". These things have no bearing whatsoever on the truth of those beliefs. In other words, even if you could prove that more Christians thrive than atheists, you couldn't logically claim that therefore Christians are right and atheists are wrong.

I see your point, spblat. Now look at mine; no communist nation has thrived, at least not for long. Communist governments are Godless governments.

I looked at your point. And that is why I made my point. You do not seem to see my point, because you continue to make invalid arguments. Let's break it down:

1. Communist governments are godless governments (debatable, but I'll let you have this one)

2. No communist nation has thrived, at least for long (also debatable, but I'm feeling charitable, so I'll spot you this one too)

3. Therefore, atheists are wrong when they decide not to accept that there is a God and also Jesus was His son sent to Earth to forgive us for our sins and everything in the Bible is true except for a few bits in Exodus 23 and here and there where we find it to be outdated but the rest of it is God's infallible word and so you're wrong.

Is a logical path available from 2 to 3? Because that's what I meant when I complained about the "pointless of this argument."

Or did I miss an unspoken premise (or was it spoken and I missed it)? Are you saying that godless nations fail to thrive because God frowns on them and prevents them from succeeding? Let's try that one out.

1. God only bestows His grace upon nations populated by His followers.

2. Communist governments are godless governments.

3. No communist nation has thrived, at least for long.

4. Therefore, God exists, because we see that He withholds his grace from the godless communists.

This one's pretty messy too. Would you like to tidy it up so we at least know what we're arguing?

Sure, I'll tidy it up for you. I also hate messy rhetoric. God blesses those who honor Him; no one who denies Him will escape His judgement and eternity in hell; and, yes, Communism was founded on atheism, i.e. Karl Marx.

[Guest]

Absolute Truth - Accept No Substitute! - There Is No Other!

Jesus The Christ

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

John 14:6

The Creator

Jesus The Christ

"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created."

Revelation 4:11

and EVERY post which you use circular logic to ignore provide the necessary evidence of a testable hypothesis which has led to a confirmed theory of evolution

Testable Hypothesis~

Ah!

Taste

O taste and see that the LORD is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.

Psalms 34:8

Keep trying SDSJap. It appears that you are up against someone who believes that all that is required to defend an idea is to relentlessly attack and discredit competing ideas. Then when the dust has settled I assume the final step will be to invoke Sherlock Holmes.

Needless to say, I find this technique somewhat counterproductive.

Invoke Truth~

Ah!

Jesus The Christ

But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head saying, He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.

Psalms 22:6-8

No Apes In This Family - Man The Created - Man The Fallen - Man The Redeemed

Man Soon To Be The Resurrected!

Hallelujah!

Absolute Truth

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;"

Romans 3:23

"They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

Psalms 14:3

"But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death."

Proverbs 8:36

Absolute Truth

"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool."

Isaiah 1:18

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

Ephesians 2:8-9

Absolute Truth

"That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."

Romans 10:9

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

John 3:16

Be Blessed

The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:

The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:

The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.

And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them.

Numbers 6:24-27

Love, Joe

[MorningGlory]

That is tidy indeed. You have made two points.

Sure, I'll tidy it up for you. I also hate messy rhetoric. God blesses those who honor Him; no one who denies Him will escape His judgement and eternity in hell;

You have every right to make this claim, though it is wasted on me. Since I do not share your belief in God, I am unmoved by the threats you claim He makes.

and, yes, Communism was founded on atheism, i.e. Karl Marx.

I am so bored by this argument. What does the oft-trumpeted, ill-demonstrated relationship between Marx, atheism and communism have to do with truth, the subject of this thread?

And your rebuttal is wasted on ME; you will only be unmoved until you stand before Him. I pray that you come to the truth before that day. While you may be 'bored' with the Marx/Atheism/Communism thing, that is the response to someone's statement about thriving countries. The point is that atheistic countries do not tend to be prosperous. And, yes, some Christian countries aren't either. You atheists often crow about 'absolute truth' but, being atheists, you wouldn't recognize it if it jumped up and bit you. Obviously.

[MorningGlory]

just as evolutionism is a religion.

Can you change that broken record and try something new and intellectually challenging for a change? The act is tiring, but you're free to prove your claim (we all know that won't happen anytime soon). I mean, com'on, youhave to search long and far to find a definition of religion that doesn't have "belief in super natural power" in it, which is mutually exclusive with science. Really. Please try harder to bait people.

I often wonder how many of you nonbelievers that spout 'science' 24/7 really have a scientific background? No offense intended; I'm only curious. And, it bears mentioning, that the slavish devotion to science IS a form of religion.

[apothanein kerdos]

Of the many types of jobs I have worked in my short life, one of them is concrete construction. This type of job - working with concrete and laying foundations for buildings - is so bad that it actually ended up on the show "Dirty Jobs"...twice. The reason it is so grueling is that you have to dig into the earth, make sure the concrete solidifies correctly, make sure no cracks appear, etc. The reason is the slightest mistake will compromise the entire building that is to go upon it, and if that were to occur the entire building would collapse. We once had to redo an entire project because we had poured the concrete wrong, to the point it developed a hairline crack. The point is, the building had to be built on a solid foundation, so solid it was almost perfect, or else the building ran the risk of collapsing.

Everyone has a worldview, a way in which they view the world. In fact, people who claim to have no worldview actually hold a worldview by denying they exist. We all have an opinion or a belief on how we came here, how we know things, how we experience the world, even down to what we should eat. Every worldview, however, has a foundation on what it views as truth.

Truth, itself, can be broken down into two major fields of philosophy; epistemology and metaphysics. When someone makes a truth claim they usually appeal to how they can know it is true (epistemology) and there that knowledge/belief/truth came from (metaphysics). In this sense, every philosophy believes in universal truth, even if they seek to deny it. By seeking to deny universal truth, they are saying that no truth can apply in all situations, yet this truth (that no truth applies) applies to all situations.

With this realization, as the original post seems to be indicating, we must realize that we are all seeking this truth. Thus, all truths are competing against each other. Atheists might think they have this market cornered, but that simply is not true. As we saw in this thread, they have said "Naturalism is testable, God is not, therefore we have the accurate claim to truth." This, however, is a logical error that causes the argument to go in circles. Naturalism's truth relies on itself. Before we can see this, we must understand how the epistemological view of universal truth works.

Some epistemologists have what is called the "upper story" and the "lower story." The upper story are the things we enjoy, such as types of art, while the lower story is for facts, such as the sun rotates around the earth. Different worldviews place different things within each story, or gets rid of them all together. A naturalistic worldivew places science - what can be observed by the senses - into the lower story (the factual story). Anything supernatural, or that which cannot be proven by the senses, is subsequently placed in the upper story (subjective story). Therefore, all truth claims must relate back to the lower story instead of the upper story. This explains why it is vital for naturalists to show how emotions, morality, and the like evolved - if they fail to show that these truly belong in the lower story, then emotions and morality become completely subjective. Two people's preference for murder would become no different than their preference for ice cream.

Getting back to the point, many atheists trump the debate before it occurs. They state their worldview can be proven by the senses whereas God cannot, therefore they automatically win. However, this is completely circular. Observe:

Point A: Naturalism teaches that the only way to know something really exists is through our senses

Point B: The ideas of naturalism (blind evolution) can be tested, God cannot, therefore naturalism is true

In other words, naturalism is true because it can be tested, and the only way to know truth is through rationalism. It becomes a circle, or a game of Pong that is ad infinitum.

Therefore, an atheist must prove that we can only know something through the senses before he can declare he has gained the edge in the debate. This, of course, will ultimately cause him problems as some things - such as love, emotions, and morality - cannot be explained via naturalism.

[Gerioke]

Atheist says there's no God-> God chooses not to reveal Himself to those who deny Him-> Atheist says there is no God because God has not revealed Himself to atheist-> God does not reveal himself to those who deny Him.

Look familiar?