Rational Thinking

[Lonewolf]

Science Vs. Revelation

Should revelation rule over observation, or should observation rule over revelation in "rational thinking" as a means to learn about God?

[abelcainsbrother]

I think it depends on the context of the Revelation like in bible prophecy we know about prophecies that are not yet fulfilled but will be in the future.We wait and watch for signs for these to be fulfilled and once they are revelation and observation go hand in hand.

[PaulSacramento]

It isn't an either/or thing, that should complement themselves.

[Lonewolf]

So if they (observation and revelation) complement themselves, why argue with atheists? If they cannot understand because they can't perceive revelation, and if all they go by is observation, while we (Christians) complement the observation with revelation, and we will never get through to them until God draws them to Him and gives them revelation, why even bother arguing with them?

[PaulSacramento]

So if they (observation and revelation) complement themselves, why argue with atheists? If they cannot understand because they can't perceive revelation, and if all they go by is observation, while we (Christians) complement the observation with revelation, and we will never get through to them until God draws them to Him and gives them revelation, why even bother arguing with them?

We really shouldn't ARGUE with atheists or skeptics BUT we should be able to have a rational account for our beliefs.
Some people don't believe because they don't understand the rational arguments for God ( considering how complex they are, and they should be, that is understandable).
Some people don't believe because of the KIND of God they THINK they have to believe in.
Some people don't believe because they KNOW what it means to believe and they want nothing to do with it.
Some people don't believe because they simply disagree with any of the rational premises the lead to belief in God.

It is our job as believers to be able to give a rational account of our beliefs, it is NOT our job to CONVINCE anyone to agree with them.

[Lonewolf]

So if they (observation and revelation) complement themselves, why argue with atheists? If they cannot understand because they can't perceive revelation, and if all they go by is observation, while we (Christians) complement the observation with revelation, and we will never get through to them until God draws them to Him and gives them revelation, why even bother arguing with them?

We really shouldn't ARGUE with atheists or skeptics BUT we should be able to have a rational account for our beliefs.
Some people don't believe because they don't understand the rational arguments for God ( considering how complex they are, and they should be, that is understandable).
Some people don't believe because of the KIND of God they THINK they have to believe in.
Some people don't believe because they KNOW what it means to believe and they want nothing to do with it.
Some people don't believe because they simply disagree with any of the rational premises the lead to belief in God.

It is our job as believers to be able to give a rational account of our beliefs, it is NOT our job to CONVINCE anyone to agree with them.

That's very rational thinking, yet somehow, someway, sometimes, with some people, the arguments do go back and forth, and it is no longer one person wanting to learn and the other person being of enough learning and filled with the Holy Spirit giving concise rational observation with revelation,because it becomes simply one person trying to convince the other. It brings to mind the old saying of 'don't argue with fools, because they might think you're one.'

[PaulSacramento]

So if they (observation and revelation) complement themselves, why argue with atheists? If they cannot understand because they can't perceive revelation, and if all they go by is observation, while we (Christians) complement the observation with revelation, and we will never get through to them until God draws them to Him and gives them revelation, why even bother arguing with them?

We really shouldn't ARGUE with atheists or skeptics BUT we should be able to have a rational account for our beliefs.
Some people don't believe because they don't understand the rational arguments for God ( considering how complex they are, and they should be, that is understandable).
Some people don't believe because of the KIND of God they THINK they have to believe in.
Some people don't believe because they KNOW what it means to believe and they want nothing to do with it.
Some people don't believe because they simply disagree with any of the rational premises the lead to belief in God.

It is our job as believers to be able to give a rational account of our beliefs, it is NOT our job to CONVINCE anyone to agree with them.

That's very rational thinking, yet somehow, someway, sometimes, with some people, the arguments do go back and forth, and it is no longer one person wanting to learn and the other person being of enough learning and filled with the Holy Spirit giving concise rational observation with revelation,because it becomes simply one person trying to convince the other. It brings to mind the old saying of 'don't argue with fools, because they might think you're one.'

Jesus said very plainly ( and a bit roughly) to not throw pearls before swine.
What that means is to not give to those that show no desire in appreciating what you give.

[abelcainsbrother]

So if they (observation and revelation) complement themselves, why argue with atheists? If they cannot understand because they can't perceive revelation, and if all they go by is observation, while we (Christians) complement the observation with revelation, and we will never get through to them until God draws them to Him and gives them revelation, why even bother arguing with them?

We really shouldn't ARGUE with atheists or skeptics BUT we should be able to have a rational account for our beliefs.
Some people don't believe because they don't understand the rational arguments for God ( considering how complex they are, and they should be, that is understandable).
Some people don't believe because of the KIND of God they THINK they have to believe in.
Some people don't believe because they KNOW what it means to believe and they want nothing to do with it.
Some people don't believe because they simply disagree with any of the rational premises the lead to belief in God.

It is our job as believers to be able to give a rational account of our beliefs, it is NOT our job to CONVINCE anyone to agree with them.

That's very rational thinking, yet somehow, someway, sometimes, with some people, the arguments do go back and forth, and it is no longer one person wanting to learn and the other person being of enough learning and filled with the Holy Spirit giving concise rational observation with revelation,because it becomes simply one person trying to convince the other. It brings to mind the old saying of 'don't argue with fools, because they might think you're one.'

Jesus said very plainly ( and a bit roughly) to not throw pearls before swine.
What that means is to not give to those that show no desire in appreciating what you give.

I agree Jesus told us not to cast pearls before swine and I follow this in my debates with atheists and I provide biblical evidence on my terms not their terms when it is needed to make a point but I no longer cast pearls before swine like I used to.

Atheists already have talking points to explain it away so you've got to understand evidence is not really going to win them over.I have found that you first need to show them why evolution is false first and if you can do this then they may be more open to reasons to believe the bible.

I very rarely have to defend the bible and make them defend evolution and then I show how it doesn't back up evolution and that there is no evidence in science that demonstrates life evolves.I then point out if you believe life evolves by faith then you could just believe the bible by faith or that preacher preaching about Jesus and salvation.

[abelcainsbrother]

So if they (observation and revelation) complement themselves, why argue with atheists? If they cannot understand because they can't perceive revelation, and if all they go by is observation, while we (Christians) complement the observation with revelation, and we will never get through to them until God draws them to Him and gives them revelation, why even bother arguing with them?

It is important to defend our faith as Christians I mean atheists dream of removing religion from society and that is their goal and we can't just sit back and allow it to happen.I look at it as planting seeds that can grow when I debate atheists I don't expect to change them right now eventhough that would be great if I could but I look at it like planting seeds that can grow over time.I realize not everybody will be reached no matter what but I think we should try to reach them too.I think this song might help make my point also - Mr Christian. for you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDlo3GcFGHw

[Audie]

So if they (observation and revelation) complement themselves, why argue with atheists? If they cannot understand because they can't perceive revelation, and if all they go by is observation, while we (Christians) complement the observation with revelation, and we will never get through to them until God draws them to Him and gives them revelation, why even bother arguing with them?

It is important to defend our faith as Christians I mean atheists dream of removing religion from society and that is their goal and we can't just sit back and allow it to happen.I look at it as planting seeds that can grow when I debate atheists I don't expect to change them right now eventhough that would be great if I could but I look at it like planting seeds that can grow over time.I realize not everybody will be reached no matter what but I think we should try to reach them too.I think this song might help make my point also - Mr Christian. for you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDlo3GcFGHw

Speaking as an atheist myself there may be some few who so dream as you say; it takes all kinds, as they
say For me though, esp coming from a communist country, I'd NEVER be on board with any social engineering program
I like the freedom to be me! What awful person denies it to others? Freedom!

I respect Christian values, Mormons in particular are such model citizens.

When I disagree with an idea, or point to error in some idea about science, resulting fro a simple
lack of familiarity with the subject, or a reading of the bible at odds with science,
I've been told that is an attack on Christianity!

I hope I can be understood better than that.

My intent is really quite the opposite. I really dont care if people are Christian or not, but
If people are going to be Christian a good strong faith surely is nowhere grounded
in mistakes and misunderstanding. Such faith as that benefits neither society nor an individual, dont you think so?

I do not like to see science misunderstood and rejected in the name of religion or
any other reason. Its a worrying weakness I see in my adopted country that I love.

That is where I hope to reach at least a few people.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

For me though, esp coming from a communist country...

So...I guess you're not Audie Cornish of NPR. Which Communist country do you come from?

I respect Christian values, Mormons in particular are such model citizens.

Mormons are not Christians. Sorry.

I hope I can be understood better than that.

You seem smart and sensible. There is no fruitcake in you: I like that.

FL

[Audie]

For me though, esp coming from a communist country...

So...I guess you're not Audie Cornish of NPR. Which Communist country do you come from?

I respect Christian values, Mormons in particular are such model citizens.

Mormons are not Christians. Sorry.

I hope I can be understood better than that.

You seem smart and sensible. There is no fruitcake in you: I like that.

FL

Hi Fl and thank you.

From which country?, HK actually, so not quite PRC.

Mormons say they are Christians. I've "dog in that fight".
In the event it was just a comment on positive religious values
put into practice, voluntary and outside of govt "let or hindrance".

If religion dries up or becomes universal, that surely is for individual decisions, not for campaigns.

[Audie]

"NO dog in that fight"

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

OK...Thanks. Positive values are nice but you don't have to be Christian to have such values. Positive values keep the surroundings clean: Japan and Switzerland are good examples of neat & tidy countries.

FL

[Audie]

OK...Thanks. Positive values are nice but you don't have to be Christian to have such values. Positive values keep the surroundings clean: Japan and Switzerland are good examples of neat & tidy countries.

FL

I was raised with very strong positive values, no religion to any of it.