It's logically possible that you don't need a crutch, but it's also logically possible that you do. For it's conceivable that you are in fact spiritually and morally crippled, and that you are blinded to this fact by your self-willed persistence in wickedness.
Now, when it comes to spiritual things, who has more credibility? David Heckman-or Jesus of Nazareth. Well, it's certainly a tough call, because Mr. Heckman has done so many miracles in his life, and has shown himself to be so wonderfully upright in all that he's done. But I don't know, Jesus has done a few noteworthy things. I mean, I know it's not much, but he did resurrect from the dead. Okay, maybe that doesn't compare to what David's done, but I think I'm going to have to trust Jesus when it comes to spirituality and moral well-being. Because I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and I know he would never lie to me. But as for David Heckman-what has he done?
If you were looking for a logical argument, sorry. Not all speech about spiritual matters revolves around demonstrative (or even probabilistic) argument, and thank God for that.
And what if there is insufficient evidence for God's existence for the skeptic or evidentialist? Does that count as reason not to believe in God? Not for me and for others who have a different total evidence for God's existence. The inability to prove God's existence through argument doesn't show that God doesn't exist.
And yes, what you say is conceivable. But it's also false.
if you don't have rational evidence, why do you even bother talking to people about god? you shouldn't even waste your time mentioning jesus' name. everyone will just have to wait for the moment that god imparts the wisdom of the holy spirit on them like he did for you.
As many an evangelical will tell you, success in witnessing is simply taking the initiative to share Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit and leaving the results to God. Also, nowhere in Scripture does it say to preach the Word "only if you've mastered the most probable forms of the cosmological, teleological and moral arguments."
Isn't your belief that I shouldn't waste my time mentioning Jesus' name without rational evidence? If so, you shouldn't waste your time mentioning that I shouldn't waste my time mentioning Jesus' name.
Why assume that God's Spirit wouldn't work in the believers in whom it indwells?
it's pointless to preach to people who want reasonable evidence if you have no reasonable evidence. if you're saying you have "different total evidence for God's existence", the only way anyone else will get that evidence (which i'm assuming is the holy spirit) is if god or the holy spirit comes to them personally. no need for your intervention. it'd be pointless.
if god's "spirit" works in someone else but never comes to me.. i don't know if what they're feeling is actually a legitmate expression of any deity/creator/god. i'm not going to take anyone else's word for anything when it comes to such serious matters.
if you're saying you have "different total evidence for God's existence", the only way anyone else will get that evidence (which i'm assuming is the holy spirit) is if god or the holy spirit comes to them personally. no need for your intervention. it'd be pointless.
Total evidence is total, not just the internal witness of the Holy Ghost.
Sure. Knowing the faith by the Spirit's witness doesn't preclude showing the faith by argument. It just doesn't necessitate it. (In other words, if I cannot present a rationally compelling argument for Christianity, it may still be the case that I am rationally justified in believing in Christianity.)
read the thread "If you were looking for a logical argument, sorry. Not all speech about spiritual matters revolves around demonstrative (or even probabilistic) argument, and thank God for that."
Reply
Reply
Reply
Now, when it comes to spiritual things, who has more credibility? David Heckman-or Jesus of Nazareth. Well, it's certainly a tough call, because Mr. Heckman has done so many miracles in his life, and has shown himself to be so wonderfully upright in all that he's done. But I don't know, Jesus has done a few noteworthy things. I mean, I know it's not much, but he did resurrect from the dead. Okay, maybe that doesn't compare to what David's done, but I think I'm going to have to trust Jesus when it comes to spirituality and moral well-being. Because I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and I know he would never lie to me. But as for David Heckman-what has he done?
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
And what if there is insufficient evidence for God's existence for the skeptic or evidentialist? Does that count as reason not to believe in God? Not for me and for others who have a different total evidence for God's existence. The inability to prove God's existence through argument doesn't show that God doesn't exist.
And yes, what you say is conceivable. But it's also false.
Reply
Reply
Isn't your belief that I shouldn't waste my time mentioning Jesus' name without rational evidence? If so, you shouldn't waste your time mentioning that I shouldn't waste my time mentioning Jesus' name.
Why assume that God's Spirit wouldn't work in the believers in whom it indwells?
Reply
if god's "spirit" works in someone else but never comes to me.. i don't know if what they're feeling is actually a legitmate expression of any deity/creator/god. i'm not going to take anyone else's word for anything when it comes to such serious matters.
Reply
Total evidence is total, not just the internal witness of the Holy Ghost.
Reply
"..not just the internal witness of the Holy Ghost"
so now you're saying that there is some kind of logical argument in addition to the holy spirit or something??
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment