What is/are your favorite theology/ apologetic related argument(s)?

[erro...er]

God acts, does things. That is a more clear understanding than just an inactive status, a theology formula slot.

I’m not exactly sure where the argument is going or where it would be employed from what you’ve said here, is there any further reading or a different phrasing that I might understand better?

 

[erro...er]

You mean like my pov that:
I tend to base my theology upon the fact that GOD, (who cannot create evil so all sin is only by a free will decision to rebel against HIM or HIS command), created everyone to be HIS perfect Bride and also as capable of so being HIS perfect bride, proving that HE does NOT create anyone inheriting Adam's sin....?

Yep, looks like an argument within theology to me.

 

[meshak]

Yep, looks like an argument within theology to me.

Yes.

thats what they encourage to do.

 

[erro...er]

I am on the topic.

I owe you an apology then. As I read your post it seemed that you intended to post the conclusion of a conviction without stating an argument that supports those

 

[meshak]

I owe you an apology then. As I read your post it seemed that you intended to post the conclusion of a conviction without stating an argument that supports those

What is the purpose of the thread?

thanks.

 

[EarlyActs]

I’m not exactly sure where the argument is going or where it would be employed from what you’ve said here, is there any further reading or a different phrasing that I might understand better?

It's just that theology can tend to get abstract, which is why Jesus in person is a great standard to compare too. In the Mk 2 'which is easier' healing, the Pharisees object, not to Him being God (as a concept), but to Him forgiving as God (an action). So that's why the type of proof was given. He could do either at will. Or the invisible was proven by the visible.

 

[erro...er]

What is the purpose of the thread?

thanks.

To share arguments that posters seeing or employ often within theology/apologetic discussion. This thread is a way to possibly see how they may look before pitted against eachother in a thread and obstructed by all of the difficulties that can bring in getting it across. Also, we might see an argument that someone likes but hasn’t been regularly used on the forum because they feel it probably will receive little engagement.

 

[erro...er]

It's just that theology can tend to get abstract, which is why Jesus in person is a great standard to compare too. In the Mk 2 'which is easier' healing, the Pharisees object, not to Him being God (as a concept), but to Him forgiving as God (an action). So that's why the type of proof was given. He could do either at will. Or the invisible was proven by the visible.

Oh, ok I think I get the point of this one a little bit better now. I appreciate the further explanation

 

[meshak]

To share arguments that posters seeing or employ often within theology/apologetic discussion. This thread is a way to possibly see how they may look before pitted against eachother in a thread and obstructed by all of the difficulties that can bring in getting it across. Also, we might see an argument that someone likes but hasn’t been regularly used on the forum because they feel it probably will receive little engagement.

why are you interested in those?

what are you going to do with the information you get?

You know many follow their denominational systematic apologetic?

 

[Grace Accepted]

I am on the topic.

You have been warned.

 

[erro...er]

why are you interested in those?

Because my interest in religion is not entirely from a practical aspect, I like to learn new things even if I don’t necessarily do anything with that knowledge.

what are you going to do with the information you get?

Aside from the above, I will have a sort of quick reference of arguments that I may encounter outside of this thread. Having a combination of some knowledge of the existence of an argument and potential past experience with posters those references may better help me under The reasoning for their beliefs, or how to communicate my own beliefs in a way they might understand better (definitely useful if I get into topics outside of this thread)

You know many follow their denominational systematic apologetic?

Not sure what you mean, but I don’t really care about the agenda of anyone in this particular thread. Just collecting info really

 

[erro...er]

Here is Dr. Schaeffer's best book in just a few lines. In defense of Christian faith, there are 3 essential problems, just to get started:
1, the problem of existence. Why does anything exist? The fact that things do exist is a huge (foundational) problem for the conventional modern person, although they seldom see it.
2, the problem of evil. Is there an unbroken line of continuity between God and evil, or is God mad that evil exists, too?
3, the problem of knowing. Is it possible to know our world and God truly, even though we can't know everything? Why?

This is what the excellent book HE IS THERE AND HE IS NOT SILENT covers. But each time, he shows that as you start to look at the Christian message in entirety, it has none of them! This is a problem for the modern person, foundationally, because there is no where to go on any of them. They try materialism (in C S Lewis' sense) or Bhuddism/pantheism, very unhappily.

Ted T's post is about #2 of course.

Thank you for the book recommendation. One of the reasons I was glad to see your name in this thread because I was certain you’d recommend some kind of literature.

I’m personally less familiar with arguments on the 3rd problem listed here, would you say that this book offers your favorite argument on that subject or would you recommend a different source for the curious?