Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 115

Thread: When's the last time you heard something new from the Christians?

  1. Top | #1
    Cyborg with a Tiara
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Recluse
    Posts
    7,351
    Archived
    9,040
    Total Posts
    16,391
    Rep Power
    80

    When's the last time you heard something new from the Christians?

    The other thread got me thinking. It's been a long long time since I heard something novel from the Christians trying to explain their beliefs.
    Whether that be trying to sell their beliefs, or apologize for their beliefs or make excuses for their beliefs.

    I do hear things that are new about how to look at the Christian religion from a few atheists, mostly because there are so few out there, so I haven't heard as many and also because science keeps discovering new things that almost always make the bible less believable.

    But religion? All their stuff I heard 40 years ago, you know?

    When's the last time a christian gave you an argument that was knew and you had to look stuff up and decide how you felt about it?

  2. Top | #2
    Veteran Member Brian63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,056
    Archived
    8,911
    Total Posts
    9,967
    Rep Power
    70
    A couple categories.

    I have read/seen paleontology arguments from Ken Ham giving YEC arguments that I cannot refute, because I have little knowledge and interest in that field. The same thing with many who make historical arguments for the NT being a historical document. I simply have never had much interest in the details of the historical (in)accuracies either way. Accepting their conclusions would require rejecting principles like methodological naturalism though, which has been an extremely useful tool for us to obtain knowledge in the past. The fact that Ken Ham also bypasses scientific consensus to try to legitimize his views is also a huge red flag. The proper way to show that you have come across some important new scientific discovery is to convince peers and other scientists and experts of its legitimacy, not Joe Schmoe's on the street who know nothing about the topic.

  3. Top | #3
    Elder Contributor Keith&Co.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Far Western Mass
    Posts
    15,491
    Archived
    24,500
    Total Posts
    39,991
    Rep Power
    72
    Depends on what you consider 'new.' Last week I heard someone arguing that the big bang required god for a justification I hadn't heard before. But really, it strikes me that as the gaps get smaller and smaller, the god of the gaps has to find smaller and smaller niches. So not a new thing as much as a new spot to place the old thing.

    Plus, his 'god is the only way to explain this' point was offered to other believers, not someone with enough physics to actually critique its applicability.

  4. Top | #4
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,120
    Rep Power
    9
    When atheists hear new arguments, they just go "Well that's not what MOST Christians believe" and ignore you.

  5. Top | #5
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Georgia, US
    Posts
    2,120
    Archived
    3,862
    Total Posts
    5,982
    Rep Power
    70
    Nobody ever brings up religion with me, and what could possible be new about a religion that is over 2000 years old?

  6. Top | #6
    Veteran Member James Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,741
    Archived
    5,844
    Total Posts
    8,585
    Rep Power
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith&Co. View Post
    Depends on what you consider 'new.' Last week I heard someone arguing that the big bang required god for a justification I hadn't heard before. But really, it strikes me that as the gaps get smaller and smaller, the god of the gaps has to find smaller and smaller niches. So not a new thing as much as a new spot to place the old thing.
    Years ago it seemed to me that Apologists (not YEC'rs) had winnowed their arguments down to three remaining 'gaps':

    1) The origin of the universe
    2) The origin of life
    3) The origin of morality

    Everything else a well-read apologist will concede has natural explanations (within the framework of "God created the rules of nature"--see Argument #1) but those three were the hills to die on. That's all the arguments I hear from them anymore. I'll hear Apologists grudgingly admit that the Bible may not be inerrant, or that Moses didn't write the Pentaeuch, or that a person can go to Heaven without praying the sinner's prayer. "But only God can make a tree."

    I stopped enjoying Theist/Skeptic debates, because they all are restricted to those three topics. "Does God exist?" "Is morality Objective?" "Is Evolution true?" The subjects and arguments are mostly unfalisfiable philosophy. I would like to see debates on more mundane topics--"Do demons exist?" "Was Noah's Deluge Global?" "Did Jesus turn water into wine?" But I suspect apologists aren't interested in those kinds of debates.

  7. Top | #7
    Veteran Member Sarpedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    MN, US
    Posts
    2,885
    Archived
    8,446
    Total Posts
    11,331
    Rep Power
    65
    When atheists hear new arguments, they just go "Well that's not what MOST Christians believe" and ignore you.
    If it were a good argument, there would be more people than just one that believes it.

  8. Top | #8
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The North
    Posts
    9,023
    Archived
    9,514
    Total Posts
    18,537
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    I stopped enjoying Theist/Skeptic debates, because they all are restricted to those three topics. "Does God exist?" "Is morality Objective?" "Is Evolution true?" The subjects and arguments are mostly unfalisfiable philosophy. I would like to see debates on more mundane topics--"Do demons exist?" "Was Noah's Deluge Global?" "Did Jesus turn water into wine?" But I suspect apologists aren't interested in those kinds of debates.
    This is why I've lost interest too. The debates amount to materialists bashing their head against a wall until theists admit they're wrong or give up. I much prefer to live in the arena of scholars who've moved a few football fields past religious debate and are discussing new ideas.

    God bless the people with the patience for it, I have many things I'd rather involve myself in.

  9. Top | #9
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,120
    Rep Power
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarpedon View Post
    When atheists hear new arguments, they just go "Well that's not what MOST Christians believe" and ignore you.
    If it were a good argument, there would be more people than just one that believes it.
    Well, okay.

    But if you refuse to have conversations about anything other than the majority perspective in your country, you can't very well complain about a lack of novelty, can you? It's like someone bitching about how all movies are the same these days, then refusing to investigate indie cinema because it isn't popular.

  10. Top | #10
    Elder Contributor Keith&Co.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Far Western Mass
    Posts
    15,491
    Archived
    24,500
    Total Posts
    39,991
    Rep Power
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    But if you refuse to have conversations about anything other than the majority perspective in your country, you can't very well complain about a lack of novelty, can you?
    But do you bring up novel perspectives by initiating a new thread for discussion?
    Because my impression has been that you bring up a novel POV in the middle of a thread about something that is a majority or at least a plurality position.
    Which may mean that it's not a case of refusing something new, but not wanting to derail to discuss something that is not-the-OP.

    I may be wrong, but that's what the back of my mind is suggesting. But I threw out all my otherposter surveillance notes...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •