That makes you a better muslim than me, mate. Harder to be one as a newcomer than someone who was brought up to be. We took it just too easy, and perhaps too lightly at times. But the rewards must be accordingly, for God is Just. God bless you and your mother. Hoping to be on the side of the ones with the light in their faces with you all when that day comes. Hailing all the way from Istanbul, assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah.
With the name of God, Anonymous that's hard to say. I think that your argument is that mathematics should be eliminated from the world because of all the evil the suffering that mathematics has brought human kind. (Nuclear weapons, fighter jets, tanks, calibration on weaponry,advancement in medicine that keeps nature from taking it's course and keep humanities numbers low by inventing vacinations etc.
So your argument is basically that we should eliminate mathematics and I am not sure that this is a good suggestion from you.
GV19 - I just noticed this older post from March, a few days ago (July 17, 2010; and now have read it.)
the first issue that caused you to question Christianity was when an African American asked you what color Jesus was; and you wrongly answered that he was "white like me".
That was your first fatal flaw. Jesus was not Caucasian or white or European!
He was a middle-eastern Jew. Probably Tan - Brown skinned; Black or dark hair, etc.
I am sorry that the churches you grew up did not teach you well and taught you this bad tradition (along with the dumb Hollywood movies and dumb pictures of Jesus that portray Him as white or blond or blue eyes, etc.
You were obviously very nominal and were not discipled / taught to be a disciple of Jesus (Matthew 28:18-20; Ephesians 4:20-24) very well in the Christian faith.
With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
Well, those were my reasons Ken and I said I was nominal. I don't try and pretend that I was a 'mover' and a 'shaker' among Christians. However, I'm happy with the decision that the creator has made for me. That the God of Abraham has willed for me to me among the Muslims. Al hamdulillah!
By the way Ken I have noticed something quite odd for you as a Calvinist. You seem to abandon presupposition apologetics in favour of evidential approaches. Have you not noticed this?
GV19 wrote: By the way Ken I have noticed something quite odd for you as a Calvinist. You seem to abandon presupposition apologetics in favour of evidential approaches. Have you not noticed this?
No; Calvinism and Presuppositional Apologetic approach does not deny good use of good evidence.
You would have to understand the two positions more thoroughly; and you would have to define exactly how I have violated anything by using evidence.
Dr. White does a good job of using historical and Biblical evidence in his debates, and yet he is a presuppositionalist in his apologetic approach.
They are not mutually exclusive to each other.
But, I agree with Dr. White, that William Lane Craig's approach is weak when he says something like "the preponderance of evidence points to the possibility that there is a creator or that Christ rose from the dead."
Rather, "the evidence point to the truth that is a creator God, who is the God of the Bible and that Christ really did rise in history and time/space; that He lived and was crucified, etc."
Do you see the difference ?
One says "it is possible; or maybe" (Evidentialist approach)
The other says
"the evidence confirms what is already true; God and the Bible; the evidence confirms the truth of God and His word; it is true." Presuppositional
With the name of God, Peace be unto you. Yes I see the difference one is a champion of Christianity (William Lane Craig) the other is an inconsistent egomaniac (James White).
Why is White inconsistent. He constantly tells people to lay aside their presuppositions but he is not willing to do the same.
when you say 'the evidence confirms what is already true; God and the Bible.' this alone makes me rethink twice about having any interaction with you Ken.
Why? It is not possible for me to disprove your position not because I do not have very excellent arguments but because you presuppose the facts. You posit ideas before the conclusion is reached.
William Lane Craig is living in the real world where he deals with Atheist and Agnostics and people undecided.
Your view fits in well with the idea that man is absolutely helpless and so therefore who is he to question the Bible?
William Lane Craig comes from a position that allows that God is allowing for intellectual exploration of the facts.
When William Lane Craig debates it's about facts and where the evidence leads.
James White missed this fact and Shabir Ally was trying to get him to see this in their encounter in London.
Shabir Ally was trying to tell James that it is his (Shabir's presuppositions) as a Muslim that allows him to believe in Jesus or the supra-natural at all.
If he or (we) let this aside what do we have? 0.00
I would be without a belief in a creator, revealed revelation or anything. However, a flaw that Shabir Ally made was to assume Atheism just because someone was to abandon the Qur'an.
Though this may be true in his case, my view is that we would be at 0.00 meaning Agnostic. We would be able to neither confirm or deny. We would be an empty cup.
For me to take on a theist or an anti-theist position is to automatically posit God or to posit no God.
That is not neutral.
Notice that in that debate James White struggled and wiggled around a bit when Shabir was questioning him about how he came to his views about the Bagh Avita, and the book of Mormon.
That makes you a better muslim than me, mate. Harder to be one as a newcomer than someone who was brought up to be. We took it just too easy, and perhaps too lightly at times. But the rewards must be accordingly, for God is Just. God bless you and your mother. Hoping to be on the side of the ones with the light in their faces with you all when that day comes. Hailing all the way from Istanbul, assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah.
ReplyDeleteK Ozturk
Well, Ok ! You write a lot of problems here.
ReplyDeleteBut, I think the problem is that the Islam and Christianity should be eliminated from this world.
Islam and Christianty has and is bringing many suffer to human kind.
With the name of God, Anonymous that's hard to say. I think that your argument is that mathematics should be eliminated from the world because of all the evil the suffering that mathematics has brought human kind. (Nuclear weapons, fighter jets, tanks, calibration on weaponry,advancement in medicine that keeps nature from taking it's course and keep humanities numbers low by inventing vacinations etc.
ReplyDeleteSo your argument is basically that we should eliminate mathematics and I am not sure that this is a good suggestion from you.
GV19 -
ReplyDeleteI just noticed this older post from March, a few days ago (July 17, 2010; and now have read it.)
the first issue that caused you to question Christianity was when an African American asked you what color Jesus was; and you wrongly answered that he was "white like me".
That was your first fatal flaw. Jesus was not Caucasian or white or European!
He was a middle-eastern Jew. Probably Tan - Brown skinned; Black or dark hair, etc.
see the interesting article and picture below.
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2010/07/09/what-did-jesus-look-like/
I am sorry that the churches you grew up did not teach you well and taught you this bad tradition (along with the dumb Hollywood movies and dumb pictures of Jesus that portray Him as white or blond or blue eyes, etc.
You were obviously very nominal and were not discipled / taught to be a disciple of Jesus (Matthew 28:18-20; Ephesians 4:20-24) very well in the Christian faith.
With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
ReplyDeleteWell, those were my reasons Ken and I said I was nominal. I don't try and pretend that I was a 'mover' and a 'shaker' among Christians. However, I'm happy with the decision that the creator has made for me. That the God of Abraham has willed for me to me among the Muslims. Al hamdulillah!
By the way Ken I have noticed something quite odd for you as a Calvinist. You seem to abandon presupposition apologetics in favour of evidential approaches. Have you not noticed this?
GV19 wrote:
ReplyDeleteBy the way Ken I have noticed something quite odd for you as a Calvinist. You seem to abandon presupposition apologetics in favour of evidential approaches. Have you not noticed this?
No; Calvinism and Presuppositional Apologetic approach does not deny good use of good evidence.
You would have to understand the two positions more thoroughly; and you would have to define exactly how I have violated anything by using evidence.
Dr. White does a good job of using historical and Biblical evidence in his debates, and yet he is a presuppositionalist in his apologetic approach.
They are not mutually exclusive to each other.
But, I agree with Dr. White, that William Lane Craig's approach is weak when he says something like "the preponderance of evidence points to the possibility that there is a creator or that Christ rose from the dead."
Rather,
"the evidence point to the truth that is a creator God, who is the God of the Bible and that Christ really did rise in history and time/space; that He lived and was crucified, etc."
Do you see the difference ?
One says "it is possible; or maybe" (Evidentialist approach)
The other says
"the evidence confirms what is already true; God and the Bible; the evidence confirms the truth of God and His word; it is true." Presuppositional
With the name of God, Peace be unto you. Yes I see the difference one is a champion of Christianity (William Lane Craig) the other is an inconsistent egomaniac (James White).
ReplyDeleteWhy is White inconsistent. He constantly tells people to lay aside their presuppositions but he is not willing to do the same.
when you say 'the evidence confirms what is already true; God and the Bible.' this alone makes me rethink twice about having any interaction with you Ken.
Why? It is not possible for me to disprove your position not because I do not have very excellent arguments but because you presuppose the facts. You posit ideas before the conclusion is reached.
William Lane Craig is living in the real world where he deals with Atheist and Agnostics and people undecided.
Your view fits in well with the idea that man is absolutely helpless and so therefore who is he to question the Bible?
William Lane Craig comes from a position that allows that God is allowing for intellectual exploration of the facts.
When William Lane Craig debates it's about facts and where the evidence leads.
When Calvinist debate it's a dog and pony show.
James White missed this fact and Shabir Ally was trying to get him to see this in their encounter in London.
ReplyDeleteShabir Ally was trying to tell James that it is his (Shabir's presuppositions) as a Muslim that allows him to believe in Jesus or the supra-natural at all.
If he or (we) let this aside what do we have? 0.00
I would be without a belief in a creator, revealed revelation or anything. However, a flaw that Shabir Ally made was to assume Atheism just because someone was to abandon the Qur'an.
Though this may be true in his case, my view is that we would be at 0.00 meaning Agnostic. We would be able to neither confirm or deny. We would be an empty cup.
For me to take on a theist or an anti-theist position is to automatically posit God or to posit no God.
That is not neutral.
Notice that in that debate James White struggled and wiggled around a bit when Shabir was questioning him about how he came to his views about the Bagh Avita, and the book of Mormon.
What happened to all those people who lived and died and never heard that Christ Jesus was their lord and savior?
ReplyDeleteSince you asked...
They still die... Responding to Lvka
ReplyDelete