Sufficient Evidence - Ravi Zacharias Q & A

Answers the problem of evil and a good God... puts the issue squarely in the lap of the skeptic asking the question (where it belongs).

Category:

Education

Tags:

• apologetics
• evil
• good
• god
• ravi
• zacharias
• theist
• theism
• atheist
• atheism
• skeptic
• skepticism
• evidence
• logic

[ZaoHudor]

@StrumstickJoe "NT scholarship' is an oxymoron." You are very ignorant of what speak. NT scholarship is the analytical study of the New Testament texts — their historicity, origin, authorship, dating, and content. There are many atheists and agnostic NT scholars as well. So if you believe that disciplines at Cambridge, Oxford, and just about every other major university are oxymoronic, then I can only urge you to refrain from speaking about things you know not of.

[ZaoHudor]

@StrumstickJoe "An atheist is a person without a god, or a need for a god". Atheism is is the belief that there is no god, or, as some might say today, lack of belief in a god. The Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Names defines atheism as, "belief that God does not exist". It concerns belief, which is epistemological.

So I must, therefore ask, where did you get your definition from? Please provide a reputable source. Or did you just make it up?

[StrumstickJoe]

@ZaoHudor The existence or not of your friend jc has no bearing whatever on the human race. An atheist is a person without a god, or a need for a god - that would define a newborn.Neither I nor a baby has need to study the nature of knowledge; its presuppositions and foundations, or its extent and validity. 'NT scholarship' is an oxymoron. Belief in magic is the position of the moron.

I genuinely have no more time for this at present, though much work remains to be done, obviously.

[ZaoHudor]

@StrumstickJoe Do you believe that the denial of Jesus' existence is rational? If so, then what reason do you have to reject both biblical and secular sources that evidence His existence? Why do you depart from contemporary NT scholarship?

Second, atheism is an epistemological position. Babies do not have epistemological positions concerning fundamental philosophical questions. There are developed as one begins to reason. Thus atheists are not born.

[StrumstickJoe]

@ZaoHudor It's as though you need me to admit "he" existed, which I didn't. I don't accept it at all.

Atheists are born. There are no presuppositions. We are all born atheists - we need to be duped and indoctrinated to accept the bizarre doctrines of one of the many thousands of faiths - depending entirely on where we are born and to whom.

Again - I wish you peace and clarity here on earth - for there is nothing to follow.

Thank goodness!

[ZaoHudor]

@StrumstickJoe Given your atheistic presuppositions, it's now wonder that you would believe Jesus to have been deluded. But I'm glad you at least now except the undeniable fact that He existed. I always find it rather strange why atheists are so eager to deny the historical Jesus' existence. It's as though they do not want Him to have existed.

[StrumstickJoe]

@ZaoHudor It seems possible that there was a charismatic (though bizarre and probably deluded) rabbi around about 2,000 yrs ago. Though why you should believe that he should be your moral guide (much less that he is still talking to you!) is utterly beyond me.

I am an atheist - as were we all once - and I don't think he was there - but if he was - so what?

I hope you find peace and clarity within reality.

[ZaoHudor]

@StrumstickJoe Considering the overwhelming evidence of the existence of Jesus of Nazareth (both biblical and and secular), what has lead you to doubt it? You do realize that there is no debate of the existence of Jesus among New Testament scholars? Even atheists grant this as a grounded historical fact.

[StrumstickJoe]

@Follower172 I replied privately to this, but, after seeming to want to hear my reasons, you seem to have defaulted from further comment.

I should add that, whilst I am very doubtful that the jc character ever existed, I utterly renounce his relevance and claims to moral leadership if he did.

The whole faith is an immoral mess based on admiration for a loony who took his son up the mountain to kill him because of a voice in his head.

I hope those who read this find reality.

[Follower172]

people have been killed in the name of everything, including atheism. But I am more interested in this...what Bible have you read that teaches human sacrifice? Are you arguing that the Self-giving Son (in cooperation with the Father's will to redeem) is the same as people putting someone to death for the purpose of appeasing a deity? Because Christ gave of himself as propitiation for sin. in other words, what man meant for evil, Christ meant for good. it was his doing. please respond