
[ref001]


#apologetics:  DEBATE LOGS - 4/2/96
#apologetics:  DEBATE LOGS - 4/2/96

[23:49] ZenRookie (hyperion@blackhole.dimensional.com) 
joined #apologetics.
[23:49] Kiwitu (melmes@ppp232.ihug.co.nz) joined #Apologetics.
[23:49] <ZenRookie> hiya
[23:50] <Kiwitu> Gidday ZenRookie
[23:50] <Kiwitu> May I ask, what is the subject of the 
channel?
[23:50] <ZenRookie> are you an apologist?
[23:50] DG (earth.exe@andromeda.execpc.com) joined 
#Apologetics.
[23:50] <Kiwitu> Don't know
[23:50] <ZenRookie> oh. hehe,  well, an apologist is 
one who rationally defends religion.  
[23:51] <ZenRookie> so this channel is for people who 
rationally defend religion
[23:51] <ZenRookie> mostly christianity
[23:51] <Kiwitu> Ah. OK thanks..Interested.
[23:51] <ZenRookie> are you religious?  i am not.
[23:52] <Kiwitu> No. Neither am I
[23:52] <ZenRookie> ah.  
[23:52] <ZenRookie> i was just waiting for someone to 
come in so I could ask a few questions, and see if 
they could "rationally" answer them.
[23:52] <Kiwitu> So what are you doing here ?
[23:53] <Kiwitu> Sorry Zen...Not gonna be any help.
[23:53] <ZenRookie> i figured :)
[23:53] <ZenRookie> i usually hang out in #atheism a 
quite irreverent channel, if you are interested.
[23:53] Cesium (dos.efx@lgn.com) joined #apologetics.
[23:53] <Cesium> hello
[23:54] <ZenRookie> hey cesium
[23:54] <Cassidy_> hello.
[23:54] <Cassidy_> what can I rationally answer? (or 
try to,...)
[23:54] <Kiwitu> I am from New Zealand. The latest issue 
of Time magazine carries a particularly interesting 
cover story about AI
[23:55] <ZenRookie> cassidy: ok, wherein lies the sacrifice 
of death (dying for our sins) if jesus knew he would 
rise from the dead?
[23:55] <ZenRookie> it's one of the questions that bugs 
me
[23:55] <Cassidy_> Zen...let me see if I am understanding 
you correctly....
[23:55] <Kiwitu> I have visited #atheism several times 
but find a few of the regulars too evangelistic for 
me.
[23:56] <Cassidy_> are you asking..."how could a sacrafice 
be valid if the person being sacraficed knows his sacrafice 
will be only for a limited amount of time?
[23:56] <Cesium> so... apolobot captures everything we 
say, and then the debates which christians win are 
shone on the web site?
[23:56] <ZenRookie> no, i am asking how i death considered 
a sacrifice, when he was risen from the dead.
[23:57] <Cassidy_> Kiwi...want atheistic eevangelism? 
try #AynRand!!!!
[23:57] <ZenRookie> howi = how is
[23:57] <Cassidy_> Zen...why is it efecatious if it wasn't 
eternal??? is that it?
[23:58] <Kiwitu> don't want any evangelism Cassidy...:)
[23:58] <ZenRookie> well, i guess so, how is one sacrificing 
ones life, when one is not going to be dead.
[23:58] <Cassidy_> Ces...if that happens...Im not aware 
of it. Ask Liam3 or Profg.
[23:59] <Cesium> i'll look out for them... but it seems 
to be the most reasonable hypothesis, no?
[23:59] <Cassidy_> Zen...we believe he indeed WAS dead. 
We believe He (God the Son) could die for a tempory 
amount of time...and the one for the many...because 
he, being God, is infinately valuable..therefore his 
death, although temporary...was in

finately valueable.
[00:00] <Kiwitu> Zen. Are you trying to determine the 
validity or otherwise of spiritualism by semantics?
[00:00] <Cassidy_> Kiwi...nor I.
[00:01] <ZenRookie> hmmmm, cassidy, i understand the 
explanation, but there just seems to be something wrong 
with it in my mind.
[00:01] <Cassidy_> OK...
[00:03] <Cesium> rational theism?  what exactly does 
this mean?
[00:03] DG (earth.exe@andromeda.execpc.com) left #Apologetics.
[00:04] <Kiwitu> Cesium it must essentialy mean the same 
as rational atheism
[00:04] <Cassidy_> Cesium...same thing its always meant. 
Theistic belief has always been a notable contender 
in western philosophy.
[00:04] <Cesium> i doubt that...
[00:04] <ZenRookie> what, then, would god be doing, while 
jesus was dead, if they were one and the same?
[00:04] <Cesium> rational theism as opposed to irrational 
theism?
[00:05] <Cassidy_> well...you only need read a histouy 
of philosophy to find out...
[00:05] <Cesium> i'd rather let you tell me what you 
think it means
[00:06] <Kiwitu> Cesium. What I meant was if you can 
use a method ie rationality to prove something, you 
must also be able to use the same technique to disprove 
it, otherwise the technique is invalid.
[00:06] <Cassidy_> Zen...we believe that "God" did not 
die...Christ the man died. He said "Unto thy habnds 
I commit my spirit":...Christ therefore died physically.
[00:06] <ZenRookie> cesium, there is lots of irrational 
theism.  those who take the bible as 100% literal truth 
are often irrational.
[00:06] <Cassidy_> Zen...and often not.
[00:07] <Cesium> so... rational theism proves the existence 
of god?  or attempts to?  this is getting somewhere
[00:07] <Cesium> i agree with you, zen.
[00:08] <ZenRookie> christ the human died.  but christ 
the human was also god.  but god did not die.  apparently, 
the flesh died, but not the spirit, so to speak, is 
that what you are saying?
[00:08] <Cassidy_> Ces...is it? I believe you are asking..."does 
theism have strong arguments for Gods existance"...I 
say, yes. We have many and many that are compelling.
[00:09] <Cesium> i was just wondering about the definition 
of rational in regards to theism, but asking about 
your arguments might have been a followup... what are 
some?
[00:09] <Kiwitu> those who take the bible as 100% literal 
truth are unfortunately fundamentaly irrational. It 
was probably never intended to be 100% literal.
[00:09] <Cassidy_> Zen...Christ is a hypostatic union....The 
God-man. His "parts" are neither mingled or totally seperate....so, 
yes. Christ, the man died. But God did not.
[00:10] <ZenRookie> hmmm, his parts were not mingled, 
and not separate?  could you explain how that works?>
[00:11] <Cassidy_> Kiwi...you must define 100% literal. 
I personally allow for natural language, poetic verse, 
alegory, etc. However...I otherwise accept it as the 
revealed word of God.
[00:11] <Kiwitu> It was only related by those with the 
knowledge available to them at the time, as all things 
have always been.
[00:11] HyprParit (John@line031.nwm.mindlink.net) joined 
#apologetics.
[00:12] <Cassidy_> Zen...perhaps not. Not adaquitely. 
However, I think your original question can be answered. 
Is his sacrafice sufficient? Yes.
[00:12] <Cesium> cassidy_, how do you decide when to 
label a verse allegorical?
[00:13] <Cesium> hello, hyprparit
[00:13] <Cassidy_> Cesium...if the context suggests as 
much. Its not terrably difficult.
[00:13] <ZenRookie> is this "hypostatic" union the rational 
part?
[00:14] <Cesium> when the verse seems as if it violates 
natural law or common sense?
[00:14] <Kiwitu> based upon your understanding at the 
time.
[00:14] <ZenRookie> cesium, not exactly, Job for instance, 
is allegorical, yet many people take it as literal.
[00:14] <HyprParit> IS ANYONE STIRRING?
[00:15] <Cesium> i would assume so... aren't there references 
to sea monsters?
[00:15] <HyprParit> \
[00:15] Action: HyprParit 
[00:15] <HyprParit> \
[00:15] Action: HyprParit 
[00:15] <Cesium> stirring?  is that an irc term?
[00:15] <Cassidy_> Its not irrational. To conceive of 
God Taking on flesh is not the most difficult part 
of Christianity. 
[00:16] <ZenRookie> one could argue that "sea monsters" 
could be anything that is large and unknown and living 
in the sea, of which i am sure there were many things.
[00:16] <HyprParit> hey
[00:16] <Cesium> but i believe there were specific descriptions... 
verses?
[00:17] <Cassidy_> Zen...the problem is that Christ spoke 
of Job as a literal event...he gave no hint of an allegorical 
understanding anyways..
[00:17] <Cesium> i've heard arguments that the references 
to sea monsters are sightings of dinosaurs, validating 
a young earth theory.  would you consider that irratioanl?
[00:17] Kiwitu (melmes@ppp232.ihug.co.nz) left #Apologetics.
[00:17] <Cassidy_> Zen...right. Sea Monsters are an example 
of "natural language" in the Bible.
[00:18] <ZenRookie> cassidy: so you think that the story 
of Job is a telling of actual events, just as they 
happened?
[00:18] HyprParit (John@line031.nwm.mindlink.net) left 
irc: HyprParit
[00:18] <Cassidy_> I dont hold a young earth theory.
[00:18] <ZenRookie> cesium: they also said that the dragons 
breathed fire, but as of yet, no one has documented 
any fire-breathing creatures.
[00:18] <Cesium> cassidy, i am genuinely happy for you
[00:19] HyprParit (John@line031.nwm.mindlink.net) joined 
#apologetics.
[00:20] <Cesium> hello again, hyprparit
[00:20] <Cassidy_> Zen...the way its written sounds quite 
a bit like a tale...a play perhaps. It is difficult 
to see it as a historical doccument. However, the style 
doesn't itself negate the possibility...plus, as I 
said, Christ spoke of Job, and

 his words dont suggest allegory.
[00:21] <Cesium> hmm... i'm retriving my bible (nab)
[00:21] <Cesium> er retrieving... now i have it
[00:21] <Cassidy_> Cesium...Im happy that your happy 
for me. Even if I did hold to a young earth...Id be 
happy that you weren't happy for me...  :)
[00:21] <HyprParit> hey
[00:21] <ZenRookie> cassidy: we often talk of allegorical 
stories to punctuate our language, while making it 
sound as if the events actually happened, just one 
example would be people who refer to Shakespeare.
[00:22] <Cassidy_> Zen agreed.
[00:22] W (cservice@undernet.org) got netsplit.
[00:22] <Cesium> well, i am also happy in general about 
this... but onto Job :)
[00:22] W (cservice@undernet.org) returned to #Apologetics.
[00:23] <Cesium> what is W?
[00:23] <ZenRookie> many biblcal scholars hold that Job 
is a wonderful piece of allegorical literature.  
[00:23] Mode change '+o W ' by okc.ok.us.undernet.org
[00:23] <ZenRookie> W is Da Man
[00:23] <Cesium> among the literary masterpieces of all 
time, says my catholic nab
[00:24] Fermat (knoble@acca.NMSU.Edu) joined #apologetics.
[00:24] pascoe (pasc8891@xslip04.csrv.uidaho.edu) joined 
#apologetics.
[00:24] <ZenRookie> cesium, you have the New American?
[00:25] <Cesium> hello fermat and pascoe
[00:25] <pascoe> hi Cesium.
[00:25] <Fermat> hi
[00:25] <Fermat> what is the topic?
[00:25] <Cassidy_> Zen...and others do not. They look 
first to the first verse in Job. Many claim there is 
no literary indication that the verse meant to introduce 
him as a fictitious figure......
[00:25] <Cesium> well, it's a rather old version (hmmm 
1986).  i also have a kjv
[00:25] <Cesium> Job
[00:26] <ZenRookie> cassidy: the fact that others do 
not, to me, is quite interesting.  here we have two 
sets of learned scholars, each saying something quite 
opposite from the other.  Who are we to believe?
[00:26] <Cesium> ah... notice the repeated use of the 
number 7.
[00:26] <ZenRookie> lucky 7
[00:27] <Cesium> allegorical signs of Yahweh's blessings?
[00:27] <Cassidy_> Zen...the ones that give the more 
compelling argument.
[00:27] <Cesium> hehe yes
[00:27] Bawn (simpsonb@UCS.ORST.EDU) joined #apologetics.
[00:28] <ZenRookie> the numbers 3, 12, 40 and 1260 also 
show up quite a bit :)
[00:29] <Cesium> that they do... seven sons though.  
i imagine this was considered the most significant. 
 it is listed first.
[00:29] <Cassidy_> Zen...al Im saying is that, for this 
particular verse...many believe that it is clearly 
an introduction to a real person...
[00:29] <ZenRookie> in fact, the number 1260 appears 
7 times.  spooky
[00:29] HyprParit (John@line031.nwm.mindlink.net) left 
#apologetics.
[00:30] <Cassidy_> suruly you don't doubt everything 
that is questioned be another...heck, if that were 
the case, you must then doubt you're own existance, 
because of those in the past that have doubted theirs.
[00:31] <ZenRookie> cassidy: well, one does have to look 
at likelyhood also.
[00:31] <ZenRookie> it is very likely that i exist :)
[00:31] <Cassidy_> Zen...I couldn't agree more.
[00:32] <Cassidy_> Zen...I believe that...in fact, I 
believe it is absolutey necessary that I exist.
[00:32] Action: ZenRookie will be back in a minute 
or two...
[00:32] <Cassidy_> ok...
[00:32] <Bawn> :)
[00:32] <Cassidy_> Bawn...you still with me?
[00:33] <Cassidy_> Thanx for the email...it was comforting.
[00:33] <Bawn> yuppa
[00:33] <Bawn> it was kinda long winded..sorry
[00:33] Fermat (knoble@acca.NMSU.Edu) left irc: Read 
error to Fermat[acca.NMSU.Edu]: Connection reset by 
peer
[00:33] <Cesium> who fermat
[00:33] <Cesium> oops
[00:33] <Cesium> just checking everyone out :)
[00:33] <Cassidy_> wrong channel, ces :)
[00:33] <Bawn> hootchie cootchie
[00:33] pascoe (pasc8891@xslip04.csrv.uidaho.edu) left 
irc: Ping timeout for pascoe[xslip04.csrv.uidaho.edu]
[00:34] <Cesium> ah, he left
[00:34] Action: ZenRookie is back...
[00:34] <Cesium> who
[00:34] <Cassidy_> re zen
[00:34] <Cesium> how can see everyone who is online?
[00:35] <Cesium> er on the undernet
[00:35] <Bawn> not sure you wanna do that
[00:35] <Bawn> there are like 9000 ppl on rightn now
[00:35] <ZenRookie> cesium, type /who *e* will get you 
close enough :)
[00:35] <Cassidy_> everyone? you wouldn't want to! believe 
me! its thousands!!!
[00:35] <Cesium> i figured it would be smaller than the 
others... not se?
[00:35] <Cesium> so
[00:35] <Bawn> no dal net is smaller
[00:36] <Cesium> ah... thanks for the warning
[00:36] <Bawn> but it still has like 2 thousand
[00:36] <Cassidy_> dalnet is the IRC child right now.............
[00:36] <ZenRookie> well, there is qnet, which has usually 
20 people on it. :)
[00:36] <Cesium> well... hours and hours of chemistry 
is calling me.  have fun
[00:36] nethawk (bacharms@ash-cs-6.win.bright.net) 
joined #Apologetics.
[00:36] <Cesium> exit
[00:36] Cesium (dos.efx@lgn.com) left irc: Cesium
[00:36] <Bawn> fun fun cesiam
[00:36] <Bawn> hi nethawk
[00:37] Topic changed by Cassidy_!cassidy7@irv-ca6-20.ix.netcom.com: 
God Thinks...therefore I am   -Berkeley
[00:37] <nethawk> hi bawn
[00:37] <nethawk> whatcha talkin about tonite?
[00:37] <ZenRookie> did jesus die on the first day of 
passover (the first full day) or the day before>?
[00:38] <Cassidy_> Bawn sounds like Fawn...invokes images 
of furry animals....
[00:38] <Bawn> :)
[00:38] <Bawn> for some reason the name Fawn invoces 
paper shredders in my mind
[00:39] <nethawk> lol
[00:39] <ZenRookie> fawn invokes, in me, that annoying 
piece of music we had to listen to in music appreciation, 
afternoon of a faun or something like that
[00:39] <Bawn> hehehehehehe
[00:41] <Cassidy_> Zen...Im back....
[00:41] <Cassidy_> Bawn is charasmatic and people flock 
to her................
[00:41] Double-M (mott@ts1-207.monticello.net) joined 
#Apologetics.
[00:41] Double-M (mott@ts1-207.monticello.net) left 
#Apologetics.
[00:41] <Bawn> hmmm  alum is often used as a flocking 
agent at water treatment facilities
[00:42] <Bawn> sorry I have been studying recently :P
[00:42] <Cassidy_> bawn... very interesting...thank you 
for sharing that with us...
[00:42] W (cservice@undernet.org) left irc: let's see 
it a reboot helps....
[00:42] W (cservice@undernet.org) joined #Apologetics.
[00:42] Mode change '+o W ' by channels2.undernet.org
[00:43] <Bawn> hmmm  anytimg cassidy and if you have 
any environmental engineering questions you know where 
to go :)
[00:43] <Bawn> to the library :)
[00:43] <Cassidy_> Bawn...all the time!
[00:43] <Cassidy_> ouch
[00:43] <Bawn> heheh
[00:44] <Cassidy_> oooof~
[00:44] nethawk (bacharms@ash-cs-6.win.bright.net) 
left #Apologetics.
[00:44] <Cassidy_> zen...I believe Ive abandoned you...sorry...
[00:45] <ZenRookie> s'ok, i was reading.
[00:45] <Cassidy_> reading what?
[00:46] <ZenRookie> John
[00:47] <Cassidy_> bawn is like asprin but without the 
severe stomach upset...
[00:47] <Bawn> LOL
[00:48] <Cassidy_> bawn...is alot like codine also....but 
she's legal in high doses and wonderfully addictive 
with no adverse side-effects...
[00:48] <Bawn> :)
[00:51] <Cassidy_> my novacaine for the rotten tooth 
of life....
[00:51] <Bawn> :)
[00:51] Action: Bawn groans
[00:51] <Cassidy_> ok....sore, not rotten
[00:52] <Bawn> brb
[00:52] <Cassidy_> ok
[00:52] <Cassidy_> so zen...are u a rookie of Zen?
[00:53] <Cassidy_> as in a freshman Buddist?
[00:53] <Bawn> back
[00:53] <ZenRookie> nah, just a cool nick i thought of 
once.  at least, i think it's cool.
[00:54] <Cassidy_> so you are bawn...all creation waited 
for your return...
[00:54] <Cassidy_> Zen...rather deceptive, but cool. 
Do you lean toward theism at all?
[00:55] Pergolesi (jeffboro@phx-ip-59.netzone.com) 
joined #Apologetics.
[00:56] <Cassidy_> Bawn...I waited for you with baited 
breath (smelled kinda like earthworms and Zeke's cheese-bait...didn't 
even get a bite...)
[00:56] <ZenRookie> cassidy: i tend to be one who likes 
proof.  call me a cynic, but there seems to be scare 
evidence to support the god of the bible.  i do not 
discount out of hand thta god might exist.
[00:56] <Bawn> thanks cassidy
[00:57] <Pergolesi> hello Apologists
[00:57] <ZenRookie> scare evidence should be scarce evidence 
:)
[00:57] <Bawn> hi pergolesi
[00:58] <Pergolesi> hello bawn...is there any particular 
topic...or what is going on tonight?
[00:58] <Bawn> hmmm
[00:58] <Bawn> I dunno  looks like zen rookie is trying 
to find evidence that there is a God.. and cassidy 
is trying his best to find the cheesiest pick up line 
for me.
[00:59] <Bawn> and I am sitting here politely twiddlling 
my thumbs
[00:59] <ZenRookie> i have looked for evidence for more 
than 20 years.
[00:59] <Pergolesi> ZenRookie, what sort of evidence 
are you looking for?
[00:59] <ZenRookie> oh, well, if god were to appear to 
me personally, that would probably do it
[01:00] <Cassidy_> Zen...as opposed to all us Christians 
who "dont" like proof? Read Alvin Plantinga...one of 
the formost theologians alive...or try Gorden H. Clark...also 
alive...a brilliant philosopher. There 

are a good many books written and in print updating 
the traditional arguments for God. +, there have been 
some new arguments, like the transendental argument 
that are in the philosophical arena right now. theres 
no doubt that Christian Theism is in the
[01:00] <ZenRookie> worked for moses.
[01:00] <Pergolesi> you are right, it worked for moses, 
but is any other evidence valid
[01:00] <Bawn> Moses already believed when He got to 
see God.
[01:01] <Cassidy_> cheezy, right.
[01:01] <ZenRookie> hmmm, god did not come to me when 
i did believe.  kind of a ripoff.
[01:01] <Bawn> hmmm
[01:01] <Cassidy_> Zen, Join the club. "blessed are those 
that do not see and yet believe" Christ said that.
[01:01] <Pergolesi> so, are you saying that you did believe 
in God, but he did not reveal himself to you?
[01:01] <ZenRookie> god seemed to have quite a lot of 
personal relationships with people back in the "olden 
days"  he seems to have stopped tho
[01:02] <ZenRookie> cassidy: that is a convenient verse, 
dont you think?
[01:02] <Cassidy_> Zen...ask Padre Pio. He might tell 
you different.
[01:03] <ZenRookie> i know that you will think it unbased, 
but in my philosophy, the simple fact that I can doubt 
god
[01:03] <ZenRookie> 's existence, sways me to believe 
that he does not exist.
[01:03] <Cassidy_> Zen...I dont know what you mean. I 
dont like it...I wish He would appear to me too...but 
you know? many have believed without appearences. If 
I was the ONLY one...that might be different.
[01:03] <Bawn> hmmm
[01:04] <Bawn> why is that zenrookie?  do you think that 
if there were a God he would cause people to automatically 
have ingrained belief in Him?
[01:04] <Cassidy_> Zen...what kind of argument is that? 
I doubt many things and yet am rationally compelled 
to accept them.
[01:04] <Pergolesi> Zen, what makes you doubt God's existence?
[01:04] <ZenRookie> my question always returns to "why?" 
 why would god set it all up the way he did.  it seems 
like such a bother.
[01:04] <Pergolesi> What seems like a bother?
[01:05] <ZenRookie> the whole "believe in me, but i am 
not gonna make it easy for you" thing
[01:05] vote (canon@206.163.120.146) joined #Apologetics.
[01:05] vote (canon@206.163.120.146) left #Apologetics.
[01:05] <Pergolesi> Perhaps it is you who does not make 
it easy???
[01:05] <ZenRookie> bawn: to answer your question, yes, 
that is what i think
[01:06] <Bawn> zenrookie. thanks.
[01:06] <Bawn> zenrookie  nice that you can decide What 
God would be like *if* he existed eh?  :)
[01:06] <ZenRookie> bawn: it divine
[01:06] <ZenRookie> it's 
[01:07] Action: Bawn goes back to twiddling her thumbs
[01:07] <ZenRookie> it's either what i think, or what 
i am told.  i tend to believe myself more often
[01:07] <Cassidy_> Zen...and if the why doesn't magically 
"click", then you disbelieve? that is irrational. To 
the extent that you are finite in understanding, compared 
to God who is omniscient, to that extent y

ou must grant that it is possible that there exist 
circumstances that make our present world the best 
possible world that can still maintain freedom of the 
will for it's creatures.
[01:07] <Cassidy_> Bawn! Sing us a song!
[01:08] <ZenRookie> cassidy: i am not asking for magically 
click, but after 20 years, you would think there would 
be somethin gmore.
[01:08] <Bawn> ok
[01:09] <Bawn> I never gargled I never gambled I never 
smoked at all until I met my two good amigos Nick O 
Teen and Al K Hall
[01:09] <Pergolesi> Zen, the assertion that things are 
not easy, and that we can not comprehend why the world 
is the way it is, does not in any way reject the possibility 
that God does exist
[01:09] Action: Bawn sings
[01:09] <Cassidy_> Zen...perhaps...I dont know. Many 
believe. Many dont. Good arguments and defences exist 
for the Faith. Some dont see them. I dont have the 
answers for that one.
[01:09] <ZenRookie> per: i already stated that i do not 
reject the possibility of god's existence, however 
i do find it unlikely given the evidence.
[01:09] <Cassidy_> amigos! sing more...
[01:10] <Bawn> hmmm
[01:10] <Cassidy_> Zen...what evidence do you propose 
that make the existance of God unlikely?
[01:10] Action: Bawn wonders if this is kinda like 
a side show or something... do I get paid for singing 
as well?
[01:10] <ZenRookie> cassidy, that's it exactly.  what 
evidence?
[01:11] <ZenRookie> perhaps i should have said "lack of 
evidence"
[01:11] Action: Cassidy_ slaps a 20 spot on the table 
in front of bawn and waits for another lively tune....
[01:11] Action: Bawn pockets the money
[01:12] <Pergolesi> Zen, where does Christ fit in your 
worldview?
[01:12] <Cassidy_> Zen...Im asking you. You said His 
existance was unlikely...so tell us what you feel is 
compelling evidence for the existance of a universe 
without God?
[01:13] Action: Bawn looks at the twenty
[01:13] <Bawn> yeah right Jim this is monopoly money!
[01:13] <ZenRookie> cassidy, the lack of direct sensual 
evidence of this god is what i base my conclusion on.
[01:13] <ZenRookie> per: i don't know.
[01:13] Action: Cassidy_ pulls out a wad of 20's and 
flashes them in front of bawn in an attempt to get 
anopther song or two...
[01:14] <Bawn> I want money lots and lots of money I 
want the pie in the sky I wanna be rich  
[01:15] <Bawn> I spend money on lottery
[01:15] <Bawn> my favorite number is 1 2  3
[01:15] <Cassidy_> Zen.....firstly, I think he can be 
argued for both inductively and deductively. Second, 
I believe that an explanation of Ethics or reason in 
a God-less world is a difficult task...I propose impossible.
[01:15] ^MOMSTER (dananova@ppp16.snni.com) joined #apologetics.
[01:16] <Pergolesi> I believe that for those who are 
philosophically challenged by the idea of God, should 
first and foremost examine the claims of the Bible, 
and determine them to be either true, false, or unintelligible. 
 Have you examined these

 claims?
[01:16] <Bawn> hi monster
[01:16] <^MOMSTER> hulla
[01:16] <ZenRookie> cassidy, and i would argue that basing 
morals or ethics on god is a cop out myself.
[01:16] <^MOMSTER> Cassidy dude !!!!!!
[01:16] Action: ^MOMSTER (((((((((( Cassidy_ ))))))))))
[01:16] <ZenRookie> per: i have studied, read, and otherwise 
evaluated the entire bible many times.
[01:17] <Pergolesi> And how do you see the claim of God 
as Creator?
[01:17] Action: ^MOMSTER notes that you can study all 
you want , but without the proper tools you will get 
no where.
[01:18] <^MOMSTER> :)
[01:18] <ZenRookie> per: i do not hold that proving that 
there is a creator is sufficient to assert that the 
creator is god.
[01:18] Cassidy_ (cassidy7@irv-ca6-20.ix.netcom.com) 
left irc: Ping timeout for Cassidy_[irv-ca6-20.ix.netcom.com]
[01:18] <Bawn> there goes cass
[01:18] <ZenRookie> momster: what would these tools be?
[01:18] <^MOMSTER> bye all
[01:18] ^MOMSTER (dananova@ppp16.snni.com) left #apologetics.
[01:18] Bawn (simpsonb@UCS.ORST.EDU) left #apologetics.
[01:19] ^MOMSTER (dananova@ppp16.snni.com) joined #apologetics.
[01:19] <^MOMSTER> sorry.... i missed that last question
[01:19] <^MOMSTER> what was that??
[01:19] <Pergolesi> that is fair enough, yet it throws 
weight to that possibility if you believe in a creator
[01:19] <ZenRookie> per: i have no idea how the universe 
got here.
[01:20] <ZenRookie> momster: what would these tools be?
[01:20] <^MOMSTER> I wasnt being specific, just a general 
statement
[01:20] <Pergolesi> the Bible claims that God is the 
creator.  We must realize that this claim is either 
true or false, correct?
[01:20] <ZenRookie> per: in a biblical setting, yes, 
that statement is either true or false.
[01:21] <ZenRookie> momster: then i did not understand 
what you meant.
[01:22] <Pergolesi> Zen, I disagree, if I claim to be 
the creator, my claim is either true or false, regardless 
of my personal "setting"
[01:22] <^MOMSTER> Well, what I meant is that you can 
study the Bible or anything for that matter, but if 
you are not studying with the proper tools you might 
as well not study at all.
[01:22] <ZenRookie> momster: i do not understand what 
you mean by 'the proper tools'
[01:22] <^MOMSTER> Meaning...
[01:23] <^MOMSTER> If you are using a spanish dictionary 
to interpret a passage you will be lost.
[01:23] <^MOMSTER> :)
[01:23] <Pergolesi> unless the Bible is in Spanish :)
[01:23] Mode change '+o ^MOMSTER ' by W!cservice@undernet.org
[01:23] <ZenRookie> per: the bible states that god is 
the creator.  eitehr god exists or does not, either 
there is or is not a creator.  the bible is predefined 
to assign the role of creator to god, but, outside 
of the bible, there is no such pred

efinition
[01:23] <^MOMSTER> True Pergolesi
[01:24] <ZenRookie> momster: is it then a tautology that 
if I have not found god after studying the bible, i 
must not have studied right?
[01:24] Action: ^MOMSTER thinks Pergolesi knows the 
truth behind the statement.
[01:25] <^MOMSTER> :)
[01:25] <^MOMSTER> No zen.....
[01:25] <^MOMSTER> However...if you were using the improper 
tools you might have a tougher time though.
[01:26] <^MOMSTER> I have to run you guys!!!!!
[01:26] <^MOMSTER> Have a great night!
[01:26] <ZenRookie> momster: then i assert that i did 
study correctly and with the best of intentions, and 
came away with little evidence for god.
[01:26] <Pergolesi> Zen, so is it the case that man can 
make no discernment regarding the truth of a claim 
in any setting?
[01:26] <ZenRookie> bye moimster
[01:26] <^MOMSTER> OK zen  :)
[01:26] <ZenRookie> -i
[01:26] <^MOMSTER> whateveryousaysir!
[01:27] <^MOMSTER> :
[01:27] ^MOMSTER (dananova@ppp16.snni.com) left #apologetics.
[01:27] <ZenRookie> per: that may just be
[01:27] <ZenRookie> per: what i mean, is that if I already 
believe in the truth of the bible, then i would have 
no problem believing that the bible is true.  see?
[01:28] MrBell (Micah@ppp154.ihug.co.nz) joined #apologetics.
[01:28] <Pergolesi> Let us then point to a specific example, 
one not inherent in the definition of God, nor predefined 
in the Bible, namely the person of Jesus Christ
[01:28] <ZenRookie> ok, lets/
[01:29] <Pergolesi> Good, Jesus claims to be the Son 
of God
[01:29] <ZenRookie> he did, and he claimed to be god 
also.  correct.
[01:29] <Pergolesi> Correct, now that claim must be true 
or false.  Or as some have said, he must be liar, lunatic, 
or Lord.
[01:30] <ZenRookie> ok
[01:30] <Pergolesi> What is your opinion regarding the 
claims of Christ?
[01:31] <ZenRookie> well, it would seem odd to me that 
there were so many people around at the time, yet only 
a few were believers.
[01:31] <ZenRookie> it would tend to make me think that 
he was one of the first two
[01:32] <Pergolesi> The fact that few believed lends 
merit to the falsity of his claims?
[01:32] <Pergolesi> Many also thought that Gallileo was 
off of his rocker
[01:33] <ZenRookie> are you comparing galileo to jesus 
christ?
[01:33] <Pergolesi> Not at all, though I can make the 
comparison to claims of supposed truth
[01:34] <ZenRookie> one must consider both the likelyhood 
of the claims, and the witnesses to such claims.  outrageous 
claims, and few witnesses, to me does not lend merit 
to the claims.
[01:34] <Pergolesi> It is also important to recognize 
that Jesus gained widespread acceptance outside of 
Jewish circles, and that the Jews were looking for 
a political messiah...which Jesus was not.
[01:35] <ZenRookie> he was only accepted outside of jewish 
circles.
[01:35] <Pergolesi> Not true, his disciples, the 12, 
were all jews
[01:36] <Pergolesi> Let us talk about the claims of the 
witnesses.
[01:37] <ZenRookie> as you said, jewish is both a political 
or cultural, and a religious thing.  they were jews 
by heritage, but they would be christians as followers 
of jesus, no?
[01:38] <Pergolesi> The followers of Jesus were looked 
upon as a dangerous Jewish sect.  Notice that Jesus 
followed Biblical teachings.  The term Christian did 
not come into use until the time of Paul.
[01:39] <ZenRookie> ok, it seems like semantics to me, 
but continue.
[01:40] <Pergolesi> The disciples, after Jesus' death, 
claimed that He was resurrected.
[01:40] <ZenRookie> ok
[01:40] <Pergolesi> This is a lofty claim!
[01:40] <ZenRookie> quite
[01:41] <Pergolesi> Why in the midst of political turmoil 
that sent Jesus to crucifixion, would the disciples 
claim that he had risen?
[01:41] <ZenRookie> um, to fulfill scripture?
[01:41] MrBell (Micah@ppp154.ihug.co.nz) left #apologetics.
[01:42] <Pergolesi> Yes, but would a false claim be worth 
the penalty of death?
[01:42] <ZenRookie> is that the penalty for false claims?
[01:43] <Pergolesi> In the book of Acts, the apostles 
continued preaching, against the orders of the Sanhedrin
[01:43] Cant (thmcivor@pm126.spots.ab.ca) joined #apologetics.
[01:44] Cant (thmcivor@pm126.spots.ab.ca) left #apologetics.
[01:44] <Pergolesi> In fact such was the accusation given 
by the Sanhedrin against Jesus, that he claimed to 
be the King of the Jews, that is, God.
[01:45] <ZenRookie> we must remember tho, that acts was 
written by one of the claimants in the first place.
[01:45] <Pergolesi> Jesus received death, why also would 
not his followers who were perpetuating the claim
[01:45] Grynner (wyckyd@du-44.socomm.net) joined #apologetics.
[01:45] <Grynner> hello all
[01:45] <Pergolesi> hello grynner
[01:46] <Grynner> anything interesting tonite???
[01:46] <Pergolesi> does the fact the Luke wrote Acts 
and believed discredit his testimony?
[01:47] <Pergolesi> grynner, we are discussing the validity 
of the claims of Christ and his followers
[01:47] <Grynner> personaly??? I believe luke. Its Paul 
(saul) I don't trust
[01:47] <ZenRookie> well, we are looking at the claims 
of the witnesses, i thought.  if we mention events 
from acts, then we must also mention that the events 
were also made by the same person making the claims 
in the first place.
[01:48] <Pergolesi> What do you mean that the events 
were made by the same person making the claims?
[01:48] <Pergolesi> Are you referring to Jesus?
[01:49] <ZenRookie> i should have said the "claims of 
the these events" were made by the same person who made 
the claims of jesus' godness, namely luke.
[01:49] <Pergolesi> Yet Luke was not an eyewitness to 
these events.
[01:49] <ZenRookie> which events?
[01:50] <Pergolesi> He writes, " inasmuch as many have 
undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished...
[01:50] <Grynner> not true. John also made claims as 
to Jesus being god
[01:50] <Pergolesi> it seemed fitting for me to investigate 
everything carefully from the beginning
[01:51] <Pergolesi> Why, so that you might know the exact 
truth about the things which you have been taught.
[01:52] <Pergolesi> So, Luke was attempting to find the 
Truth in the midst of confusion
[01:52] <ZenRookie> or so he says
[01:52] <Pergolesi> But, we have still not figured out 
why the apostles would risk their necks for a lie?
[01:52] <Grynner> luke was attempting to write a history 
and prove/disprove jesus while doing it
[01:53] <Grynner> Pergolesi, the apostles didn't
[01:53] <Grynner> the lies didn't start until paul (imho)
[01:53] <Grynner> How better to destroy something than 
from the inside??????
[01:53] <ZenRookie> sorry all, i am kind of losing my 
focus on what we are arguing about, and i am quite 
tired.  perhaps we can pick this up again tomorrow.
[01:54] <ZenRookie> i must go to bed now, however.
[01:54] <ZenRookie> good bye.
[01:54] ZenRookie (hyperion@blackhole.dimensional.com) 
left irc: Leaving
[01:54] <Pergolesi> sure Zen, we'll talk again later
[01:54] <Grynner> G'nite ZenRookie
[01:54] <Grynner> so what's your slant on that???? agree/disagree????
[01:55] <Pergolesi> grynner, we were talking about the 
fact that those who claimed Jesus' resurrection put 
their lives at risk.
[01:55] <Grynner> don't you mean forfeit??? after all, 
most all of tehm were killed for saying as much
[01:56] <Pergolesi> yes, semantics, but when speaking 
to those with little background, it is best to use 
laymen's terms
[01:56] <Grynner> ok. look at it this way
[01:57] <Grynner> Jesus ( god or not doesn't matter here 
) taught and did miricles for and in gods name
[01:58] <Grynner> He had a core group of followers and 
an even larger number who valued what he had done and 
taught
[01:58] Beaurang (dgallio@pmA02.iconnect.net) joined 
#apologetics.
[01:58] <Beaurang> Greetings all.
[01:58] <Grynner> When he died they carried on his teachings, 
even tho they went in teh face of the "alliance" the 
Preists and the romans held
[01:59] <Pergolesi> greetings beaurang
[01:59] <Grynner> When they couldn't be stomped out, 
have their cheif persecutor "have a visitation" and pressure 
an old blind man into backing him up
[02:00] <Grynner> Greetings Beaurang
[02:00] <Beaurang> To you both.
[02:00] <Beaurang> Am I intruding?
[02:00] <Grynner> Then work on distorting, blending, 
and thinning the core beleifs of this group
[02:00] <Pergolesi> no, not at all (yet I know not where 
we are going)
[02:01] <Beaurang> Ah...Quo Vadis?
[02:01] <Grynner> You were questioning wether the gospels 
and their writers could be beleived. I suggest its 
not them who you should question but one who came later
[02:02] <Beaurang> And they were?
[02:02] <Grynner> one Saul of Tarsus. One of Early Christianity's 
cheif opponents 
[02:03] <Beaurang> That he was.
[02:03] <Beaurang> Until he saw.
[02:03] <Pergolesi> You are mistaken, I was not questioning 
the believability of the gospels; rather, I was using 
Platonic dialogue to develop an argument
[02:04] <Grynner> also, following his example, ( although 
belatedly ) the child of the holy roman empire as it 
experienced its "rebirth"
[02:05] <Pergolesi> lol
[02:06] <Pergolesi> Are both of you believers?
[02:06] <Beaurang> I am.
[02:06] <Grynner> no, but I do love theology!!
[02:07] <Pergolesi> May I be so bold as to ask why you 
believe Beaurang
[02:07] <Beaurang> Ah, understanding seeking faith, huh 
Gryn?
[02:07] RedTango (silver@ip140.lax.primenet.com) joined 
#apologetics.
[02:07] <Beaurang> A gift from God. And evidence.
[02:08] <RedTango> evidence of what?
[02:08] <Pergolesi> Yes, truly a gift from God, but what 
evidence?
[02:08] <Beaurang> Greetings Red.
[02:08] <Pergolesi> hello rt
[02:09] <RedTango> hi!
[02:09] <Beaurang> Perg: Of God? Of Jesus' divinity? 
Which?
[02:10] <Grynner> Hi Red
[02:10] <Pergolesi> Just simply a witness of why you 
believe what you believe.
[02:10] <RedTango> eh?
[02:10] <Beaurang> Red: Perg asked why we believe. I 
am attempting an answer.
[02:11] <RedTango> Oh.
[02:11] <Beaurang> As to God, how about that nature has 
design. Which means there must be a designer.
[02:12] <RedTango> Am i lagged or are you guys just taking 
a long time to type???
[02:12] <Pergolesi> just taking a long time
[02:12] <RedTango> There doesnt have to be a designer.
[02:12] <Beaurang> Red: Then how do you account for the 
design in nature. That it has order.
[02:12] <Pergolesi> rt: there does not have to, but can 
you explain such intricate design?
[02:13] <Grynner> Beaurang, what about it's inherent 
Chaos as well?????
[02:13] <RedTango> There is also imperfection as well. 
However, order doesnt prove anything, only that patterns 
are sucessful for survival.
[02:13] <RedTango> Mnay animals have gone extince because 
their design did not work, they couldnt survive.
[02:13] <Beaurang> Even the chaos obeys the natural order.
[02:14] <Beaurang> Red: As it was meant to be. Yet they 
had design. Thus a designer. 
[02:14] <RedTango> order doesnt imply a conscience "creator."
[02:14] <Grynner> wait!!! hold!!!!  Are we gonna talk 
Chaos theory or Theology??? If teh former I gotta get 
a calculator.  :}
[02:15] <RedTango> "as it was meant to be?" why would an 
almighty designer allow for such flaws?
[02:15] <RedTango> nonsense.
[02:15] <Beaurang> Red: If you pointed to a rocket ship, 
or even a can opener, would you not say it had an inventor?
[02:15] <Pergolesi> what are considered flaws to us, 
may not be flaws to a designer
[02:15] <Beaurang> Perg: Right you are.
[02:16] <RedTango> bea, you cant compare what a human 
creates to evolution of a planet, evolution has no 
"creator."
[02:16] <RedTango> Oerg, explain why a God would create 
hundreds of animals that would die of extinction due 
to physical imperfections.
[02:17] <Beaurang> Red: How has the planet "evolved"?
[02:17] <RedTango> Perg, i mean.
[02:17] <Pergolesi> yet evolution follows laws of nature; 
from where did those laws of nature originate?
[02:17] <Grynner> Red, that "could" be argued as Man's 
fault in his haste for technology and foolishness
[02:17] <RedTango> Bea, i dont have enough time to give 
you the history of evolution here on IRC< but i trust 
you have heard it all before many times.
[02:18] <Grynner> laws of nature came from a cycle older 
than the this universe itself
[02:18] <Beaurang> Red: Truly.
[02:18] <Pergolesi> yes they did grynn, from where though
[02:18] <RedTango> then you dont need to hear it from 
me.
[02:19] <Beaurang> Red: There are no intermediary life 
forms. None at all in the fossil record.
[02:19] <Grynner> perg, that boils down to which of the 
legends/stories/histories you believe.
[02:19] <Grynner> A fact that cannot be as yet proven 
except by belief
[02:20] <Beaurang> Red?
[02:21] <RedTango> Bea, evolution is not as simple as 
that, you arent going to find a perfect line up of 
perfect skeletons to observe..millions of years tend 
to destroy and bury fossils, although every year, more 
and more fossils are being found.
[02:21] <Pergolesi> Evidence from a designer argument 
is certainly impossible to prove
[02:21] <Beaurang> Red: Yet what has been found show 
no part fish/part dog, etc. Though you keep looking...and 
looking.
[02:22] <Beaurang> And looking.
[02:22] <RedTango> hahaha
[02:22] <RedTango> dont be ignorant.
[02:23] <Grynner> we can say god or gods created the 
universe and its laws long ago and set the design in 
motion, or you can say, it was already there and playing 
out a cycle it has done many times before....but then, 
when did it start and by whos

e hand or what circumstance???
[02:23] <Beaurang> The fossil record shows that species 
are. Not that they evolved from other species, is the 
point. How is that ignorant?
[02:23] <Beaurang> This is simply evidence.
[02:23] <Pergolesi> What is true is that species adapt 
to their environment...survival of the fittest...but 
we have no proof for the evolution of one species to 
another
[02:24] <Beaurang> Right again, Perg.
[02:24] <RedTango> you arent going to find that because 
that isnt what evolution is about. Evolution isnt going 
to cater to those lame Christian models I have seen 
illustrated in books showing half a cow attached to 
a fish tail.
[02:24] <Beaurang> Red: You seem to be getting angry.
[02:24] <RedTango> Evolution is a process so slow, you 
cant even fathom it, if you beleive that the earth 
is only a few thousands of years old.
[02:24] <Grynner> accually, the fossil record indicates 
( least for non homosapiens ) fairly conclusively that 
there were traceable stages of development/evolution
[02:24] <RedTango> The thing with finding fossils is 
that you are only finding the bones, it used to be 
thought that dinosaurs were cold blooded, but their 
link to birds is being considered as a link to modern 
day birds.
[02:25] <Beaurang> Red: What they are finding are flying 
dinosaurs.
[02:25] <RedTango> That is, science has the gift of re 
examining and rethinking possibilities.
[02:26] <Beaurang> Red: And so does faith in God have 
that gift!
[02:26] <RedTango> Dinosaurs may not have been all lizards..some 
may have been predessors to modern animals.
[02:26] <Beaurang> Red: You use "may have been" and "considered." 
But still no proof.
[02:26] <RedTango> Bea, nothing will prove anything to 
you.
[02:27] <Beaurang> Red:I feel the need to apologize to 
you. I sense I am getting smug. I am sorry.
[02:27] <RedTango> Science and research have proven creation 
wrong, as well as stories in the bible regarding the 
flood, and all the simplistic dating.
[02:27] <Pergolesi> The evolutionary view presupposes 
that all life began from a single point, without a 
creator intricately involved in the process.  Likewise 
the Biblical view presupposes an involved creator.
[02:27] <Beaurang> I mean it too.
[02:28] <RedTango> The idea of showing "proof" is a dead 
end, as i cant give you a line of skeletons starting 
from a fish and ending at a human, you will never present 
me with a phototgraph of God's face. And im

 not talking about a flower or something like that.
[02:29] <Beaurang> Red: Where are the bones? The evidence. 
Isnt scientific theory supposed to start with evidence?
[02:29] <RedTango> Christians reject all scientific data, 
all of it.
[02:29] <RedTango> Not just fossils.
[02:29] <Pergolesi> Red: Biblical creation accounts were 
written for prehistoric man, as oral tradition, not 
necessarily to prove creation, but to point to God 
as creator
[02:29] <Beaurang> Red: Posh.
[02:29] <RedTango> you present them with real, working 
tools and they reject it.
[02:29] <Pergolesi> Red: I am a Christian and do not 
reject scientific data
[02:30] <Beaurang> Red: You are getting angry. 
[02:30] <RedTango> ?
[02:30] <Pergolesi> Red: why can I as a Christian not 
use the working tools to understand our universe
[02:30] <RedTango> All scientific tools are rejected
[02:30] <Grynner> Pergolesi, but, what about the other 
creation accounts????
[02:31] <RedTango> Perg, I dont meet christins who accept 
carbon dating as legitimate,
[02:31] <Pergolesi> What about them?
[02:31] <Pergolesi> Red: what then do you mean?
[02:31] <RedTango> regarding what?
[02:32] <Pergolesi> You made the assertion that all Christians 
reject scientific data.  such as?
[02:32] <RedTango> i said i dont meet christians who..for 
example, accept carbon dating.
[02:32] <RedTango> Some do not even beleive in plate 
tectonics.
[02:32] <Grynner> just that the bible isn't the only 
place one finds creation myths/stories. It still boils 
down to what the individual believes at that point. 
Noone is neccesarily wrong, then again??
[02:33] <Pergolesi> But that is sheer silliness not to 
believe
[02:33] <RedTango> Some still beleive that the theory 
of evolution involves people evolving from apes.
[02:34] <Pergolesi> I think that we are on the same wavelength, 
Red, yet I am a Christian who believes in the validity 
of scientific evidence (to a good extent)
[02:34] <RedTango> Grynner, it is wrong when those Gods 
and stories are supposed to be accepted by the general 
public as the only way to go.
[02:35] <Grynner> and on that point I agree wholeheartledly
[02:35] <RedTango> Perg, then you would admit that the 
earth seems to be quite a bit older than 6,000 years 
or so.
[02:36] <Pergolesi> undoubtedly!!! I do believe that 
God could have created the earth in six days, but evidence 
points to the fact that He did not!
[02:37] <Pergolesi> Red, you must know a lot of reactionary, 
uneducated Christians
[02:37] <RedTango> Perg, it seems there are many sorts 
of christians, some who are very conservative and stick 
strictly with scripture, and those who take a more 
allegorical point of view.
[02:37] <Pergolesi> I do not think that the creation 
account is an allegory...
[02:38] <RedTango> but you just said you think it took 
longer than the bible's six days.
[02:38] <Pergolesi> You must understand the circumstances 
under which the account was given
[02:38] <Pergolesi> Prehistoric, oral, etc.
[02:39] <Pergolesi> Prescientific
[02:39] <RedTango> It just blows my mind that in 1996, 
grown adults really think the first woman came from 
the rib of a man.
[02:39] <Pergolesi> Yes, it is very hard to believe, 
but listen, we did not live in such a time
[02:40] <RedTango> "such a time" is a fantasy.
[02:40] <Pergolesi> False, to those people, those things 
were reality
[02:40] <Pergolesi> Can you picture a prescientific world?
[02:40] <Beaurang> Not a fantasy, Red, a prescientific 
era.
[02:41] <Beaurang> They were trying to express a fundamental 
truth...that God creates.
[02:41] <Beaurang> That man and women are of the same 
nature.
[02:42] <Pergolesi> Lightning was not understood as electrical 
particles, but as an evil force coming from the sky, 
from the gods, which caused destruction and "fire"
[02:42] <Beaurang> The "rib" story was a way to express 
that truth.
[02:42] <Pergolesi> Correct Beau
[02:42] <RedTango> The thing about christianity is that 
the followers often scoff at other religions and cultures, 
calling their Gods false idols, dismissing their stories 
of creation as mere myths, mocking them, even being 
frightened of them....
[02:42] <RedTango> ...yet to me, christianity is no different, 
just another culture.
[02:42] <RedTango> with its own myths and beliefs.
[02:43] <Pergolesi> This is a difficult subject, but 
Judeo-Christian culture makes unique claims
[02:43] <RedTango> Many religions are "unique" you arent 
the only one.
[02:43] <Beaurang> Red: Like evolution is a myth to the 
"scientific" post-modern culture.
[02:43] <RedTango> There is nothing more special about 
yours than anyone elses.
[02:43] <Beaurang> Red: Every culture has its "myths."
[02:44] <Pergolesi> I said that it makes unique claims!!
[02:44] <RedTango> Bea, if evoltion is a myth, and God 
is real, show me a photo of God. You cant.
[02:44] <Beaurang> Red: Jesus.
[02:44] <RedTango> jesus what?
[02:45] <Beaurang> A "photo" of God.
[02:45] <RedTango> show me a photo.
[02:45] <Pergolesi> Jesus was the embodiment of God, 
at least such is the claim.
[02:45] <Beaurang> That a human heart can change. That 
is Christian evolution.
[02:45] <RedTango> certainly, with all these people "seeing" 
the Lord, someone certainly has been able to take a 
picture of "him."
[02:45] <RedTango> Show me a photo, please.
[02:46] <Beaurang> No cameras in 33 ad.
[02:46] <RedTango> I dont think my request is that unreasonable.
[02:46] <Beaurang> Only the testimony of history.
[02:46] <Grynner> Red, you might be goin' a tad literal 
here....tho the point does have merits...
[02:46] <Pergolesi> Red: show me a photo of love.  You 
can not. It is not physical, yet it exists and shows 
itself in various ways to various people
[02:47] <Beaurang> Red: Show me a photo of air. Yet you 
believe it.
[02:47] <RedTango> I dont think asking for a photo is 
being too literal, if God is real.
[02:47] <Beaurang> Is air real?
[02:47] <RedTango> Perg, but God isnt a "concept"..is he? 
He is suppposedly is real.
[02:48] <Beaurang> Red: Can time be photographed?
[02:48] <Beaurang> Can space?
[02:48] <Beaurang> Can sound?
[02:48] <Pergolesi> Red: before microscopes, skeptical 
scientists said "sure there are atoms"  Yet they do exist 
and we now have the tool to see them.
[02:48] <RedTango> Bea, you can see air when it has enough 
moisture in it.
[02:48] <Beaurang> Red: You see the moisture, not the 
air.
[02:48] <RedTango> i.e. FOG
[02:48] <RedTango> steam
[02:49] <Beaurang> Steam is water.
[02:49] <RedTango> you can track sound scientifically 
using osiloscopes.
[02:49] <Grynner> not really. then you are seeing the 
moisture, not the air
[02:49] <Beaurang> Red: You can track the mind of God 
through, once again, design.
[02:50] <RedTango> Perg, interesting coment about atoms, 
that scince has actually been used to prove what was 
once considered unprovable, yet science seems to have 
little merit for many christians.
[02:50] <Pergolesi> Red: before oscilloscopes, if I told 
you that I could track sound, you'd of thought me crazy
[02:50] <RedTango> Perg, and science once again proves 
itself.
[02:50] <Grynner> Beaurang, but who's design??? Which 
gods or mans?????  ( playing devils ad.here )
[02:50] <Pergolesi> Yes, but science has not explained 
all
[02:50] <RedTango> The idea of evolution originally began 
with scietific observation of stars.
[02:51] <Pergolesi> And it is a mistake to see our modern 
science as the end all
[02:51] <Beaurang> Red: To you believe that Jesus was 
God?
[02:51] <RedTango> Beleivers think that there is no more 
"creation" going on..that what we have is all there will 
be.
[02:51] <RedTango> Bea, i am an atheist.
[02:51] <Pergolesi> Time and space were scientifically 
PROVEN linear before Einstein
[02:51] <Beaurang> Red: What were you born as?
[02:51] <RedTango> born as?
[02:52] <Beaurang> Were you born into a certain faith?
[02:52] <RedTango> no
[02:52] <Beaurang> Were your parents Christian?
[02:52] <RedTango> no
[02:53] <Pergolesi> Red: The main point for me is that 
science does not disprove God for me, in fact it leads 
to a better understanding for me.  
[02:53] <RedTango> Perg, cool
[02:53] <RedTango> Im not here to undermine anyone's 
faith in God
[02:54] <Beaurang> Red: I was once an athiest. From age 
16 to 34.
[02:54] <RedTango> Im sure you were.
[02:54] <Beaurang> ?
[02:54] <RedTango> !
[02:54] <Pergolesi> I think, though, that beyond the 
scientific/creation realm of questioning, one must 
seriously consider the claims of Christianity
[02:55] <RedTango> I consider that a wise statement.
[02:56] <Pergolesi> Whether or not you believe it in 
the long run is a side issue, but the fact remains 
that Christianity makes ultimate claims upon all men. 
 
[02:56] <RedTango> Of course, because its basis is in 
controlling the masses.
[02:57] <Pergolesi> Red: have you examined the claims 
of Christianity from the scripture itself?
[02:57] <RedTango> not directly, i get to experience 
them in politics.
[02:58] <Beaurang> Red: You as a scientist should examine 
the evidence yourself. No?
[02:58] <Pergolesi> It's funny, the Jews were looking 
for a political messiah, and rejected Jesus because 
he was not
[02:58] <RedTango> Im not a scientist
[02:58] <Pergolesi> Are you a politician
[02:59] <RedTango> no
[02:59] <Pergolesi> Then, what the heck do you do?
[02:59] <RedTango> bizarre questions
[02:59] <Beaurang> Nonetheless you are a thinking man, 
Red. A thinking man should examine the evidence. No?
[02:59] <RedTango> television production
[02:59] <Pergolesi> Are you a Communist dancer?
[02:59] <RedTango> no, im not.
[03:00] <Pergolesi> haha
[03:00] <RedTango> Bea, you are wrong
[03:00] <RedTango> hehehe
[03:00] <Beaurang> hahaha!
[03:00] <RedTango> Although i appear to be a thinking 
man, im not.
[03:01] <Beaurang> You are a searching man? A seeker?
[03:01] <RedTango> nope
[03:01] <Beaurang> Alas.
[03:01] <RedTango> you overlook the obvious.
[03:01] <Beaurang> Being?
[03:01] <RedTango> you wouldnt make a very good scientist, 
stick to the bible. hahaha
[03:02] <Beaurang> hohoho
[03:03] <Pergolesi> Red: I have enjoyed jawing with you, 
but I must retire.  I hope that you will consider doing 
a little searching in the Christian arena.
[03:03] <Pergolesi> Good night all!
[03:03] <Grynner> G'nite Pergolesi!!!
[03:03] <Beaurang> Good night, Perg. See you again!
[03:03] <Grynner> Its been fun!!!
[03:03] <Beaurang> Truly.
[03:03] <RedTango> Perg, i have, and im not interested 
in what i have found.
[03:04] <RedTango> Christianity doesnt suit my nature 
at all.
[03:04] <Pergolesi> But you said that you haven't read 
from the Bible.
[03:04] <RedTango> hehehehe
[03:05] <Pergolesi> How do you know that it is not the 
truth?
[03:05] <RedTango> Perg, i do not beleive in Gods of 
any sort. I do not beleive in angels, devils, hell 
or heaven, or afterlife.
[03:05] <RedTango> Its not the truth. it is a reflection 
of the fantasies of men and promotes the political 
agenda of men.
[03:05] <Pergolesi> What does that have to do with considering 
the claims of Jesus?
[03:06] <RedTango> I dont beleive in Jesus as the saviour 
of anything. People make other people out to be heroes 
and legends.
[03:06] <Beaurang> Perg: If your are not going to bed, 
I am. Goodnight all.
[03:06] <RedTango> Bea
[03:07] <Beaurang> Yes?
[03:07] <RedTango> hehehehehe
[03:07] Action: RedTango sees you!
[03:07] <RedTango> She laughs.
[03:07] <Beaurang> Red: I will see you again, my friend.
[03:08] <Grynner> Well all, I'm off to bed.
[03:08] RedTango (silver@ip140.lax.primenet.com) left 
#apologetics.
[03:08] <Grynner> G'nite!!!!!
[03:08] <Beaurang> And to all!!
[03:08] Grynner (wyckyd@du-44.socomm.net) left #apologetics.
[03:09] <Beaurang> Bye Perg.
[03:09] <Pergolesi> Red, you are very much like my best 
friend. I believe you would get along beautifully.
[03:09] <Beaurang> And good job tonight.
[03:10] <Pergolesi> gnight beaurang
[03:10] <Beaurang> Yes, I believe this is true. See you 
again here again.
[03:10] Pergolesi (jeffboro@phx-ip-59.netzone.com) 
left #Apologetics.
[03:11] Beaurang (dgallio@pmA02.iconnect.net) 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_4_2_96.html
[ref002] http://www.fiu.edu/~wgreen01/apologetics.html
[ref003] http://www.fiu.edu/~wgreen01/logs.html
[ref004] ../

