Ravi Zacharias and William Lane Craig answers questions about Christianity (Part 2 of 8)

[oneandonlyrisenangel]

Man, Poor craig sounds like The flu sucked the life out of him.

[philosophy7575]

I like listening to W.L. Craig when he is getting over the flu.

[MajSmJz]

@philosophy7575 Haha, so true. It brings in the charm, don't you think?

[TheTechnomage]

I would answer these (easily actually), but I see that dissenting views are being CENSORED. Why do all Christians do this? Don't you think that this might be just a tad intellectually dishonest (you know, like WLC is)

[philosophy7575]

@TheTechnomage

That is quite a pompous claim. It is typical of internet atheists though.

[inhalejesus]

@TheTechnomage were waiting...

[jerrydecaire1]

@TheTechnomage Can you give me an example as to how WLC is being technically dishonest? Whenever I make a claim or proclamation, I try to support that posit.

[jerrydecaire1]

@TheTechnomage Just one more thing, in this particular video WLC is pleading the emotional skew but when he's at the top of his game, his arguments are far more intellectual and evidential. I think this video assumes a large Christian audience and WLC doesn't feel as compelled to make the evidential argument for those who already believe. Why he's making an apologetic at all to that audience may merely be a survey of his points of view-I don't know-but he's usually so much better than this

[prffsrx]

This is actually R.C. Sproul, not William Lang Craig

[philosophy7575]

@prffsrx

What? Why would you say that? He was introduced as Dr. Craig. Plus if you have ever heard Craig, you would recognize this material as his presentation, not Sproul.

[DigitalDecadence]

WLC sounds like he is a little sick or something in that first question? Like he has a cold heh.

[JClives4evr]

Awesome!!!!

[hexusziggurat]

Nicely done video.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture,

I never knew belief in once-saved-always-saved was essential for salvation. Find a Bible verse that defends that, mate.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture, My question: is it essential for the atonement of the Christ? I don't see how this makes sense: "but once a person progresses in Christ if they think they can lose their salvation obviously, they were never born again to begin with." I do not see how a person thinking they might be able to lose their salvation means they never had salvation to begin with. It is extraordinarily odd, mate, and I've never heard anyone except for unqualified youtubers spouting such.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture,

You are failing to understand me, Parture. Just because someone believes that they can lose their faith, it doesn't mean they actually can. Again, you seem to be defending some view of knowledge imparting salvation which isn't entirely true. Salvation comes from Christ's atoning death on the cross and accepting Christ as God and having a relationship with Him.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture, No, you misunderstood me. I didn't use faith in my sentence, but that can very easily been seen in what I said. I mentioned Christ's atoning death on the cross and accepting him as God [and savior]. This is faith plain and simple, mate. I'm not sure if you were lost in the content of my sentence, but you did misinterpret me. Salvation is through faith in the atoning death of the Christian messiah. Your vacuous charges are false and unhelpful. And you are the image of fundamentalism.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture Furthermore, You never answered my question, and seemed to sidestep answering it entirely. Read what I wrote concerning eternal security, and then look at your response. Your response doesn't seem to be directed at anything I've said, or just misunderstandings of what I've said. And then to claim that I have no salvation! I know the Messiah Son of God is my savior, and no amount of blind scripture volleys on your part can change that.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture By the way pull the plank out of your eye. It is blinding you.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture, You still have not responded to what I have said. You are still confusing perfect doctrine in all areas with essential doctrine for salvation.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture, First, I never said I didn't agree with eternal security. I actually haven't studied the issue well enough to make a decision. Second, I still think that is not an essential doctrine for having a saving relationship with Christ. From what I've read those that argue against eternal security have decent arguments as well. They could just as easily say you are going to hell. ;)

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture, I am a fairly recent Christian anyways so you are wrong.

[SirContraMundum]

@Parture, Obviously you are rude and foolish. Remember to re-read this conversation. You didn't respond to my criticisms to an even remotely satisfactory way, but instead engaged in personal attacks. Shame, shame.