[ref001] #apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 4/2/96 #apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 4/2/96 [23:49] Zen
[ref001]
#apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 4/2/96
#apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 4/2/96
[23:49] ZenRookie (hyperion@blackhole.dimensional.com)
joined #apologetics.
[23:49] Kiwitu (melmes@ppp232.ihug.co.nz) joined #Apologetics.
[23:49] hiya
[23:50] Gidday ZenRookie
[23:50] May I ask, what is the subject of the
channel?
[23:50] are you an apologist?
[23:50] DG (earth.exe@andromeda.execpc.com) joined
#Apologetics.
[23:50] Don't know
[23:50] oh. hehe, well, an apologist is
one who rationally defends religion.
[23:51] so this channel is for people who
rationally defend religion
[23:51] mostly christianity
[23:51] Ah. OK thanks..Interested.
[23:51] are you religious? i am not.
[23:52] No. Neither am I
[23:52] ah.
[23:52] i was just waiting for someone to
come in so I could ask a few questions, and see if
they could "rationally" answer them.
[23:52] So what are you doing here ?
[23:53] Sorry Zen...Not gonna be any help.
[23:53] i figured :)
[23:53] i usually hang out in #atheism a
quite irreverent channel, if you are interested.
[23:53] Cesium (dos.efx@lgn.com) joined #apologetics.
[23:53] hello
[23:54] hey cesium
[23:54] hello.
[23:54] what can I rationally answer? (or
try to,...)
[23:54] I am from New Zealand. The latest issue
of Time magazine carries a particularly interesting
cover story about AI
[23:55] cassidy: ok, wherein lies the sacrifice
of death (dying for our sins) if jesus knew he would
rise from the dead?
[23:55] it's one of the questions that bugs
me
[23:55] Zen...let me see if I am understanding
you correctly....
[23:55] I have visited #atheism several times
but find a few of the regulars too evangelistic for
me.
[23:56] are you asking..."how could a sacrafice
be valid if the person being sacraficed knows his sacrafice
will be only for a limited amount of time?
[23:56] so... apolobot captures everything we
say, and then the debates which christians win are
shone on the web site?
[23:56] no, i am asking how i death considered
a sacrifice, when he was risen from the dead.
[23:57] Kiwi...want atheistic eevangelism?
try #AynRand!!!!
[23:57] howi = how is
[23:57] Zen...why is it efecatious if it wasn't
eternal??? is that it?
[23:58] don't want any evangelism Cassidy...:)
[23:58] well, i guess so, how is one sacrificing
ones life, when one is not going to be dead.
[23:58] Ces...if that happens...Im not aware
of it. Ask Liam3 or Profg.
[23:59] i'll look out for them... but it seems
to be the most reasonable hypothesis, no?
[23:59] Zen...we believe he indeed WAS dead.
We believe He (God the Son) could die for a tempory
amount of time...and the one for the many...because
he, being God, is infinately valuable..therefore his
death, although temporary...was in
finately valueable.
[00:00] Zen. Are you trying to determine the
validity or otherwise of spiritualism by semantics?
[00:00] Kiwi...nor I.
[00:01] hmmmm, cassidy, i understand the
explanation, but there just seems to be something wrong
with it in my mind.
[00:01] OK...
[00:03] rational theism? what exactly does
this mean?
[00:03] DG (earth.exe@andromeda.execpc.com) left #Apologetics.
[00:04] Cesium it must essentialy mean the same
as rational atheism
[00:04] Cesium...same thing its always meant.
Theistic belief has always been a notable contender
in western philosophy.
[00:04] i doubt that...
[00:04] what, then, would god be doing, while
jesus was dead, if they were one and the same?
[00:04] rational theism as opposed to irrational
theism?
[00:05] well...you only need read a histouy
of philosophy to find out...
[00:05] i'd rather let you tell me what you
think it means
[00:06] Cesium. What I meant was if you can
use a method ie rationality to prove something, you
must also be able to use the same technique to disprove
it, otherwise the technique is invalid.
[00:06] Zen...we believe that "God" did not
die...Christ the man died. He said "Unto thy habnds
I commit my spirit":...Christ therefore died physically.
[00:06] cesium, there is lots of irrational
theism. those who take the bible as 100% literal truth
are often irrational.
[00:06] Zen...and often not.
[00:07] so... rational theism proves the existence
of god? or attempts to? this is getting somewhere
[00:07] i agree with you, zen.
[00:08] christ the human died. but christ
the human was also god. but god did not die. apparently,
the flesh died, but not the spirit, so to speak, is
that what you are saying?
[00:08] Ces...is it? I believe you are asking..."does
theism have strong arguments for Gods existance"...I
say, yes. We have many and many that are compelling.
[00:09] i was just wondering about the definition
of rational in regards to theism, but asking about
your arguments might have been a followup... what are
some?
[00:09] those who take the bible as 100% literal
truth are unfortunately fundamentaly irrational. It
was probably never intended to be 100% literal.
[00:09] Zen...Christ is a hypostatic union....The
God-man. His "parts" are neither mingled or totally seperate....so,
yes. Christ, the man died. But God did not.
[00:10] hmmm, his parts were not mingled,
and not separate? could you explain how that works?>
[00:11] Kiwi...you must define 100% literal.
I personally allow for natural language, poetic verse,
alegory, etc. However...I otherwise accept it as the
revealed word of God.
[00:11] It was only related by those with the
knowledge available to them at the time, as all things
have always been.
[00:11] HyprParit (John@line031.nwm.mindlink.net) joined
#apologetics.
[00:12] Zen...perhaps not. Not adaquitely.
However, I think your original question can be answered.
Is his sacrafice sufficient? Yes.
[00:12] cassidy_, how do you decide when to
label a verse allegorical?
[00:13] hello, hyprparit
[00:13] Cesium...if the context suggests as
much. Its not terrably difficult.
[00:13] is this "hypostatic" union the rational
part?
[00:14] when the verse seems as if it violates
natural law or common sense?
[00:14] based upon your understanding at the
time.
[00:14] cesium, not exactly, Job for instance,
is allegorical, yet many people take it as literal.
[00:14] IS ANYONE STIRRING?
[00:15] i would assume so... aren't there references
to sea monsters?
[00:15] \
[00:15] Action: HyprParit
[00:15] \
[00:15] Action: HyprParit
[00:15] stirring? is that an irc term?
[00:15] Its not irrational. To conceive of
God Taking on flesh is not the most difficult part
of Christianity.
[00:16] one could argue that "sea monsters"
could be anything that is large and unknown and living
in the sea, of which i am sure there were many things.
[00:16] hey
[00:16] but i believe there were specific descriptions...
verses?
[00:17] Zen...the problem is that Christ spoke
of Job as a literal event...he gave no hint of an allegorical
understanding anyways..
[00:17] i've heard arguments that the references
to sea monsters are sightings of dinosaurs, validating
a young earth theory. would you consider that irratioanl?
[00:17] Kiwitu (melmes@ppp232.ihug.co.nz) left #Apologetics.
[00:17] Zen...right. Sea Monsters are an example
of "natural language" in the Bible.
[00:18] cassidy: so you think that the story
of Job is a telling of actual events, just as they
happened?
[00:18] HyprParit (John@line031.nwm.mindlink.net) left
irc: HyprParit
[00:18] I dont hold a young earth theory.
[00:18] cesium: they also said that the dragons
breathed fire, but as of yet, no one has documented
any fire-breathing creatures.
[00:18] cassidy, i am genuinely happy for you
[00:19] HyprParit (John@line031.nwm.mindlink.net) joined
#apologetics.
[00:20] hello again, hyprparit
[00:20] Zen...the way its written sounds quite
a bit like a tale...a play perhaps. It is difficult
to see it as a historical doccument. However, the style
doesn't itself negate the possibility...plus, as I
said, Christ spoke of Job, and
his words dont suggest allegory.
[00:21] hmm... i'm retriving my bible (nab)
[00:21] er retrieving... now i have it
[00:21] Cesium...Im happy that your happy
for me. Even if I did hold to a young earth...Id be
happy that you weren't happy for me... :)
[00:21] hey
[00:21] cassidy: we often talk of allegorical
stories to punctuate our language, while making it
sound as if the events actually happened, just one
example would be people who refer to Shakespeare.
[00:22] Zen agreed.
[00:22] W (cservice@undernet.org) got netsplit.
[00:22] well, i am also happy in general about
this... but onto Job :)
[00:22] W (cservice@undernet.org) returned to #Apologetics.
[00:23] what is W?
[00:23] many biblcal scholars hold that Job
is a wonderful piece of allegorical literature.
[00:23] Mode change '+o W ' by okc.ok.us.undernet.org
[00:23] W is Da Man
[00:23] among the literary masterpieces of all
time, says my catholic nab
[00:24] Fermat (knoble@acca.NMSU.Edu) joined #apologetics.
[00:24] pascoe (pasc8891@xslip04.csrv.uidaho.edu) joined
#apologetics.
[00:24] cesium, you have the New American?
[00:25] hello fermat and pascoe
[00:25] hi Cesium.
[00:25] hi
[00:25] what is the topic?
[00:25] Zen...and others do not. They look
first to the first verse in Job. Many claim there is
no literary indication that the verse meant to introduce
him as a fictitious figure......
[00:25] well, it's a rather old version (hmmm
1986). i also have a kjv
[00:25] Job
[00:26] cassidy: the fact that others do
not, to me, is quite interesting. here we have two
sets of learned scholars, each saying something quite
opposite from the other. Who are we to believe?
[00:26] ah... notice the repeated use of the
number 7.
[00:26] lucky 7
[00:27] allegorical signs of Yahweh's blessings?
[00:27] Zen...the ones that give the more
compelling argument.
[00:27] hehe yes
[00:27] Bawn (simpsonb@UCS.ORST.EDU) joined #apologetics.
[00:28] the numbers 3, 12, 40 and 1260 also
show up quite a bit :)
[00:29] that they do... seven sons though.
i imagine this was considered the most significant.
it is listed first.
[00:29] Zen...al Im saying is that, for this
particular verse...many believe that it is clearly
an introduction to a real person...
[00:29] in fact, the number 1260 appears
7 times. spooky
[00:29] HyprParit (John@line031.nwm.mindlink.net) left
#apologetics.
[00:30] suruly you don't doubt everything
that is questioned be another...heck, if that were
the case, you must then doubt you're own existance,
because of those in the past that have doubted theirs.
[00:31] cassidy: well, one does have to look
at likelyhood also.
[00:31] it is very likely that i exist :)
[00:31] Zen...I couldn't agree more.
[00:32] Zen...I believe that...in fact, I
believe it is absolutey necessary that I exist.
[00:32] Action: ZenRookie will be back in a minute
or two...
[00:32] ok...
[00:32] :)
[00:32] Bawn...you still with me?
[00:33] Thanx for the email...it was comforting.
[00:33] yuppa
[00:33] it was kinda long winded..sorry
[00:33] Fermat (knoble@acca.NMSU.Edu) left irc: Read
error to Fermat[acca.NMSU.Edu]: Connection reset by
peer
[00:33] who fermat
[00:33] oops
[00:33] just checking everyone out :)
[00:33] wrong channel, ces :)
[00:33] hootchie cootchie
[00:33] pascoe (pasc8891@xslip04.csrv.uidaho.edu) left
irc: Ping timeout for pascoe[xslip04.csrv.uidaho.edu]
[00:34] ah, he left
[00:34] Action: ZenRookie is back...
[00:34] who
[00:34] re zen
[00:34] how can see everyone who is online?
[00:35] er on the undernet
[00:35] not sure you wanna do that
[00:35] there are like 9000 ppl on rightn now
[00:35] cesium, type /who *e* will get you
close enough :)
[00:35] everyone? you wouldn't want to! believe
me! its thousands!!!
[00:35] i figured it would be smaller than the
others... not se?
[00:35] so
[00:35] no dal net is smaller
[00:36] ah... thanks for the warning
[00:36] but it still has like 2 thousand
[00:36] dalnet is the IRC child right now.............
[00:36] well, there is qnet, which has usually
20 people on it. :)
[00:36] well... hours and hours of chemistry
is calling me. have fun
[00:36] nethawk (bacharms@ash-cs-6.win.bright.net)
joined #Apologetics.
[00:36] exit
[00:36] Cesium (dos.efx@lgn.com) left irc: Cesium
[00:36] fun fun cesiam
[00:36] hi nethawk
[00:37] Topic changed by Cassidy_!cassidy7@irv-ca6-20.ix.netcom.com:
God Thinks...therefore I am -Berkeley
[00:37] hi bawn
[00:37] whatcha talkin about tonite?
[00:37] did jesus die on the first day of
passover (the first full day) or the day before>?
[00:38] Bawn sounds like Fawn...invokes images
of furry animals....
[00:38] :)
[00:38] for some reason the name Fawn invoces
paper shredders in my mind
[00:39] lol
[00:39] fawn invokes, in me, that annoying
piece of music we had to listen to in music appreciation,
afternoon of a faun or something like that
[00:39] hehehehehehe
[00:41] Zen...Im back....
[00:41] Bawn is charasmatic and people flock
to her................
[00:41] Double-M (mott@ts1-207.monticello.net) joined
#Apologetics.
[00:41] Double-M (mott@ts1-207.monticello.net) left
#Apologetics.
[00:41] hmmm alum is often used as a flocking
agent at water treatment facilities
[00:42] sorry I have been studying recently :P
[00:42] bawn... very interesting...thank you
for sharing that with us...
[00:42] W (cservice@undernet.org) left irc: let's see
it a reboot helps....
[00:42] W (cservice@undernet.org) joined #Apologetics.
[00:42] Mode change '+o W ' by channels2.undernet.org
[00:43] hmmm anytimg cassidy and if you have
any environmental engineering questions you know where
to go :)
[00:43] to the library :)
[00:43] Bawn...all the time!
[00:43] ouch
[00:43] heheh
[00:44] oooof~
[00:44] nethawk (bacharms@ash-cs-6.win.bright.net)
left #Apologetics.
[00:44] zen...I believe Ive abandoned you...sorry...
[00:45] s'ok, i was reading.
[00:45] reading what?
[00:46] John
[00:47] bawn is like asprin but without the
severe stomach upset...
[00:47] LOL
[00:48] bawn...is alot like codine also....but
she's legal in high doses and wonderfully addictive
with no adverse side-effects...
[00:48] :)
[00:51] my novacaine for the rotten tooth
of life....
[00:51] :)
[00:51] Action: Bawn groans
[00:51] ok....sore, not rotten
[00:52] brb
[00:52] ok
[00:52] so zen...are u a rookie of Zen?
[00:53] as in a freshman Buddist?
[00:53] back
[00:53] nah, just a cool nick i thought of
once. at least, i think it's cool.
[00:54] so you are bawn...all creation waited
for your return...
[00:54] Zen...rather deceptive, but cool.
Do you lean toward theism at all?
[00:55] Pergolesi (jeffboro@phx-ip-59.netzone.com)
joined #Apologetics.
[00:56] Bawn...I waited for you with baited
breath (smelled kinda like earthworms and Zeke's cheese-bait...didn't
even get a bite...)
[00:56] cassidy: i tend to be one who likes
proof. call me a cynic, but there seems to be scare
evidence to support the god of the bible. i do not
discount out of hand thta god might exist.
[00:56] thanks cassidy
[00:57] hello Apologists
[00:57] scare evidence should be scarce evidence
:)
[00:57] hi pergolesi
[00:58] hello bawn...is there any particular
topic...or what is going on tonight?
[00:58] hmmm
[00:58] I dunno looks like zen rookie is trying
to find evidence that there is a God.. and cassidy
is trying his best to find the cheesiest pick up line
for me.
[00:59] and I am sitting here politely twiddlling
my thumbs
[00:59] i have looked for evidence for more
than 20 years.
[00:59] ZenRookie, what sort of evidence
are you looking for?
[00:59] oh, well, if god were to appear to
me personally, that would probably do it
[01:00] Zen...as opposed to all us Christians
who "dont" like proof? Read Alvin Plantinga...one of
the formost theologians alive...or try Gorden H. Clark...also
alive...a brilliant philosopher. There
are a good many books written and in print updating
the traditional arguments for God. +, there have been
some new arguments, like the transendental argument
that are in the philosophical arena right now. theres
no doubt that Christian Theism is in the
[01:00] worked for moses.
[01:00] you are right, it worked for moses,
but is any other evidence valid
[01:00] Moses already believed when He got to
see God.
[01:01] cheezy, right.
[01:01] hmmm, god did not come to me when
i did believe. kind of a ripoff.
[01:01] hmmm
[01:01] Zen, Join the club. "blessed are those
that do not see and yet believe" Christ said that.
[01:01] so, are you saying that you did believe
in God, but he did not reveal himself to you?
[01:01] god seemed to have quite a lot of
personal relationships with people back in the "olden
days" he seems to have stopped tho
[01:02] cassidy: that is a convenient verse,
dont you think?
[01:02] Zen...ask Padre Pio. He might tell
you different.
[01:03] i know that you will think it unbased,
but in my philosophy, the simple fact that I can doubt
god
[01:03] 's existence, sways me to believe
that he does not exist.
[01:03] Zen...I dont know what you mean. I
dont like it...I wish He would appear to me too...but
you know? many have believed without appearences. If
I was the ONLY one...that might be different.
[01:03] hmmm
[01:04] why is that zenrookie? do you think that
if there were a God he would cause people to automatically
have ingrained belief in Him?
[01:04] Zen...what kind of argument is that?
I doubt many things and yet am rationally compelled
to accept them.
[01:04] Zen, what makes you doubt God's existence?
[01:04] my question always returns to "why?"
why would god set it all up the way he did. it seems
like such a bother.
[01:04] What seems like a bother?
[01:05] the whole "believe in me, but i am
not gonna make it easy for you" thing
[01:05] vote (canon@206.163.120.146) joined #Apologetics.
[01:05] vote (canon@206.163.120.146) left #Apologetics.
[01:05] Perhaps it is you who does not make
it easy???
[01:05] bawn: to answer your question, yes,
that is what i think
[01:06] zenrookie. thanks.
[01:06] zenrookie nice that you can decide What
God would be like *if* he existed eh? :)
[01:06] bawn: it divine
[01:06] it's
[01:07] Action: Bawn goes back to twiddling her thumbs
[01:07] it's either what i think, or what
i am told. i tend to believe myself more often
[01:07] Zen...and if the why doesn't magically
"click", then you disbelieve? that is irrational. To
the extent that you are finite in understanding, compared
to God who is omniscient, to that extent y
ou must grant that it is possible that there exist
circumstances that make our present world the best
possible world that can still maintain freedom of the
will for it's creatures.
[01:07] Bawn! Sing us a song!
[01:08] cassidy: i am not asking for magically
click, but after 20 years, you would think there would
be somethin gmore.
[01:08] ok
[01:09] I never gargled I never gambled I never
smoked at all until I met my two good amigos Nick O
Teen and Al K Hall
[01:09] Zen, the assertion that things are
not easy, and that we can not comprehend why the world
is the way it is, does not in any way reject the possibility
that God does exist
[01:09] Action: Bawn sings
[01:09] Zen...perhaps...I dont know. Many
believe. Many dont. Good arguments and defences exist
for the Faith. Some dont see them. I dont have the
answers for that one.
[01:09] per: i already stated that i do not
reject the possibility of god's existence, however
i do find it unlikely given the evidence.
[01:09] amigos! sing more...
[01:10] hmmm
[01:10] Zen...what evidence do you propose
that make the existance of God unlikely?
[01:10] Action: Bawn wonders if this is kinda like
a side show or something... do I get paid for singing
as well?
[01:10] cassidy, that's it exactly. what
evidence?
[01:11] |