txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

He's pretty good at wiggling out of things but not this time. It starts out when he admits he can't give 100% proof for the resurrection of Jesus and Chezlaw congratulates him on realizing that it may not be true. His reply:

"First of all, I believe 100% that Christ is the Son of God. I've come to this conclusion given the available evidence. What I said in my earlier post was that I couldn't give you 100% proof, not that I didn't believe it 100%."

Chezlaw's reply:

So you are close minded. You've taken a position that denies all other possibilities without any proof that there aren't other possibilities.

txaq007's reply:

"In how many other things in life do you need 100% proof before taking a position? The only thing we have to evaluate is the evidence that is out there, and it points to Christianity."

But he is not just "taking a position". He is claiming 100% certainty. While at the same time admitting there is not 100% proof. While at the same time claiming that he is not close minded. These three things cannot all exist at the same time whether he is talking about Jesus or whether the moon is made of green cheese.

Wonder whether he will try to refute that last sentence (not a good idea). If not, which of the three statements above (100% certainty, 100% proof, not close minded) will he give up?

Re: txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

It's just a matter of perspective, David. I believe with 100% certainty that Jesus is the Son of God because I know Him personally. If you knew Him, you'd believe with 100% certainty, too.

However, I'm perfectly aware that you nor anyone else on these boards will accept my testimony as proof. Therefore, I can give you logical reasoning, but I can't give you 100% proof. That doesn't mean my belief is false. It's only my ability to express it that's not perfect.

As far as being close-minded, I don't consider myself so because I am willing to listen to and attempt to refute any alternate theories that are brought forth. This is more than can be said about many on this forum who bring with them a pre-determined bias against Christianity.

Re: txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

Slightly off-topic, but what proof do you have that you know him personally?

Unless I am misreading your posts, it looks as you have some sort of testimony that proves you know God personally. The only way that is possible is if you saw a miracle take place that no one else witnessed, that God personally did for your benefit and knowing, and left no evidence. Is that your position?

Re: txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's just a matter of perspective, David. I believe with 100% certainty that Jesus is the Son of God because I know Him personally. If you knew Him, you'd believe with 100% certainty, too.

However, I'm perfectly aware that you nor anyone else on these boards will accept my testimony as proof. Therefore, I can give you logical reasoning, but I can't give you 100% proof. That doesn't mean my belief is false. It's only my ability to express it that's not perfect.

As far as being close-minded, I don't consider myself so because I am willing to listen to and attempt to refute any alternate theories that are brought forth. This is more than can be said about many on this forum who bring with them a pre-determined bias against Christianity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Were you presented with a theory you couldn't refute would you then abandom your position?

Re: txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

Christians tend to believe that God "speaks" to them on a regular basis. I'm not talking about hearing voices, just that God helps out in small (and sometimes huge) ways. The non-believer writes these events off to chance. Or, explains the relief/confidence/love in other ways.

If my mother has a flat tire and someone happens along to help her, she credits God with watching over her. That explanation is comforting to her. (Although I don't believe the same things, I don't mean to be condescending. I actually have some admiration for those who can give themselves over to Faith. I just hope I'm never one of those people... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )

Re: txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

[ QUOTE ]
However, I'm perfectly aware that you nor anyone else on these boards will accept my testimony as proof. Therefore, I can give you logical reasoning, but I can't give you 100% proof. That doesn't mean my belief is false. It's only my ability to express it that's not perfect.

[/ QUOTE ]Your ability to express it may be hampered by an attempt to explain it logically. From my understanding, Faith is not intended to be logical. If Faith could be proven, it would no longer be Faith.

Re: txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

Why do you think you have personal relationship with God and i don't? I've attempted to seek a relationship, but i've found nothing to reciprocate.

I'd really appreciate if you would open up about the specifics of your personal relationship with God. Explain why you know you have a personal relationship and what about that relationship has convinced you of God's validity.

Re: txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

[ QUOTE ]
But he is not just "taking a position". He is claiming 100% certainty. While at the same time admitting there is not 100% proof. While at the same time claiming that he is not close minded. These three things cannot all exist at the same time whether he is talking about Jesus or whether the moon is made of green cheese.

[/ QUOTE ]Faith is by definition 100% certain and unprovable. If it were otherwise, it would not be Faith. The problem is not with txaq007's position, but with your attempt to fit that position into your logic-only world.

Re: txaq007\'s Inescapable Error
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But he is not just "taking a position". He is claiming 100% certainty. While at the same time admitting there is not 100% proof. While at the same time claiming that he is not close minded. These three things cannot all exist at the same time whether he is talking about Jesus or whether the moon is made of green cheese.

[/ QUOTE ]Faith is by definition 100% certain and unprovable. If it were otherwise, it would not be Faith. The problem is not with txaq007's position, but with your attempt to fit that position into your logic-only world.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all faith isn't 100% certain, anything that is 100% certain is damn well proveable, and doesn't require any faith. Secondly, he was trying to make a logical argument where his statements contradicted. The only problem is trying to fit something with logical errors into a logical argument.

Does he need 100% proof?
 

You caught him in an error of words, but not in logic. There are many things in science which we don't have 100% proof of, yet we know with near certainty they exist. Black holes would be one example.

So he should probably drop the 100% belief in Jesus, and make it 99.9%. Unfortunately for him, if I'm not mistaken, he can't do this and remain a Christian. So he must retain his 100% belief status.