Is The World Getting Better Or Worse?

Well, I suppose that I could lump a bunch of you together and label you evidentialists*! Were you the new Sheriff, you would outlaw belief of any kind not grounded in epistemology. Thankfully, we never gave you a gun, though jar has a few you could borrow. *Evidentialism is a thesis in epistemology which states that one is justified to believe something if and only if that person has evidence which supports his or her belief. Evidentialism is, therefore, a thesis about which beliefs are justified and which are not.

What I've read about Martin Luther's view of Jews is that he was at first tolerant of them and sympathetic towards them, but then when it became clear to him that he had no chance of converting them to Christianity (not to any form of Christianity, but much more painfully for him not to his form) he then became virulently anti-Semitic.In our travels in Germany, we visited Bacharach, a beautiful German town on the Rhein that I would recommend to everybody -- yes, that is the same as Burt Bacharach's name, but it's actually pronounced very differently such that on the train when I saw it and heard the voice say it there was a momentary disconnect. Wandering along the streets and alleys of Bacharach was the very first time I had ever encountered Stolpersteine, "stumbling stones", cobblestone replacements which document what Jewish family had lived here, when they were arrested, and when and where they either died or were murdered. Some homes had that kind of history painted into their faades. In other municipalities, I saw memorials to local concentration camps. All of that spoke to me of attempts to atone for past sins, of accepting responsibility.The reason I brought up Bacharach is because of what happened in 1287 in which the disappearance of a 16-year-old Werner led to accusations against the Jewish community of having killed him to obtain blood for their Passover observances. Those accusations led to a vicious pogram that wiped out Jewish communities in the Middle and Lower Rhine and Moselle regions. In folk Christianity arose the cult of Werner, which was only stricken from the Bishopric of Trier calendar in 1963. When I transferred from community college to California State College, Fullerton (later elevated to a California State University before my graduation) one of my first classes was in Rabbinic Literature, a class which was taught by one Rabbi Kalir. He mentioned that tradition of Christian blood libel and that it's the reason for the tradition of opening the door during the Passover Seder for the Prophet Elijah (for whom an empty setting is always set). So that every Jewish family can freely show the Gentiles exactly what they are doing.

No one wants to outlaw belief. What we do want is for people to understand that belief is not fact or reality and that evidence should trump belief.When someone says that the God in Genesis 2&3 must not have been fearful or that the serpent lied and the God in the story told the truth they are placing belief above the actual evidence. They are in fact misrepresenting the Bible. It's fine for them to say that they do not believe the Bible says what it actually says as long as they also deny that they believe the Bible is inerrant or "God Breathed" or any other such nonsense. When they start making mutually exclusive belief statements folks should understand they are creating God in their own image.

I dont trust you. You will simply defend why the apologists dont...cant...or wont accept your answer by saying that they are liars. Frankly i reject this explanation as unrealistic. It plays well in a secular humanist and largely atheist forum but it is wrong. I have a strong belief based on experience that God is real...very real...apart from simply a character which must be understood in context of what the book says and by inference must mean. Im not sure why your logic appears sound. I have no evidence that your argument is wrong but i feel very strongly that it is. Why you never became a believer apart from going through the rituals of your club is and was your choice. In my opinion it is why God never revealed Himself to you and remains...for you...as a character not only in the Bible but in many religions. I believe that you quite simply missed the boat.That being said I begrudgingly will agree with the latter part of your statement. I cant magically invoke a supernatural bible in a fair way in our argument. Edited by Thugpreacha, : Clarification

Good. You should not just trust someone, particularly someone who tells you what you want to hear. When have I simply asserted folk are lying without providing the direct evidence that that is what they are in reality doing?The Apologist don't accept what the Bible actually says for their own reasons. I cannot say what those reasons are but I can point to what is actually written in the Bible and compare that to what they claim. But you can test my argument and should test my argument Phat. What does the evidence show; does it support or refute my argument? I became a believer based on the influence of my environment. I remain a believer based on choice. I grew up in a Christian household, was educated in a Christian school and have been immersed in Christian culture all my life. Yet you have never been able to provide any evidence that there is some boat that I missed.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

Basically it is the difference between knowing God and knowing about various characters in books known as God, in so many differing names.
*sighs*
Yes, I know you will ask me to provide some sort of evidence that I *know* God. He has no YouTube. He appears in no videos. He never wrote anything that we know of, although the apologists claim that He inspired many writers. Though we could determine that an inner voice is a common human trait, we could never provide a definite source for that voice. To me, its not even so much as an audible voice...its an impression in conjunction with my prayers. This inner impression does not usually tell me what I may want to hear confirmed, though it is sort of like an internal conscience and always pushes me towards what I *should* do rather than what I may want to do in a carnal or selfish way. At times I have even questioned this impression, for I sometimes get the impression to do something the opposite of what I planned to do.Now...you will likely argue that everyone has such an inner conscience and not "just" believers. As I study people, I realize that many who profess to be believers are less rational and sane than the atheists and secular humanists that I know. A few years ago, I would have defended this observation by quoting some scripture out of context...such as "We are a peculiar people...a chosen generation...etc etc. The reason I don't trust you and ringo...particularly him..is because he is not a believer. Thinking this through, I realize that God restrained the madness of a "prophet" by speaking through a donkey, so I suppose that He theoretically could use non believers and evidentialists over staunch and untested believers.The bottom line is that I believe that God exists, that His character is displayed through the man Christ Jesus, and that Jesus *lives* today.Again, being an evidentialist, you will ask me where such evidence is.You will ask for the umpteenth time how I know or could possibly know such a thing. Just because they don't interpret the meaning of the scripture as you do does not mean that they are lying. Belief is, in my opinion, not based on evidence. Otherwise either everyone would believe or no one would believe...if objectifiable evidence were the standard. And even as I struggle to form words to defend my argument I can see the inner human tendency to make up a defense. But lets look at a synopsis of their basic argument...or at least one of them I have heard:

1 Corinthians 2:13-15: writes:

​

13And this is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom, but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. For they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Yes, they will use scripture to defend the apologetic premise of scripture. That's a basic counter-argument. But if we cant use the Bible as an anchor, we have nothing...except a belief no better than those who advocate Loki, or the Spaghetti Monster, or Allah Most Merciful, or rabbit, or any of the other mythos developed by humans.

​

And that is, in my opinion, your essential teaching. that it was all stories created by man, told round the campfires, and kept alive through human ignorance at worst and mythos at best.

​

That is the explanation that I do not trust. Its not so much you, for you have taken time to talk to me for many years, and I see no evil in you apart from what all humans share.

​

We need a thread to defend and/or expose the Apologists. I have been listening to some whom I consider rather good. And I don't expect anyone around here to agree with my conclusions. Odd that.

---

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

​

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

​

As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

I don't interpret meaning, I report fact; I simply believe that the story says what is actually written.It is not an interpretation that the serpent told the truth and the God lied; it is exactly what is written.The issue is that what is actually written conflicts with the meaning someone wants; the Bible is not the Bible they want and so they "interpret" what it must "mean". Screw explanations; what is actually written?

Be honest. You require evidence in every area except your God. The Sheriff only enforces the public consensus and the public consensus is that evidence trumps belief. Belief is not outlawed but it is sometimes deprecated.

Show us how it is wrong.

Lets talk about this. First, why do you reject the story the way most of "them" want it to say?Basically that GOD allowed this empathetic animal known as Homo Sapiens to become aware of decision making and responsibility apart6 from instinct, that God allowed for the humans to fail time and time again foreknowing that they would soon need to reestablish communion, that He made this way through becoming human...(yes it was Jesus...not God disguised as a human) but yet the issue thus centers around Jesus. Who He was, is and whether he is eternal or not. You seem to think He taught us to be responsible and provided an example of all a man can do. They seem to believe that He came as a sacrificial lamb to once and forever take away our problem and mistake at trusting a source other than GOD the Creator. Whats so wrong with their way, apart from your point about it taking away the necessary element of personal responsibility? This seems to be a big theme with you.Look, we can both agree that humans make stupid decisions based on greed, selfishness, insecurity, and listening to bad advice. Humans may not have been created damned, that I agree with you in. The issue is how we humans get out of it and overcome it. They say that we overcome by the blood of the lamb and the word of our testimony. What do you say? Do we overcome solely through our own collective efforts? And really....why do you think that God simply saves everybody. Or do you think that? If not, how do you see it...we save ourselves and essentially are judged based on what we do versus what we could have done? The sheep and goats essentially describes such a judgment. We have been over this before. But I'm not sure whether I agree with you that God simply judges everyone based on what they do. It does make sense, though. The apologetic defense is that we can never do enough to erase original sin. They are stuck with that term. I see flaws with your concept of an honor system and standard, however. For one thing, it is not often easy at all, and seems a bit unfair. Let's take me, for example. One time I declared bankruptcy, 11 years ago. Had I done it according to your honor system, I would still be paying back a debt so big I never would have settled it. As a result, I would live with the consequences of a bad series of mistakes. All for what? So I could show honor to the public?But I believe that I was forgiven and given another opportunity...even at the public expense. I am grateful for such a judgment.And I believe in a God who would forgive the mistakes rather than force the people to accept full responsibility for their mistakes.You often say that we here in America will get the world we want. As if because of our flaws, we must pay the piper. The apologist would say that we can be forgiven. I will agree with you, however, that the bumper sticker "Not Perfect, Just Forgiven" is lame.

How do you want me to do that? I have listened to several apologists whom I consider to have good messages. I guess what I am challenging is first of all why you have a different message. You are admittedly not a believer. Yet you claim to show us the holy book as if you were the boy pointing out that the emperor has no clothes. None of us see it.

now let us examine ringo in light of this. Nonsense. I don't test every chair before I sit on it. I don't slow down at every green light. I will admit that I am seeking more evidence of a spiritual war, for I sure feel one coming on. That's what you want the public consensus to be. We are not there yet and I predict we won't get there any time sooon...especially if there is greater need to believe based on circumstances that evidence and hard work just cant handle.

quote:

---

The secret of steel has always carried with it a mystery. You must learn its riddle, little Conan. You must learn its discipline. For no one, no one in this world can you trust. Not men, not women, not beasts. [Points to sword] This you can trust.

​

--Conan's father

---

quote:

---

Ephesians 6:13-17 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

---

Maybe because it is not written the way they want it to say? Please point out where Jesus said doing what is right should be easy or fair? Who will forgive you? God may well forgive you but what about China or Japan or the EU or the bank or ...

I've told you many times: I want you to bring the apologists' arguments here, so we can see if they have any value. The only message I have is what the Bible says. If you prefer a different message, it is up to you to explain why. Exactly. The point of that story is that anybody can see that the emperor has no clothes. Only those with a vested interest in the lie failed to point it out. Who is this "us"?