Ever the glutton for punishment, I was listening to a sermon not too long ago, and the pastor had these words to say to their congregation:
“What I see in front of me might contradict everything he [Jesus] has said, but I believe in the end he’ll be born out to be true.”
This type of attitude is very disturbing, and in essence says, “Look, you can show me all the evidence you want to, and it can be the most solid evidence ever, and I’m still not going to accept it.” There are few things to be pitied more than a person who says their mind cannot be changed no matter what evidence is provided. Such a person is a prisoner in their own mind, who when handed the key to set themselves free, gouges out their eyes with it lest they find the lock.
Answers most arguments of skeptics. The interactive Gospel
http://www.hazelden.org.uk/ig/ig.htm
I would have to completely disagree with you. You should actually look at arguments that skeptics put forward (there are plenty of them on this site), and try actually addressing those instead of link dropping to a site called, “The Interactive Gospel” that allows for no public interaction.
So what excites you most is the argument, not the truth. They do have a link if you seriously want to know the truth.
Mr./Ms. Dogbronte, what excites me is the quest for knowledge, which comes through the hard work of discovery – not revelation from on high. I’m well aware of the contact link on the page you have directed me to, which so far as I can tell addresses none of the challenges that I raise here.
The Pauline Epistles instruct you to be ready in season and out of season to defend the faith that you hold, and yet you direct me to a site, that so far as I can tell is not yours. So I tell you what… I’ll pose this question to you and instead of pointing me to someone else – YOU – defend your faith as you are directed in scripture. Here you go: “I have the power to forgive anyone I want to. I forgive my children, I forgive friends, family, and even strangers. I do this without requiring anything from them. Not so much as an apology and I forgive them. Does this not make me more powerful than your god who requires a blood sacrifice (something outside of himself – in the OT) in order to forgive? How is it that I – a finite and relatively powerless creature – can do something that your supposedly all-powerful god cannot do? In addition to this, how can your god have free will if he cannot freely choose to forgive without a blood sacrifice? The Bible says that without the shedding of blood, there can be no forgiveness of sins.”
I await your reply.
Special revelation, again. These people use their intuition (be it good or faulty) and ignore all else.
It’s really scary to hear that, but I think it’s true. Some people have a complete block for all information that contradicts their beliefs.
E, I do believe it was Richard Dawkins who said he would not believe in God even if an 80-foot (or some absurd measurement) Jesus appeared to him. You cannot be intellectually dishonest here and apply the rule that only those who are willing to think critically are atheists and skeptics, and that only those who are willing to be convinced by truth are again atheists and skeptics. Plenty from both sides have fallen to this phenomenon.
I wouldn’t believe if an 80-ft Jesus appeared to me either. I’m a human being, and human beings have brains that are prone to error and hallucination. Would you abandon your faith if an 80-ft Mohammad appeared to you and said you needed to worship Allah? Richard Dawkins I believe has given examples of things that he would accept as evidence. For me personally – a simultaneous “broadcast” into the heads of every man woman and child on Earth saying Jesus really is God, and the Bible can be trusted might be a good start. Rearranging the stars in the sky so they spell out a similar message, or anything like that which is verifiable by others, and not potentially a misfiring of my brain would be evidence worthy of investigation. Most atheists and skeptics espouse similar views on evidence, and I challenge you to find someone who says there is not any evidence they would accept. So, I’m not being intellectually dishonest here. Presumably, an all-powerful being who wanted to make its presence known to all, so that none would perish could accomplish such a thing. So why the hide-and-seek?
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/dawkins-and-grayling-can-there-be-evidence-for-the-supernatural/ The disagreement for Dawkins seems to be more for what is counted as “evidence” and what is legitimately “supernatural.” Those terms would need to be defined for him and agreed upon by everyone. Even in my example, the potential exists that it could be an illusion perpetrated by some advanced alien species, though it would be pretty unlikely. I think Dawkins’ main issue is – the stuff that we would count as evidence (like I listed below) will never happen – at least there is no reason to believe it would – so in reality there is nothing that could convince him. If something like that did present itself for observation, however, I think he would be singing a different tune.