If there is no God as some on here say where do we get our point of reference from for peace and happiness. If we are mere mortals who live once & they become dust than "peace" & "happiness" are nothing more than the empty vain longings of mammals who are reacting to their DNA. I wonder how one would explain the subjective nonsense of peace/happiness without the existence of a Creator. Good luck. There's no hope without Him.
Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding. - Isaiah 40:28
"If the wife has given him good reason... " AH! There is the crux of the issue: what constitutes a good reason? Is it evidence alone? The experiences of the senses? Are theses the only ways knowledge can be attained? I agree that blind faith that is without reason is childish and gullible, but this is not the kind of faith that Paul and the Apostles had. This is not the kind of faith that Christians should have. Many do, sure. But Christians are called to use their noggin' believe it or not.
you use the words "scrutinised" and "criticised" but that is not necessarily a disprover. maybe i'm just a stubborn man, but everyone has the right to disagree with a theory but they must be able to effectively disprove it. and i see no one who has done that to the Kalam teleological argument.
First, in order to show that belief in a god is at least justified and reasonable, I suggest investigating William Lane Craig's Kalam Cosmological Argument, as well as the Teleological. Next, I would explore the Moral Argument for God. Finally, the historical evidence surrounding Jesus Christ leads me to believe that everything the Bible *teaches* is true. All of these can be found here, on UA-cam. William Lane Craig has a wealth of resources on all of these subjects.
Highly flawed? Care to give some examples? The Kalam is one of his most scrutinized and criticized arguments. Surely you can think of some for that, no? I will message you when I find the time some historical evidence for Jesus.
@MetsMr1969 Mister Zacharias wouldn't know the truth if it bit him! His very lucrative sermons are based on myths. The bible has no foundation except in Iron Age mythology that predates monotheism by thousands of years. The JC story is an old one - in every detail. Why would you believe human sacrifice, cannibalism, slavery, genocide and an utterly ridiculous trust in an afterlife would make you feel better? Live this life, spread peace and happiness. All the best to you.
Well it depends. Issues with wives cheating, though I've never gone through it, are obviously very complicated. Ok, exactly how is it not blind faith? In other words, what evidence is there to support what the Bible says?
I have very little respect for Craig and the arguments I have already watched him making, which are highly flawed, though I can't remember anything called the "Kalam Cosmological Argument" I think I know which one you are talking about, as such I am still unconvinced. Lets first discuss the historical evidence for Jesus, as I have yet to come across any, and what is put forward as evidence by other Christians I have discussed this with so far have all been nothing more than inconclusive.
Well that is faith in a different sense. If the wife has given him good reason to believe her then no it is not gullible. But seeing as there is absolutely no evidence for God's existence and there is plenty of instances where what the bible says is demonstrably false or just plain absurd. Now believing in THAT is gullible! The two scenarios are COMPLETELY different. :)
It does not even prove if what caused it was a natural or supernatural event. And if everything had to have a causer, then that means that this ‘God’ also had to have a causer and so on, so all you get is an infinite regress which does not answer how it all began. You don’t just get to suspend the rules on your own argument and whenever and wherever you like because that is committing the fallacy of special pleading and highly dishonest.
"And according to an atheist worldview, there is no moral law." That is a strawman argument so commonly thrown around by the religious and I'll tell you why it is so. Just because atheism does not come with any religious beliefs or moral laws or dogmas does not mean that atheists do not believe in a moral law or being moral. All it is, is a single position on a single issue, the existence of a God, it has no bearing on our morals....
You are clueless about atheism. Atheists completely depend on science (their corrupted view of science), and on the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution is that everything that exists today came into existence through unplanned , unguided , purposeless chaos. And therefore people are only responding to their DNA as bio-molecular machines...there is NO Consciousness only Matter. That is straight from the atheist handbook of beliefs. And the reason they insist despite evidence to the contrary, that there is only matter and no consciousness is because consciousness opens the door to free will , and free will opens the door to distinctions between good and evil...which leads logically to the existence of moral law...which leads inevitably to the existence of a moral law giver...a.k.a. God. And they can't have that. So they paint themselves into a corner by saying there is no such thing as consciousness or choice in public...and then they go home and choose which movie they want to go see.
Any pre-existing entity that may have caused the universe does not have to be omniscient, personal, have any intelligence or even a mind or will. It doesn’t have to be Yahweh the God of the bible. And why does it have to be one cause? It could have been several beings or even millions. All he is doing is guessing. Even if his argument in proving the universe had a causer was valid, it WOULD NOT prove that Yahweh did it. In order to prove which God it is you need EVIDENCE of some sort. ....
Ah the 'God of the Gaps' argument. You don't know how the universe came to be so you 'insert God' into the 'gaps' in your knowledge. That is not a way to create a reasoned and valid argument for the existence of any sort of deity. It could have been anything, there are a number of 'pre-universe' scientific hypotheses but none have been conclusively proven, due to the obvious nature of the difficulty of gathering evidence to support them. ...
Yeah...well except for hospitals, they invented that...oh and I guess universities I forgot about that. Hmm...well they did lay the foundations for all scientific endeavour...I guess that's something. And slavery...they did fight to end world wide slavery. I nearly forgot! They did entrench the worth of a human life in a legal system. Yeah but I see your point...so much evil! LOL!
"I know" this, "I know" that. Such dogma and arrogance. Of course you don't know. You believe. You are a very closed-minded individual. That is what Christianity promotes. Gullibility and being closed-minded.
God bless & give more people like this to this world
10 years ago…
Mr. Zacharias is saying the truth. I am happy to hear that this man is a Christian
If there is no God as some on here say where do we get our point of reference from for peace and happiness. If we are mere mortals who live once & they become dust than "peace" & "happiness" are nothing more than the empty vain longings of mammals who are reacting to their DNA. I wonder how one would explain the subjective nonsense of peace/happiness without the existence of a Creator. Good luck. There's no hope without Him.
God is indeed good.
Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding. - Isaiah 40:28
We love Ravi Sir every day we hear his messages n learn more about the God of Abraham n the one God of this universe.
Very helpful. Thanks
You could try looking at the rebuttal offered by the ironchariots website.
Cool VideoWhich sermon did you take it from?
Yes, his argument is "scrutinised" and "criticised"- it is like that for a reason.
Which is nothing more than a euphemism for 'gullibility.'
@JesusWarrior4life i think music distracts and is sometimes too loud!
how can i get this beat
??
"If the wife has given him good reason... " AH! There is the crux of the issue: what constitutes a good reason? Is it evidence alone? The experiences of the senses? Are theses the only ways knowledge can be attained?
I agree that blind faith that is without reason is childish and gullible, but this is not the kind of faith that Paul and the Apostles had. This is not the kind of faith that Christians should have. Many do, sure. But Christians are called to use their noggin' believe it or not.
turn the music down or off!
Everyone is close-minded.
@StrumstickJoe I will be praying for you.
It says nothing to address what I just said.
So, the man who has faith that his wife will not cheat on him is gullible?
you use the words "scrutinised" and "criticised" but that is not necessarily a disprover. maybe i'm just a stubborn man, but everyone has the right to disagree with a theory but they must be able to effectively disprove it. and i see no one who has done that to the Kalam teleological argument.
First, in order to show that belief in a god is at least justified and reasonable, I suggest investigating William Lane Craig's Kalam Cosmological Argument, as well as the Teleological. Next, I would explore the Moral Argument for God. Finally, the historical evidence surrounding Jesus Christ leads me to believe that everything the Bible *teaches* is true.
All of these can be found here, on UA-cam. William Lane Craig has a wealth of resources on all of these subjects.
please turn the music off...
Highly flawed? Care to give some examples? The Kalam is one of his most scrutinized and criticized arguments. Surely you can think of some for that, no? I will message you when I find the time some historical evidence for Jesus.
@MetsMr1969 Mister Zacharias wouldn't know the truth if it bit him!
His very lucrative sermons are based on myths. The bible has no foundation except in Iron Age mythology that predates monotheism by thousands of years. The JC story is an old one - in every detail.
Why would you believe human sacrifice, cannibalism, slavery, genocide and an utterly ridiculous trust in an afterlife would make you feel better?
Live this life, spread peace and happiness.
All the best to you.
Well it depends. Issues with wives cheating, though I've never gone through it, are obviously very complicated.
Ok, exactly how is it not blind faith? In other words, what evidence is there to support what the Bible says?
I have very little respect for Craig and the arguments I have already watched him making, which are highly flawed, though I can't remember anything called the "Kalam Cosmological Argument" I think I know which one you are talking about, as such I am still unconvinced. Lets first discuss the historical evidence for Jesus, as I have yet to come across any, and what is put forward as evidence by other Christians I have discussed this with so far have all been nothing more than inconclusive.
Well that is faith in a different sense. If the wife has given him good reason to believe her then no it is not gullible. But seeing as there is absolutely no evidence for God's existence and there is plenty of instances where what the bible says is demonstrably false or just plain absurd. Now believing in THAT is gullible! The two scenarios are COMPLETELY different. :)
It does not even prove if what caused it was a natural or supernatural event. And if everything had to have a causer, then that means that this ‘God’ also had to have a causer and so on, so all you get is an infinite regress which does not answer how it all began. You don’t just get to suspend the rules on your own argument and whenever and wherever you like because that is committing the fallacy of special pleading and highly dishonest.
"And according to an atheist worldview, there is no moral law." That is a strawman argument so commonly thrown around by the religious and I'll tell you why it is so. Just because atheism does not come with any religious beliefs or moral laws or dogmas does not mean that atheists do not believe in a moral law or being moral. All it is, is a single position on a single issue, the existence of a God, it has no bearing on our morals....
You are clueless about atheism. Atheists completely depend on science (their corrupted view of science), and on the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution is that everything that exists today came into existence through unplanned , unguided , purposeless chaos. And therefore people are only responding to their DNA as bio-molecular machines...there is NO Consciousness only Matter. That is straight from the atheist handbook of beliefs. And the reason they insist despite evidence to the contrary, that there is only matter and no consciousness is because consciousness opens the door to free will , and free will opens the door to distinctions between good and evil...which leads logically to the existence of moral law...which leads inevitably to the existence of a moral law giver...a.k.a. God. And they can't have that. So they paint themselves into a corner by saying there is no such thing as consciousness or choice in public...and then they go home and choose which movie they want to go see.
@cheshirelizzy fgfgf
Any pre-existing entity that may have caused the universe does not have to be omniscient, personal, have any intelligence or even a mind or will. It doesn’t have to be Yahweh the God of the bible. And why does it have to be one cause? It could have been several beings or even millions. All he is doing is guessing. Even if his argument in proving the universe had a causer was valid, it WOULD NOT prove that Yahweh did it. In order to prove which God it is you need EVIDENCE of some sort. ....
Ah the 'God of the Gaps' argument. You don't know how the universe came to be so you 'insert God' into the 'gaps' in your knowledge. That is not a way to create a reasoned and valid argument for the existence of any sort of deity. It could have been anything, there are a number of 'pre-universe' scientific hypotheses but none have been conclusively proven, due to the obvious nature of the difficulty of gathering evidence to support them. ...
Christianity is the cause of so much evil in the world... this man does not know the damage he is causing.
Yeah...well except for hospitals, they invented that...oh and I guess universities I forgot about that. Hmm...well they did lay the foundations for all scientific endeavour...I guess that's something. And slavery...they did fight to end world wide slavery. I nearly forgot! They did entrench the worth of a human life in a legal system. Yeah but I see your point...so much evil! LOL!
"I know" this, "I know" that. Such dogma and arrogance. Of course you don't know. You believe. You are a very closed-minded individual. That is what Christianity promotes. Gullibility and being closed-minded.