Testing The Christian Apologists

I agree. Faith and Works are inseparable. I think what started the controversy was that when the Protestants were breaking away from the RCC, the emphasis on Faith over and above and beyond works was in the light of works done for the church and/or on behalf of the church. The Protestants likely emphasized that they were not saved based on what they did for "the church" but entirely on God's Grace. In my mind at least, salvation is entirely a gift from God which is a meaningless concept to those who think that humans are good enough without God, or need of (A God) or authority of the said Deity. Our good Friar Ringo of Saskatchewan dutifully and continually points out the meaning that the good book implies and which I have never disagreed with...except for the fact that I believe that the Messenger (Jesus Christ) is as important as the Message (Doing good for others). The greatest commandment is to love the Lord with all of your heart, soul, mind, and strength and to love your neighbor as yourself. This alone implies that works are essential...not for God (or the RCC) but for all practical purposes in daily living. Hope that was not too confusing. I am a bit discombobulated today...I have an operation tomorrow and likely will be off the forum for a while until I can see again. But then again...I may be so addicted that i will try and reply to messages with one eye.

You are just wildlyh guessing about things that are clearly presented in the writings of the Reformers. Nothing to do with "works for the church," It was all determined from scripture. The RCC did prescribe works for salvation, but scripture says no, absolutely no works at all will save you, it's all by faith. That's what the Reformers, particularly Luther, discovered. He had previously felt despairing of salvation because he knew he could never overcome all his sins, so when he discovered that God saves us Himself without any input from us it was a savating revelation to him. "The just shall live by faith" is the verse that transformed him. No longer did he have to acquire his own rightouesness in order to be saved, he was to live by faith in God alone, and then works were done in God's power, not for salvation.

Yup.You outline the perfect SnakeOil Medicine Man Carny Barker Conman product.It's been successfully sold by SnakeOil Medicine Men, Conmen and Carny Barkers since the so called Reformation and is the sole product sold by the CCoI.It's perfect.No product liability.No Truth in Advertising risks.No major investments needed.And the Rubes line up to buy it.

Any longtime lurker at EvC Forum has heard your schpiel about the carny snake-oil medicine men PT Barnumesque aspect of Biblical Christian Apologetics. You even hint that the reformation itself was an unnecessary step towards selling a better product. I have often thought your argument indicative of a general disdain for how you see God and Christianity to have been marketed throughout the years, so I thought I would discuss it.One apologist whom we have talked about before is Dr.RC Sproul. Critics may say that Biblical Christianity (how do you define that term, by the way?) is chock full of con artists and charlatans and I will actually agree with you on this point. There is money to be made in this industry, and there are many opportunists on the lecture circuit. In my opinion, the late Dr.Sproul was and is one of the best. (apologists, that is. Not opportunists.)He has a teaching series called The Psychology of Atheism.
Lecture 1. A Vested Interest
Many folks cope with the pain and suffering of life by holding on to the hope of a better place where there is no more pain, suffering, and tears. Who wouldn’t want to go to a place like that? Jesus promised such a place for His people. But is the Christian belief in heaven a result of our own wishful projections of a better life? Beginning this new series entitled The Psychology of Atheism, Dr. Sproul first discusses the underlying motivations of those who do not want God to exist.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lecture 2, How Do You Know?
Dr. Sproul talks briefly about why it is that people of great and impeccable academic and scientific credentials will disagree on very important issues. Of these, none is more important than the question of the existence of God.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lecture 3, Faulty Logic and Sense Perception:
In the previous lecture, Dr. Sproul stated four reasons why intelligent people come to differing conclusions about major issues such as the existence of God. In this message, Dr. Sproul discusses why we are prone to making errors in reasoning, or formal errors of logic, and the errors made in our empirical sensory perception.Sproul goes into great detail about many early intellectual and sociological men who explained the reason that humans create the gods they worship. I respect the fact that he brings up the secular teaching arguments against belief in God, though as a believer he defends the living truth the way that we believe it actually is. I decided a long time ago to never hang my hat on evidence which contradicts my own personal experience. Perhaps this is a flaw in my thinking, but I have always believed that you either choose to stand for something or you will end up falling for anything.

And that is yet another example of the Carny Side Show conman spiel. It is just another stupid saying refuted by reality and evidence.R. C. Sproul loved to use a hundred words when only two were needed.AbE: Your sig quote from Sproul is a great example of utterly meaningless nonsense marketed as though it were wisdom.Edited by jar, : see AbE

Sproul isnt as carny as you think. He freely admits that the atheist's logic makes sense and that he wishes that God in fact exists.
Seems to me you are simply critical of his $20.00 words.

No Phat, as I said in the post, I object to his utterly stupid and absurd comments like the ones you used.Edited by jar, : No reason given.Edited by jar, : clarify, clarify!

That's a classic carny spiel."Atheist" is a poison word, like "communist". You can say, "Communist logic makes sense..." and your audience will hang on your every word waiting for you to add, "... on paper - but it doesn't work in reality."And the audience wishes that God existed too. Even some atheists wish that God existed, even though there's no sign that He does. The audience is just hoping for the carny to verify and validate their wishful thinking.It's all about giving the customer what he wants. "Sure, you can be saved by faith alone. You don't have to do anything at all. Just say Lord! Lord! and the good works will happen magically all by themselves. No muss, no fuss."

Different people see different signs. Some hear an internal voice. Others are told something that resonates with them from others. The only thing that believers have in common is a desire to know God. You may say you have the same desire, but ask yourself if your logic gets in the way. Perhaps you *know* that evidence is needed but finding none you conclude that belief is irrational and thus impossible. Granted many people are gullible, but keep in mind that churches are full of people of whom 70% actually do not believe. One can only believe once one experiences the evidence of His presence. In my opinion, anyway. You may demand that I show this "evidence" objectively to everyone. (As if God had an obligation to "save" everyone. The onus is on us not Him. My point is that we need to be open enough to receive Him even without evidence. You have mentioned before that there is no evidence. Thus, the question: Will you take that leap of faith? Or do you feel a need to do so? Believers obviously felt a need to do so. Nobody becomes a believer by accident or by birthright.

Upon further reflection, maybe you have been right all along. Maybe if people saw someone who had the guts to give it all up, including their very houses, they too would respond by believing. In which case you are correct. I am not yet saved because I have not given it all up.

You have that backwards. It's belief that should not get in the way of logic. Belief is irrational (or non-rational, if you prefer a less negative word). Period. Nonsense. "Leap of faith" is a stupid concept. There's a bridge; are you going to take a leap of faith or are you going to rely on the strength of concrete and steel?

Well, you're not "yet" saved because whatever it is that you need to be saved from hasn't happened yet. That's why the whole idea of "knowing you are saved" is so silly. You can be confident that you will be saved but you can not know the future.

No one thinks belief is impossible but belief certainly is irrational.

How do you explain loss of faith? Of course they do, that's why you're not a muslim.

It never helps matters any by making up your own. Stop & Think.

Because of Father Joe Woods Warlord's story and critical thinking sessions, you went against the popular teaching and concluded that God must surely save everyone. Upon further reflection, you rejected the idea that Jesus died for us and took upon Himself all of our sins, preferring a Jesus who taught us to *do for others* and that salvation may happen after we die. (thus introducing the heresy that nobody can know.

Using your own logic, rationale, and reasoning, you made up a belief that you could accept, rather than the belief of the majority of Christianity---namely that Jesus came to earth as a propitiation for our sins, died, rose again, and is now eternally present. Rather, you ask questions such as "How do you know...?" thus introducing doubt into your students. You essentially made up the whole doctrine that Christianity is about what we do and that we will be judged based on what we do vs what we could have done. Not that this belief isn't possibly true but that it is incomplete. So far all you have is secular humanism.

​

You show arrogance vby dismissibng good teachers, such as RC Sproul, based on your preconceived notion that Biblical Christianity is represented by carny barkers, swindlers, and conmen. Granted this is your opinion, but you push it as fact. You then claim victory by saying that reality always wins and trumps fantasy.

​

Why have you concluded that a living Christ and an active Holy Spirit in the church is a manmade fantasy? Is it simply due to a lack of evidence? I have seen many cons and hucksters in the church but I have also seen the real deal and that it works. God is living and actively present. I can't help that you don't see it---I have no clue why, if you claim to be a Christian...unless it is you who have redefined Christianity to appeal to logical minds. Just call it what it is. Humanism. Doing your best. Helping your fellow man. Oh, and lest I leave it out...you advocate "throwing God away." Which arguably is blasphemy

​

Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.

---

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 "
~"We, humans, are engaged in an ongoing war of ideologies. I see it in this microcosm of EvC Forum just as I see it in the governments and attitudes of people throughout the world. Take your pick: Oppression or Seduction .
"~Thugpreacha

​

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