
[ref001]


apologetics:  DEBATE LOGS - 3/14/96
apologetics:  DEBATE LOGS - 3/14/96

[04:09] Acolyte (st_aidan@delta1.deltanet.com) joined 
#apologetics.
[04:09] Mode change '+o Acolyte ' by ApoloBot!bibleman@xlab1.fiu.edu
[04:09] Wakko_ (Conclave@s13-pm07.usc.campus.mci.net) 
joined #apologetics.
[04:09] <Acolyte> ok
[04:09] <ViaMortis> !op
[04:09] <ViaMortis> :)
[04:09] <ViaMortis> it was worth a try...
[04:09] <Acolyte> via u wish
[04:10] <Babysnake> I have no idea.  Evolution might 
provide an answer, in that a species that enjoyed killing 
eachother may have some hard times in the future.
[04:10] <jako> Via, I believe that we have the ability 
to identify with the pain and suffering inflicted on 
others and that in itself is a minor deterent to evil
[04:10] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: :P
[04:11] <Acolyte> wakko if you want the best book on 
the topic you should get Francis Turretin's Institutes 
of Elenctic Theology and MArtin Chemnitz, The Two Natures 
of Christ
[04:11] <ViaMortis> Well I tell you this.. I enjoy doing 
some mean things to people but refrain cause It might 
hurt them... why?
[04:11] <Acolyte> via nature disposes youto
[04:11] <jako> Could it be because you can imagine what 
pain they might suffer!
[04:12] <ViaMortis> no...
[04:12] <ViaMortis> it would be fun... I just know it's 
not right...
[04:12] <ViaMortis> like a pie in the face.. is that 
harmful?
[04:12] <ViaMortis> no
[04:12] <ViaMortis> but it would be fun.. but evil in 
a way...
[04:12] <Babysnake> How would it be evil?
[04:12] <ViaMortis> cause it might hurt the person I 
inflict
[04:12] <jako> It depends on the situation
[04:13] <ViaMortis> how would you like it if I pied your 
face?
[04:13] <Acolyte> via it all depends ont he value of 
the consequent and why it is valued
[04:13] <Babysnake> I might enjoy it, depending on the 
mood.
[04:13] Wakko_ (Conclave@s13-pm07.usc.campus.mci.net) 
left #apologetics.
[04:14] <ViaMortis> your correct.. but in most of my 
moods I feel it would be wrong
[04:14] <Acolyte> via what are emotions?
[04:14] <ViaMortis> I feel the pie hitted wouldn't like 
it either no matter the time or place
[04:14] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: You tell me
[04:14] <Acolyte> via it depends on the paradigm one 
is in, what is your paradigm?
[04:15] <ViaMortis> well first I would look in the dictionary 
what a paradigm is.. then I would tell you...  :P
[04:15] <ViaMortis> or you could tell me and save me 
the time
[04:15] <Acolyte> worldview=paradigm
[04:15] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: the world is full of messed 
up people.. that's my paradigm
[04:16] <Acolyte> via r u an athiest? Theist? pantheist?what?
[04:16] <ViaMortis> panthiest is what?
[04:16] <ViaMortis> exactly?
[04:16] <Acolyte> God=nature
[04:16] <ViaMortis> hmmm... agnostic
[04:16] <Acolyte> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^pantheism
[04:16] <Acolyte> ic
[04:16] <ViaMortis> U C?
[04:17] <ViaMortis> :P
[04:17] <Acolyte> you don't know or no one can know?
[04:17] <ViaMortis> I don't know
[04:17] <Acolyte> ic
[04:17] <Acolyte> well is man anything more than a material 
body?
[04:17] <jako> pantheism is the belief that all things 
are manifestations of god!
[04:17] <Acolyte> IYO
[04:17] <Acolyte> jako God=Nature, saves space
[04:18] <ViaMortis> all things? hmmm.. that's not me
[04:18] <Acolyte> via is man anything more than a physical 
body?
[04:18] <jako> Whats your "paradigm" Acolyte?
[04:18] <Acolyte> Jako I am a Theist
[04:18] <Acolyte> jakco specifically I am a Christian 
Theist
[04:19] <jako> AH! and telepathic too. You answered my 
question before I asked it. :)
[04:19] <ViaMortis> wow.. Ill send my 75 cents for that 
"paradigm" word thingy
[04:19] <ViaMortis> :fi
[04:20] <ViaMortis> :)
[04:20] <ViaMortis> just kidding
[04:20] <Acolyte> via wellif man is only materila thenemotions 
are chemical reactions
[04:20] <Acolyte> if man has no soul then his emotions 
are bio-chemical reactions, as are his ideas
[04:20] <ViaMortis> well that wouldn't make sense if 
Im an agnostic.. then I wouldn't believe that there 
is NO God would I?
[04:21] <ViaMortis> I don't know which... le sigh...
[04:21] <Acolyte> viamortis do you have reasons for your 
denial of God's existence?
[04:21] <ViaMortis> :fi
[04:21] <Acolyte> :P~
[04:21] <ViaMortis> AGNOSTIC.. NOT ATHIEST
[04:21] <ViaMortis> there is a difference
[04:21] <ViaMortis> :P
[04:21] <Acolyte> via ok, do you think you cold ever 
know?
[04:22] <ViaMortis> If I look long enough.. I will find
[04:22] <ViaMortis> right?
[04:22] <jako> Is it necessary to know?
[04:22] <Acolyte> perhaps if you look correctly you will 
find
[04:22] <Acolyte> jako for somethings yes
[04:22] <Babysnake> So there is a correct way to look?
[04:22] <ViaMortis> Jako: Of course it is.. it is the 
future of your afterlife.. nothing? or death or life?
[04:22] <jako> For god and Christ?
[04:22] <Acolyte> babysnake I thinks o
[04:22] <Acolyte> jako yup
[04:23] <Babysnake> What is this hypothetical correct 
way?
[04:23] <Acolyte> wooops
[04:23] <Acolyte> brb
[04:23] <ViaMortis> hmmm... now that was just strange
[04:23] <ViaMortis> Okay I have another question.. assuming 
God is Good.. how do we know that he will not change?
[04:24] <Acolyte> not that one
[04:24] <Acolyte> hmmm
[04:24] <Acolyte> @tim 4 13
[04:24] <Acolyte> dang it
[04:24] <Acolyte> where is it
[04:24] <ViaMortis> AColyte: did you hear my question?
[04:24] <Acolyte> yes
[04:24] <Acolyte> be there in a second
[04:24] <ViaMortis> what cha think?
[04:24] <Babysnake> What are you looking for?
[04:24] <ViaMortis> he's a christian.. he's FOUND it 
all  :P
[04:25] <ViaMortis> just kidding
[04:25] <jako> If I live a rightious (not sinless) life 
and I spend a great deal of my time helping others 
but do not accept the existance of the Christian God, 
what will become of myu soul?
[04:25] <Acolyte> jako depends
[04:25] <Acolyte> not that one
[04:25] <jako> on what
[04:25] <Acolyte> dang it I usually know that one by 
heart
[04:25] <ViaMortis> Jako: I can answer that one
[04:25] <ViaMortis> if you would permit
[04:25] <Acolyte> jako christians disagree on that issue
[04:25] <jako> go for it
[04:25] <Acolyte> jako, some thing you'd be toast
[04:26] <Acolyte> jako others depends on whaere you were, 
if you in a place that youcould not hear the gospel 
or not
[04:26] <ViaMortis> well according to Christian view... 
If God is indeed perfect then he can't dwell with our 
imperfect selves
[04:26] <ViaMortis> If we had ONE ounce of imperfection 
how could he dwell?
[04:26] <Acolyte> Via your question abut God
[04:26] <jako> What if I was raised a christian!
[04:26] <Acolyte> thats simple
[04:26] <ViaMortis> I don't know...
[04:26] <Acolyte> jako toast
[04:27] <Acolyte> God does not change because his nature 
determines what he will do, his nature is immutable
[04:27] <ViaMortis> Jako: So the only way to cover ALL 
the sins or imperfections that one has.. they would 
have to accept Christ
[04:27] <Acolyte> via no
[04:27] <jako> That is the main reason I cannot call 
myself a Christian
[04:27] <Acolyte> via to have christ accept you
[04:27] <Acolyte> jako why?
[04:27] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: If he "asks ya" you have to 
accept him
[04:27] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: If he "asks ya" you have to 
accept him
[04:28] <ViaMortis> Jako: what do you mean?
[04:28] <Acolyte> there it is
[04:28] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: If he "asks ya" you have to 
accept him
[04:28] <ViaMortis> Jako: what do you mean?
[04:28] <Acolyte> via perhaps
[04:28] <Babysnake> So what exactly is rational theism?
[04:28] <jako> Ac. I believe that we will be judged by 
what is truly in our hearts. Any judgement will be 
independant of out spiritual beliefs.
[04:28] <ViaMortis> perhaps? or right?
[04:28] <ViaMortis> how does one tell?
[04:29] <Acolyte> jako so weather you love God does not 
matter?
[04:29] <Acolyte> via see jn 6 44
[04:29] <Acolyte> Jako so you could hate God and still 
go to heaven?
[04:29] <jako> Yes
[04:30] <Acolyte> yes?
[04:30] <Acolyte> Jako so you could hate God and still 
go to heaven?
[04:30] <Acolyte> Jako how does one merit God's favor?
[04:30] <jako> Unless god has an attitude
[04:30] <ViaMortis> Jako: So imperfection CAN dwell with 
perfection?
[04:30] <Acolyte> jako, what would the presence of God 
be like for those that hate him?
[04:30] <ViaMortis> God CAN look upon evil and not care?
[04:30] <Acolyte> via good question
[04:30] <ViaMortis> How do you know?
[04:30] <jako> Why should we try to merit gods favor!
[04:31] <Acolyte> via he cares
[04:31] <Babysnake> Why should he?
[04:31] <Acolyte> jako, I am asking you, you seemto think 
that God owes you eternal life
[04:31] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: I know that if a God took 
the time to create us that he would be a different 
God then "impersonal"
[04:31] <Acolyte> via very true
[04:32] <ViaMortis> So Jako: can a perfect God dwell 
with imperfection?
[04:32] <jako> I believe that eternal life is something 
that should be earned by someones actions and by their 
true heart, not by their spiritual belief!
[04:32] <Acolyte> jako how do you earn God's Favor?
[04:32] <ViaMortis> How can one EVER hope to win salvation?
[04:32] <Acolyte> jako how much good is enough?
[04:32] <ViaMortis> have you seen how evil a "rightous" 
man can be?
[04:33] <ViaMortis> How then can a Unrightous man gain 
eternal life?
[04:33] <ViaMortis> what If society made it impossible 
to do good?
[04:33] <jako> Via, I have seen how evil a Christian 
can be!
[04:33] <ViaMortis> then he's stuck in a hole
[04:33] <Acolyte> jako ok, so how do you plan to earn 
God's favor?
[04:33] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: assuming that we don't believe 
in the bible... how can you quote it?
[04:33] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: assuming that we don't believe 
in the bible... how can you quote it?
[04:33] <Acolyte> via I do
[04:34] <Acolyte> via its truth does not depend on your 
assent to it
[04:34] <ViaMortis> That's my point.. I don't.. how can 
you win me over with something i don't belive?
[04:34] <Babysnake> Oh, I think it does aco.
[04:34] <Acolyte> via other ways
[04:34] <Acolyte> via by showing alternatives to be faulty
[04:34] <Acolyte> thats one way
[04:34] <ViaMortis> Acolyte.. my point is... with scripture 
you won't win anyone over unless they believe in the 
scripture
[04:35] <jako> Ac. As I said, I plan to live my life 
as morally and just as I can manage and will leave 
the judgement up to God when the time comes, whatever 
"god" is!
[04:35] <ViaMortis> or else then they will ignore it
[04:35] <Acolyte> via perhaps, Ic an show how it comports 
mwith experience tho
[04:35] <ViaMortis> Jako: How do you know that's good 
enough?
[04:35] <Acolyte> jako how do you know what is moral?
[04:35] xenno (balo@ix-okc-ok1-21.ix.netcom.com) joined 
#apologetics.
[04:35] <jako> Via! I don't
[04:35] <xenno> hmm
[04:35] xenno (balo@ix-okc-ok1-21.ix.netcom.com) left 
#apologetics.
[04:35] <Acolyte> jako how do you know what is moral?
[04:36] <ViaMortis> Jako: then what is the use trying 
if you don't know what is good enough? how do you know 
that two "sins" isn't bad enough to send you to hell 
and that you never have a way to ignore those sin

s?
[04:36] <ViaMortis> or mistakes?
[04:36] <jako> Ac. Moralality, to me, is what I believe 
to be just, For me it is to treat others as I would 
want to be treated 
[04:37] <Acolyte> jako, so what you like makes a thing 
moral?
[04:37] <ViaMortis> then it's already to late and your 
on your way
[04:37] <Acolyte> jako so what if I like to kill jews?
[04:37] <Babysnake> Yes, what I like is my morality.
[04:37] <Acolyte> jako thatis abitrary
[04:37] <ViaMortis> do unto others is jako's philosophy
[04:37] <ViaMortis> not what is fun
[04:37] <Acolyte> via, that all depends onw hat he/she 
likes tho
[04:37] <Babysnake> Then in your morality Acolyte, you 
would be correct.  You should be prepared to be judged 
by others however.
[04:38] <ViaMortis> Acolyte" pardon?
[04:38] <Acolyte> baby why?
[04:38] <ViaMortis> baby: pardon
[04:38] <Acolyte> baby why should my actins incurr judgement 
if there is not any standrd to make a judgement by?
[04:38] <ViaMortis> anyone going to clear up their own 
opinions?
[04:38] <Babysnake> why what?  If you like to kill jews, 
then it must be morally acceptable to you.
[04:38] <ViaMortis> or just continue to be amgigious?
[04:38] <ViaMortis> ambiguious
[04:39] <ViaMortis> hmm.. how does one spell that word?
[04:39] <Babysnake> The standard of judgement is your 
fellow man.
[04:39] <Acolyte> babysnake that is a descriptive staement 
only tho
[04:40] <Acolyte> jako I don't think you have really 
delt with the problem of individual ethical systems
[04:40] <Babysnake> Do you deny that you will be judged 
by others?  In fact, what is not a descriptive statement?
[04:40] <Acolyte> babysnake why?
[04:40] <Babysnake> why what?
[04:40] <Acolyte> baysnake Prescriptive statements are 
not descriptive stattments
[04:41] <Acolyte> baby why should others judge me? and 
how can they if there is nothing to judge BY?
[04:41] <Babysnake> And the problem with a descriptive 
statement is?
[04:41] <ViaMortis> Are we all okay on the concept that 
there MIGHT be a God?
[04:41] <ViaMortis> or not?
[04:41] <Babysnake> The can judge you by their own moral 
code, and the code aggreed to by common consensus.
[04:41] <Acolyte> babysnake it does not prescibe, ethics 
deals with whatI OUGHT to to, not describing what I 
do
[04:41] <jako> How you got killing jews out of my statement 
baffels me! I did not say treat others as I please. 
I said treat others as I would like to be treated myself.
[04:42] dad44 (stahley@ppp0.enter.net) joined #Apologetics.
[04:42] <Acolyte> babysnake but how do you know there 
is morality at all?
[04:42] dad44 (stahley@ppp0.enter.net) left #Apologetics.
[04:42] <Acolyte> Jako, do all ppl like to be treated 
the same way? No also, why should i value how I like 
to be treated?
[04:42] <ViaMortis> Jako: I already said that for your 
benifit already
[04:42] <ViaMortis> :fi
[04:42] <ViaMortis> scroll up
[04:43] <Babysnake> I am not claiming there is.  I am 
claiming that we all have our own ehtical code for 
ourselves, and then there are guidelines agrred upon 
by common consenus.
[04:43] <Acolyte> babysnake but if therea re no ethics 
then we cannot have an ethcial code, now can we?
[04:44] <Acolyte> Babysnake Consensus gentium, just because 
we agree does not make it true or right ethically or 
factually
[04:44] <jako> Ac. So morality, outside of the religious 
setting, is non existant
[04:44] <Acolyte> babysnake informal fallacy
[04:44] <ViaMortis> Jako: that is true
[04:44] <Acolyte> jako yes
[04:44] <ViaMortis> since "all ie relative"
[04:44] <Acolyte> jako ppl are not consistent
[04:44] <Babysnake> I am afraid it does make it true. 
 There is no other standard to use.
[04:44] <jako> Ac, either is religion
[04:45] <Acolyte> Babysnake why not God's standard?
[04:45] <Acolyte> Jako how do you know that?
[04:45] <jako> Ac. look at the different interpretation 
of the bible!
[04:45] <Babysnake> Because God's standard is up to interpetation, 
hence, if we agree what god's standard is then it would 
be true.  It is still by consensus.
[04:45] <ViaMortis> jako: different? like what?
[04:46] <Acolyte> jako how does hppl interpreting what 
God does and says make what God does and says inconssitent?
[04:46] <ViaMortis> Jako: One can misinterpret shakespear 
but is the wrong way the way that is correct?
[04:46] <Acolyte> Babysnake is there anything that is 
not debatable? No
[04:46] <ViaMortis> yes there is Acolyte
[04:46] <ViaMortis> :P
[04:46] <jako> Ac. I didn's say that Gos was inconsistant, 
I said that religion was inconsistant
[04:46] <ViaMortis> joke
[04:46] <ViaMortis> Jako: One can misinterpret shakespear 
but is the wrong way the way that is correct?
[04:47] <ViaMortis> someone going to listen?
[04:47] <Babysnake> No there is not, and that is my point 
acolyte, thanks.
[04:47] <Acolyte> jako many ppl in religious bodie are, 
so?
[04:47] <Acolyte> babysnake so lack of debate does not 
make an issue correct, nor does the existence of debate 
make a position false
[04:48] <ViaMortis> Acolyte: your correct.. I like that...
[04:48] <Babysnake> What other standard do you propse 
acolyte?
[04:48] <Acolyte> babysnake sso debate is irrelevant 
to the truth of theproposition
[04:48] <jako> So what about someone who follow a code 
of ethics that is indipendant of religion.
[04:48] <Acolyte> babysnake God's Law
[04:48] <ViaMortis> people error.. therefore there are 
mistakes
[04:48] <ViaMortis> correct?
[04:48] <Babysnake> Which one?
[04:48] <Acolyte> jako is there one?
[04:48] <Acolyte> babysnake Xian
[04:48] <Babysnake> Define please
[04:48] <Acolyte> babysnake I think there is more evidence 
for it and reason than all others
[04:49] <Acolyte> Christian Go
[04:49] <Acolyte> God
[04:49] <Babysnake> I see, so a hindu would be just plain 
wrong then?
[04:49] <ViaMortis> hmmm...
[04:49] <jako> Via: People - interpretation - Religion 
- Bible - God Therefor there are mistakes!
[04:49] <Acolyte> babysnake not wrong on everything, 
but on many things yes
[04:49] <Babysnake> By whose standard?
[04:50] <Acolyte> babysnake the Christian Standard, the 
Scriptures
[04:50] <ViaMortis> Jako: that would be true... but if 
God DID have a hand in those creations then there would 
be no mistake in the bible.. then you have to decide 
what a mistake IS
[04:50] <Babysnake> Yours becasue you believe something 
different?
[04:50] <Babysnake> So the hindu cannot form an ethical 
code from his religous texts, while you can from yours?
[04:50] <Acolyte> Babysnake not because I think differently 
but because it has support of reason and evidence. 
there's does not
[04:50] <jako> Via. There are many interpretations of 
the bible. Surely one of them has mistakes!
[04:50] <Acolyte> babys sure he can, but is it consistent? 
Logical? No
[04:51] <Babysnake> What evidence does the christian 
bible enjoy, that the hindu faith does not?
[04:51] <ViaMortis> Jako: person iterpretations of the 
bible? or language?
[04:51] <Acolyte> babysnakewas Vishnu a real person? 
No was jesus? Yes
[04:51] <Babysnake> Is god a real person?
[04:51] <jako> Via: Probably both!
[04:51] <Acolyte> baby I think so, but I know what God 
is like because of Christ
[04:52] <Babysnake> So if your god could be a "person", 
why could not vishnu?
[04:52] <ViaMortis> Jako: well I must admit that personal 
interpretations are bad.. but language... that is something 
else
[04:52] <Acolyte> babysnake never said it could not, 
justthatit is inconsistent and not supported by evidence
[04:53] <Babysnake> What evidnece is there that god was/is/ever 
a person other than someone is claiming so right now? 
 
[04:53] <Acolyte> babysnake if you have better evidence 
for A then B, would itnot be rational to choose belief 
in A over B?
[04:53] <jako> Ac. I have a difficult time accepting 
a religion that condems the soul of a man who tried 
to life a good life yet saves the soul of a man that 
commits horrible crimes as long as he accept Christ 
and repents on his death bed!
[04:53] <ViaMortis> How are you sure that it is? If God 
is indeed helping us out.. would he allow our text 
to lie to us? 
[04:53] <Acolyte> Babysnake History
[04:54] <Babysnake> If you had any evidence at all, that 
argument might be valid.
[04:54] <Acolyte> Jako thats right, God's mercy is unconditinal.
[04:54] <ViaMortis> Jako: I would agree but that arguement 
sounds wrong
[04:54] <Acolyte> Babysnake an dyou know that I do not?
[04:54] <Babysnake> My main questions is this:  The point 
of the bible is faith, yet you seem to have all of 
this evidence to support your claim.  It no longer 
sounds like faith to me.
[04:54] <jako> Via: What sounds wrong!
[04:54] <Acolyte> Jako God's mercy cannot be barrted 
for by works
[04:55] <Babysnake> If you have it, spill it boy!
[04:55] <Acolyte> define faith
[04:55] <Acolyte> babsysnake define faith
[04:55] <ViaMortis> Jako: IF god gave us a "way" to save 
our lives.. then how is that wrong? he told us that 
"he was the only way the only truth and the only life" 
if he gave 

us a means of excape then it seems that he is just.. 
or that he at least cares
[04:56] <Babysnake> Faith is the belief in something 
when there is no eveidence.  If you had no evidence 
it would not matter, because you have faith.  I do 
not  have a dictionary, so I cannot give you a good 
one.
[04:56] <ViaMortis> that is if you accept the Christian 
view
[04:56] <Acolyte> Babysnake well thatis not a Christian 
defintion of Faith
[04:56] <Babysnake> I shoould say, wothout need for eveidence.
[04:56] <Babysnake> Give me your definition of faith 
then acolyte
[04:56] <Acolyte> babysnake you will not find A SINGLE 
christian theologian that takes that view
[04:56] <Acolyte> Faith has 3 componants
[04:57] <Acolyte> 1. Knowledge
[04:57] <Acolyte> 2. Assent
[04:57] <Acolyte> 3. Trust
[04:57] <Babysnake> Knowledge of what?
[04:57] <Acolyte> 1. I know X by evidence and reason
[04:57] <Acolyte> 2. I assent that X is true
[04:57] <jako> Via: If he is truly omnepotent(sp.) why 
would he not judge us truly by what we accomplised, 
tried to accomplish and by the good that we do.
[04:57] <Acolyte> 3. I Trust Christ based on 1  & 2
[04:58] <Acolyte> Babysnake God and his works
[04:58] <ViaMortis> Jako: how does that play into omnipotents?
[04:58] <Acolyte> Jako if god was  to judge you by your 
works, would one infractionof his law make you a lawbreaker?
[04:59] <jako> Ac. That would be for god to determine
[04:59] <ViaMortis> all have sinned and are worthy of 
death.. according to that scripture all are in trouble.. 
unless God did something to stop that punishment from 
happening
[05:00] <Acolyte> jako ok, how do you know that there 
is a God at all?
[05:00] <ViaMortis> jako: but you said if he was omipotent 
then he would judge according to our actions
[05:00] <ViaMortis> how does that play into his omnipotents?
[05:00] <ViaMortis> I don't see the conection
[05:01] <jako> Ac. You may laugh but the truth is I was 
dead for 3 minutes in 1969. I know that there is a 
god!
[05:01] Babysnake (storm@cisco-ts17-line2.uoregon.edu) 
left irc: Ping timeout for Babysnake[cisco-ts17-line2.uoregon.edu]
[05:01] MrBell (Micah@ppp108.ihug.co.nz) joined #apologetics.
[05:01] <ViaMortis> Jako: how is it that about 1 out 
of 50 (or something like that) say that they DID indeed 
feel something otherwise than "nothing"?
[05:02] <ViaMortis> when they died?
[05:02] <ViaMortis> (they also claim that most blocked 
the experience from mind cause of the painfulness of 
the experience.. aka: hell?)
[05:02] <Acolyte> jako so based on yourpost mortum experience 
I am supposed to trust what you say>?
[05:02] <jako> Via. I was just saying that an omnipotent 
god would have the ability to judge on wider criteria 
than the vane conception that we believe in him.
[05:03] <Acolyte> Jako perhaps God chose not to judge 
on a wider criteria
[05:03] <Acolyte> jako and perhaps he told us so
[05:03] <Acolyte> he made it simple
[05:03] <ViaMortis> jako: that is your vain concept of 
what a omnipotent god would do... don't you think?
[05:03] <Acolyte> 1 way
[05:03] <ViaMortis> how do you know that God wouldn't 
do what the christian god would?
[05:03] <Acolyte> jako did jesus lie?
[05:03] <ViaMortis> jako: that is your vain concept of 
what a omnipotent god would do... don't you think?
[05:03] <Acolyte> jako did jesus make an error there?
[05:04] <ViaMortis> answer mine first...
[05:04] <jako> Wow, I got about a hundred questions.
[05:04] <ViaMortis> :fi
[05:04] <ViaMortis> answer mine first...
[05:04] <ViaMortis> :)
[05:04] <jako> I will answer as quick as possible
[05:04] haven2 (haven2@199.183.200.76) joined #Apologetics.
[05:05] <ViaMortis> :fi
[05:05] <Acolyte> hullo haven
[05:05] <haven2> hi
[05:05] <ViaMortis> hulloooooooo haven
[05:05] <ViaMortis> :P
[05:05] <jako> First: about the near death experience. 
I am not claiming that this experience gives me a better 
knowlege of what the "truth" is just that it has confirmed 
my beliefe that life does not end at phy

sical death!
[05:06] <haven2> sounds like i interupted
[05:06] <Acolyte> jako Jesus was dead for days, don't 
u think he wold know betetr than you?
[05:06] <haven2> sorry
[05:06] <Acolyte> haven no problem
[05:06] <Acolyte> haven go ahead
[05:06] <ViaMortis> haven2 no problems
[05:06] <jako> Ac. Providing you believe that Jesus was 
resurected!
[05:07] <jako> Hi haven2
[05:07] <Acolyte> jako oh wellperhaps you can explain 
what occured then ifhe was not?
[05:07] <ViaMortis> well then what happened to the body 
if he wasn't resurected?
[05:07] shema (lewis7@aus-tx6-15.ix.netcom.com) joined 
#apologetics.
[05:07] <Acolyte> hullo shema
[05:07] <jako> Ac. No I cannot, I wasn't there.
[05:07] shema (lewis7@aus-tx6-15.ix.netcom.com) left 
#apologetics.
[05:08] <Acolyte> jako was president Lincoln shot?
[05:08] <Acolyte> jako did cesar cross the Rubicon?
[05:08] <Acolyte> jako did the Gospel writers lie?
[05:08] <jako> Yes many different sources of historical 
facts say so!
[05:09] <jako> licoln that is
[05:09] <Acolyte> ok, so why is it that you trust those 
sources bu tnot the Gospel writers?
[05:09] <haven2> bye everyone gonna surf while tides 
still in:]
[05:09] <Acolyte> later haven
[05:09] <ViaMortis> bye Haven
[05:10] <haven2> libyebye
[05:10] haven2 (haven2@199.183.200.76) left #Apologetics.
[05:10] <jako> I dont know of any history writers who 
wrote about parting seas' etc.
[05:10] <Acolyte> jako ok but I am not tlaking about 
that 
[05:10] <ViaMortis> jako: is it miracles that keep you 
from scripture?
[05:10] <Acolyte> jako why is it htat you trust those 
sources but not the Gospel writers?
[05:11] <jako> I do not trust all sources I read. I have 
to make judgement calls as I go
[05:12] <ViaMortis> Jako: have you ever done a unbias 
study of the Christian faith? It's really interesting...
[05:12] <Acolyte> jako ok, why do you judge the Gospel 
writers to be deficient?
[05:12] <jako> To read something and believe it to be 
truth without scrutiny can be very dangerous!
[05:12] <ViaMortis> Jako: have you ever done a unbias 
study of the Christian faith? It's really interesting...
[05:12] <Acolyte> jako I am not saying that, what are 
your reasons for rejecting the Gospel writers?
[05:13] <Acolyte> jako ok, why do you judge the Gospel 
writers to be deficient?
[05:14] <Acolyte> jako ok, why do you judge the Gospel 
writers to be deficient?
[05:14] <ViaMortis> acolyte: maybe if you say it again... 
 :)
[05:14] <ViaMortis> acolyte: maybe if you say it again... 
 :)
[05:14] <ViaMortis> :P
[05:14] <jako> Via: I dont necessarily reject the gosple 
writers. I do believe that The gosple is one source 
of information (possibly corrupted) from which one 
can read / live by
[05:15] <Acolyte> possibly corrupted? or IS corrupted?
[05:15] <jako> Sorry about the slow responses. I use 
a special keyboard and I have trouble keeping up!
[05:15] <Acolyte> jako the gospels have the best textual 
transmission out of any ancient historical document
[05:15] <ViaMortis> jako: all I said was this
[05:15] <Acolyte> thats fine
[05:15] <ViaMortis> Jako: have you ever done a unbias 
study of the Christian faith? It's really interesting...
[05:15] <ViaMortis> that's what I said...
[05:16] <Acolyte> via I saw
[05:16] <ViaMortis> :P
[05:16] <ViaMortis> thanks
[05:16] <Acolyte> :P`
[05:16] <Acolyte> :P`~
[05:16] <jako> I believe possible corrupt. I have drawn 
no specific conclusion when it comes to spirituality.
[05:16] <jako> Via: I am trying to do that as we speak!
[05:17] <ViaMortis> :P
[05:17] <Acolyte> jako but yet you trust othger sources 
which are less reliable historically but not the Gospels 
whicha re themost reliable historically. that does 
not make much sense
[05:17] <ViaMortis> hokay.. lets take it from here...
[05:17] <ViaMortis> that's true...
[05:18] <jako> Why are the gosples more reliable!
[05:18] <ViaMortis> like the Galic wars of Julius Ceaser
[05:18] <jako> historically, that is.
[05:18] <ViaMortis> only a couple of documents were found 
BUT we take it ALL as a fact
[05:18] <Acolyte> jako, 1, transmission
[05:18] <Acolyte> 2. external confirmation
[05:18] <Acolyte> 3. Internal evidence
[05:19] <Acolyte> the Gospels have more than any other 
ancient document by far
[05:19] <Acolyte> the only document that comes even close 
is Homer's Illiad and the odessy, which is not very 
close
[05:19] <Acolyte> jako, I suggest F.F. Bruce, The NT 
Documents: Are they Reliable?
[05:19] <Acolyte> he's an Oxford Textual Critic
[05:19] <jako> but how many times has it been rewritten 
and translated, let alon interpreted
[05:20] <Acolyte> jako interpretation does not change 
the text
[05:20] <Acolyte> jako think of it this way
[05:20] <Acolyte> you have 3 copies o anote from your 
mom
[05:20] <Acolyte> each one has a mess up
[05:20] <Acolyte> so the firts one goes liek this
[05:21] <Acolyte> 1. Go to the $tore and buy some milk.
[05:21] <Acolyte> 2. *o to the store and buy some milk.
[05:21] <Acolyte> 3. Go to the store and &uy some milk.
[05:21] <Acolyte> not to hard to figure out what the 
original said now is it?
[05:22] <ViaMortis> well if you candy coat it...
[05:22] <Acolyte> you RE-construct the original scientifically
[05:22] <ViaMortis> or how about this 1: bad arguement
[05:22] <ViaMortis> 2: bud arguement
[05:22] <ViaMortis> 3: bod arguement
[05:22] <ViaMortis> not hard to figure out is it...  
:)
[05:22] <Acolyte> jako we have 99.8-9% of the NT reconstructed. 
better than anything in the WORLD
[05:23] <Acolyte> EVER
[05:23] <ViaMortis> hey.. just a joke...
[05:23] <Acolyte> nothing even comes close
[05:23] <jako> Through several transgressions the corruption 
could get deeper that that
[05:23] <Acolyte> jako could, but didn't
[05:23] <Acolyte> jako do you know how many ancient copies 
of the NT there are?
[05:24] <Acolyte> over 25,000
[05:24] <Acolyte> too many to hide corruption
[05:24] <jako> How ancient!
[05:24] <ViaMortis> wow.. that's muchos gracios
[05:24] <Acolyte> if someone deliberately wanted to change 
te text, it would be practically impossible
[05:24] <Acolyte> jako the earliest text we have is about 
90-115 AD 
[05:25] <Acolyte> the latest is about 900-1,000 ad or 
so
[05:25] <ViaMortis> you mean OLD testament
[05:25] <Acolyte> No I mean NT
[05:25] <ViaMortis> or NEW testament?
[05:25] <Acolyte> the John Rylands text
[05:26] <Acolyte> its dated about 90-115 ad
[05:26] <Acolyte> jako the NT is not unreliable historically
[05:27] <Acolyte> the point is simple, if you accept 
less reliable sources then why not the NT since it 
is by FAR much more reliable?
[05:27] <ViaMortis> true that...
[05:27] <Acolyte> jako the evidence is there
[05:27] <Acolyte> the reasons are clear
[05:27] <Acolyte> its just that simple
[05:27] <Acolyte> jako think about it
[05:28] Acolyte (st_aidan@delta1.deltanet.com) left 
#apologetics.
[ref002]Return to #apologetics Home Page
[ref003]Return to LOGS Page
[ref004]Go to the MCU Virtual Library



[ref001] http://mcu.edu/library/logs/log_3_14_96.html
[ref002] http://www.fiu.edu/~wgreen01/apologetics.html
[ref003] http://www.fiu.edu/~wgreen01/logs.html
[ref004] ../

