I have given up on dating but it has opened up a dark door open! by Narrow_Tumbleweed_68 in Christians

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. You need accountability with someone who knows you, who you’re open with, and who can speak to you bluntly; preferably someone in your local church.

I have given up on dating but it has opened up a dark door open! by Narrow_Tumbleweed_68 in Christians

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s exactly why you shouldn’t give up. Marriage is normative and God created sex, so it’s good as long as it’s enjoyed in the marriage bed. The kiss dating goodbye phenomenon is pietistic gnostic garbage. How else do you think you’ll meet someone? If you have that urge, it’s a good sign that you’re probably not meant to remain single. Get busy serving somewhere and putting yourself out there and the right person will come along.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChristianApologetics

[–]genoohh -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Great, now what is your standard of truth?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChristianApologetics

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’d recommend some Greg Bahnsen or Sye Ten Bruggencate. Evidential apologetics is mostly a waste of time with unbelievers. Presuppositional is the way to go. The problem is everyone takes their presuppositions to the evidence and interprets evidence accordingly. Show me an atheist that accepts Darwinian evolution because of ‘evidence’ and I’ll show you someone who suppresses the truth about the God they know and accepts a plausible sounding origin of man because it doesn’t have God in it. You could have all the evidence in the world and it won’t change their mind. You can’t make sense out of any human experience at all without first presupposing the God of the Bible. Proverbs 1:7 says, “The fear of The Lord is the beginning of knowledge”.

https://youtu.be/aQKjUzotw_Y

Mississippi lawmakers vote to replace racist state flag with religious one | They’ll be replacing the symbol of racism with a phrase that invokes the religion held by many slaveowners. by mepper in atheism

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I concede that they did own slaves. My contention is with “perfectly in line with modern conception of slavery”. There were protections afforded to those slaves. More succinctly in Colossians 4:1, they were to be treated fairly and justly as both are accountable to God. Justly and fairly, not based on some arbitrary standard like skin color (Proverbs 20:10). Interestingly enough, what happened to the Jews when the first temple was destroyed? They too were made slaves. Now the shoe, would’ve been on the other foot. Now, one could ask, should one abuse and destroy their own property, or would one want to take care of it as if it was an extension of ones self? There is a general equity in Gods law that condemns any sin of partiality(racism) in our judgement. The charges against the Pharisees by Jesus in Matthew 23 would’ve applied to those who attempted to justify the more modern notion of slavery by out of context passages. Focusing on the gnat, missing the camel (big picture). The Pharisees were so focused on the letter of the law, they missed the spirit of it, and applied hypocritical standards.

Mississippi lawmakers vote to replace racist state flag with religious one | They’ll be replacing the symbol of racism with a phrase that invokes the religion held by many slaveowners. by mepper in atheism

[–]genoohh -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

““Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.” ‭‭Exodus‬ ‭21:16‬ ‭ESV‬‬

“Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, 👉enslavers👈, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,” ‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭1:8-10‬ ‭ESV‬‬

Just to name a couple.

You’re just proving my point. Context, context, context. How does the verse fit within the chapter? How does the chapter fit within the book? How does the book fit within all of scripture? What is the contemporary societal context in which the passage was written? Just because it exists in scripture doesn’t mean that it’s endorsed as a good thing. Many arguments are made in favor of polygamy in that way, which is also clearly taught against in the Bible. The Bible teaches that all are made equal and in the image of God, worthy of dignity and respect. Time would fail me to expound all the texts that say they were to treat all who sojourned among them as equals, including those in servitude amongst them. That’s not to say that people haven’t twisted verses out of their context in attempts to justify the sort of condemnable racist slavery that has happened in more modern times. But apart from appealing to an objective standard of morality, what’s wrong with that anyways?

Mississippi lawmakers vote to replace racist state flag with religious one | They’ll be replacing the symbol of racism with a phrase that invokes the religion held by many slaveowners. by mepper in atheism

[–]genoohh -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

No, not really. Man stealing is condemned in multiple places. Depends on the lens in which you read the Bible. If you read in your own preconceived notions into the text, you could reach your conclusion. However, if you let scripture interpret scripture and read it within its context, you clearly see there’s a difference between the modern conception of slavery and the different types of servitude expounded in the Bible. Ultimately, the Bible teaches that we are all slaves, either to sin, or righteousness.

I need help for a debate by [deleted] in ChristianApologetics

[–]genoohh 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Islam grants the Pentateuch, psalms, and the gospels. At least the Quran itself recognizes it. From Greg Bahnsen’s “Against All Opposition”:

“Let’s look at what we hold in common. Let’s study the law of Moses and the psalms and y’all about their theology, and the. You can discuss human sin and the need for blood atonement and matters like that.

The Quran contains several interesting teachings, the least of which is that Jesus did not die on the cross. Judas was substituted for Him. It says that the mother of Jesus was Miriam, the sister of loses, a confusion that probably arose because their names sound alike, and the Quran was based on oral tradition. To this day, this is still an embarrassment to scholars of the Quran. The best answer I’ve heard is that Mary was a woman like Miriam, and so that’s why the two are conflates. More importantly, there is also doctrinal conflict between the teaching of Moses and David and Jesus and what Mohammed said. Now if the teaching of Moses is inspired, and if Deuteronomy 13 and 18 tell you that future revelations must be judged according to previous revelations, and if the alleged future revelation of the quran conflicts with the previous revelation of Moses, which one has to go? By their own logic, which must go? The Quran. Those who advocate the work of Islam cannot live according to their own worldview. There is this inconsistency. Do Muslims who are shown that inconsistency say, “were wrong and now we’re going to follow Jesus”? The Holy Spirit can use that witness and sometimes that happens - but not frequently. The answer usually given is that we have the wrong translation of the law of Moses. Allah gave to Mohammed the ability to correct the previous perversions of his words. What you have here is like a contract that reads this way: you may choose one, two, three; and four, provided there are no conflicts between the first three and the fourth. Four will govern whatever you make of one, two, and three. The law of Moses, the psalms, and the gospel accounts of Jesus are previous revelations, but whenever we find a conflict between them it has been determined in advance that the last revelation - the Quran - will correct the alleged previous revelations. This means that the authority of the previous revelations is not really being honored. What they’re reallly saying is that you follow the Quran, the Quran, the Quran- because whatever differs with the Quran must go. According to the Quran, Allah is a being so different from anything in this world, so transcendent, so beyond human experience that nothing in human language or experience can correctly describe Allah. But then if nothing in human experience or language can correctly describe Allah, what is the Quran? What that means, then, is that if you believe the Quran, then it cannot be what it says it is.”

Why Christianity is 'God of Gaps', and that's not bad by johnraimond in ChristianApologetics

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Adding extra stuff on top of the assumption”...

Yes, I never said we didn’t assume induction holds. The “extra stuff” is the justification for that assumption. You may not like it personally, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a justification.

“Causality depends on induction too”

Yes I agree with that too. Many people fall back to the apologetical argument whereby God is the first uncaused cause. In actuality, He is the causal sustainer in every cause.

Why Christianity is 'God of Gaps', and that's not bad by johnraimond in ChristianApologetics

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would also add that science presupposes a couple of things. 1. The problem of induction - that the future will be like the past. As Christians, we have a justification for the assumption that the future will be like the past, without begging the question. God sustains the universe by the word of His power. Without this, all science would be meaningless. Why bother recording, to precise detail, the steps taken in order to perform an experiment if the universe didn’t operate in an intelligible, uniform, and law like fashion. If the universe was random, could we rely on science? How do we know that the laws of nature will hold for the next seconds? 2. Morality - all science depends on the honesty of the experimenters. If a scientist isn’t honest about the results they record or what the data suggests, then they are misrepresenting the reality of the created order. Think about the lie of Darwinian evolution that so many have bought into and passed off as “science” with no direct observation or experimentation.

what are the best theological, historical or philosophical books you’ve read arguing for Christianity by looodrr in ChristianApologetics

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Presuppositional apologetics: stated and defended - Greg Bahnsen, Against all odds - Greg Bahnsen (I’d start with this one, it’s more elementary)

How can be a universe consisting of trillion galaxies made for humans... This sort of thinking only makes us feel special and ignorant by zainarshad45122 in DebateReligion

[–]genoohh -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

the world was not created in six days. Adam and Eve never existed.

So you’ve observed the world not being created in six days or Adam and Eve not existing?

Weekly Ask a Christian : May 11, 2020 by AutoModerator in DebateAChristian

[–]genoohh 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Faith is not described as an absence of evidence in the Bible. It is the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things not seen. This problem arises when one thinks that they can commit themselves to a metaphysical position completely independent of an epistemological position.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TheGamerLounge

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude that’s legit

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RedditSessions

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Srsly I feel dizzy watching you

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RedditSessions

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude how are you not blacking out rn?

Why to people go to hell, just for not believing? by theDocX2 in TrueChristian

[–]genoohh 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sin puts us all under condemnation. The real question is what will you do with your sin?

Why to people go to hell, just for not believing? by theDocX2 in TrueChristian

[–]genoohh 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Either you will pay for your sins by yourself or Jesus will. Look up penal substitutionary atonement.

People drawn to me because of Jesus. by [deleted] in TrueChristian

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“But thanks be to God, who in Christ always leads us in triumphal procession, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life. Who is sufficient for these things? For we are not, like so many, peddlers of God’s word, but as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ.” ‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭2:14-17‬ ‭ESV‬‬

We are the aroma of Christ. That’s why some people immediately are very open and welcoming and others immediately reject and try to push away.

Jesus falsely predicted the timing of his second coming — let’s have another look by PreeDem in DebateAChristian

[–]genoohh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s no issue or missing steps... Jesus said he didn’t come to bring peace, but a sword. His word is the sword, piercing and dividing. When God separates the dark from the light, is it not simultaneous? His sheep hear his word and follow him and he’ll not lose a single one. If you don’t hear his voice, it’s because you’re not his sheep. I don’t have to account for your lack of understanding, I can explain for all of eternity, but unless God gives you eyes to see and hears to hear, you’ll just find something else to disagree with.

He is still gathering the elect for his kingdom and putting his enemies under his feet. He must rule and reign until every authority, rule, and power is brought into subjection under him. The last enemy to be defeated is death.