how do you reconcile this:
Originally Posted by Wormwood
Well I challenge you to post anything that you think can not be refuted, and I will show you an agnostic who can refute it.
Originally Posted by Wormwood
True, but an inevitable truth is undeniable. If you have a truly brilliant argument, it will be saturated with undeniable truth.
The first was in response to a challenge that no one could refute a certain logic. I stand by my claim that no such “logic” concerning God exists.
The second statement was pointing out that no such “brilliant” argument has yet been presented. I see the connection you are trying to force between these two statements, but they actually both agree.
I was trying to stop the thread starter from using terrible logic to try and deal with their atheist friend.
This probably is not much help but isn’t proof sort of relative? Don’t you have to have faith in someone else’s opinion or observation sometimes?
You “know” the world is round, right? But do you really “know”? Aren’t you accepting someones elses “truth”. Unless you have been in outer space and witnessed it with your own eyes you must still have faith in another persons statement that it is indeed round?
This is a good argument. The main difference here is that people that are alive now are in space. They can see the round earth. Mathematically the earth is round. And if you drink (7up i think) you could win a trip to space and see for yourself.
You can use the same argument for the change in the 12 Apostles after Pentecost. And if your friend is “listening” to you then his/her argument about dying for a belief is not valid. Point out to him/her the differences in the Apostles before and after.
I take it you are refering to the apostles being willing to die for christ after his death.(?) If so, good because no one else would die for their religion…well except the muslims…and those buddhist monks during vietnam…and unrepentant pagans…well you get the point.
**“You are just speculating, you have no proof that God is a trinity, that God is who or what the Catholic Church says he is or even that God actually aproves of what Catholicism says about it. You simply have no proof at all and anything you say about it is pure speculationg. Anyone can do that, the pagans did it, the muslim did it, the romans, etc…everyone. Yet none of them have any proof on support of their particular god.”
So, how can I deal with this?
The real trick here is figuring out what his/your motivation is. If he is just trying to shake your faith, or convert you, then he is in an unreachable place right now, because he doesn’t even want an answer to his questions. If he truly wants to know more about spirituality, but is simply skeptical, “logic” in the traditional sense won’t work either. As I said before, if he wants writings and scriptures refer him to other ancient texts from other cultures(babylonians, summerians, assyrians ). These cultures beliefs sync up with some of the more fantastic stories from OT. So that is comparative data, but the true answer is…that you don’t KNOW. You have faith, and that faith makes you feel complete and secure. His natural response will be something to the effect of " you are using religion as escapism, or religion is something people use to make themselves feel better"…something that will downplay the spiritual fulfillment. The correct response to this is that all people are innately spiritual, and meeting your spiritual needs makes you happy. This spiritual Joy is all the proof you need that you are at least on the right track (and happy people live longer).
If he rufutes that all people are innately spiritual, just remind him that eventhough he doesn’t believe in God, he is constantly in discussion of Him. You have to appeal to the part of the atheist that doubts (it is usually a big part), and make him doubt his own judgement and fulfillment…make him admit that he is at least agnostic, and then you have your foot in the door. Good luck.**