Russell's Criticisms of Christianity & Jesus

[Tetsugaku]

Same issues being put to you. Russell hasnt identified Jesus Christ sufficiently to correctly identify the necessary conditions for his criticism. Told you way back.

Yes, you and RCM are making the same logical error.

 

[BMS]

Unsupported.


A transparent rationalization that doesn't show Russell to have been wrong. Again, disagreeing with him isn't to refute him. Romans 1 merely advocates a design argument. Russell explains why such arguments are mistaken.

Which means Romans 1 explains why people like Russell deny the truth.

 

[BMS]

Yes, you and RCM are making the same logical error.

Or you are. I explained it to you.

 

[RCM]

And the one does not become the other. Theories explain facts. Highly successful theories like evolution explain a lot of facts.

Theories are ideas that are lacking evidence to be declared factual truth

Evolution does not deny heredity, and in fact requires it. Mutation is also a source of novel traits.
The things you list arise from evolution and socio-cultural development. There's no reason to think a supernatural being was ever involved.

The law of heredity is contradictory to macro evolution and refutes it completely

The fact is that you cannot provide one single example to support your worldview

But this isn't really the place to debate evolution, so if you're going to challenge Russell's point that evolution undercuts the design argument,

Macro evolution is dead in the water

Since we are debating Russell and since his belief in evolution was foundational for his atheistic beliefs this is as good of place to discuss it as any

then I'll just note that this move further supports his other point about how religion impedes progress.

I will agree that religion and corrupt counterfeit christianity impedes the progress of society

However, true Christianity is good news and hope for a world that is lost and broken


RCM

 

[BMS]

It is relevant and you did confuse them.

Russell said you can't be a Christian without meeting certain requirements. This is about what is necessary for being a Christian.

You and RCM are saying meeting those requirements isn't enough for being a Christian. That is about what is sufficient for being a Christian.

As I said meeting those requirements is meaningless as Muslims might meet those requirements

 

[Tetsugaku]

As I said meeting those requirements is meaningless as Muslims might meet those requirements

Which again is a point about sufficiency, not necessity, so you are repeating the same mistake.

You were Noemail here before, right?

 

[BMS]

Which again is a point about sufficiency, not necessity, so you are repeating the same mistake.

You were Noemail here before, right?

I can assure you I have never posted as Noemail and I am not Noemail.
But as that could be a Muslim, Russell's argument is neither sufficient nor necessary.

 

[RCM]

How is Russell wrong? I don't see how you're addressing the dilemma.

Euthyphro's dilemma,

(1) God loves X because it is good in which case morality is independent of God (This view is contrary to Biblical Theology)

(2) X is good because God loves it in which case morality is arbitrary (This view is contrary to Biblical Theology, read Psalm 14, Romans 3)


The Biblical Truth is true Christians are sinners who are redeemed by grace through faith, not as a result of good works (read Galatians 2:16)

The problem with Russell is that he didn't realize how limited his finite knowledge really was


RCM

 

[Tetsugaku]

I can assure you I have never posted as Noemail and I am not Noemail.

Okay, thanks for clarifying.

But as that could be a Muslim, Russell's argument is neither sufficient nor necessary.

You've already agreed that his requirements are necessary. That they are not sufficient is irrelevant because Russell is not talking about sufficiency.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Euthyphro's dilemma,

(1) God loves X because it is good in which case morality is independent of God (This view is contrary to Biblical Theology)

(2) X is good because God loves it in which case morality is arbitrary (This view is contrary to Biblical Theology, read Psalm 14, Romans 3)

Then you need to show that there is a third option, or theology is in trouble.

 

[RCM]

Russell wasn't arguing that evil and suffering disproves God, so this response falls wide of the mark. His point was that injustice in this world isn't evidence for justice in the next.

Do you realize you just contradicted yourself?

Is evil and suffering the cause of a lot of injustice that you see everywhere in the world?

If Russell claims that injustice in this world doesn't necessitate Biblical justice in the next, then he is calling God a liar

Therefore, Russell is arguing that evil and suffering do disprove the Biblical God


RCM

 

[Tetsugaku]

Do you realize you just contradicted yourself?

I'm pretty sure I didn't.

If Russell claims that injustice in this world doesn't necessitate Biblical justice in the next, then he is calling God a liar

I don't see how that follows. I think he's rather saying that God and His next-world justice might not exist, given that actual-world injustice doesn't prove they do exist.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Theories are ideas that are lacking evidence to be declared factual truth

That's not what 'theory' means in the context of science. Theories are systems of laws, principles, mechanisms, and explanations that explain certain facts and phenomena. They do not transmogrify at any point into facts, as that would be a category error.

The law of heredity is contradictory to macro evolution and refutes it completely

What exactly is it that you mean by 'law of heredity' then?

Macro evolution is dead in the water

So rain can only form puddles and never lakes.

Since we are debating Russell and since his belief in evolution was foundational for his atheistic beliefs this is as good of place to discuss it as any

Not really. There's a separate forum for evolution and I'm not going to debate it here. Note instead that Russell's point was rather that the widespread acceptance of evolution has robbed the design argument of much of its former power for most people. That should not be controversial.

I will agree that religion and corrupt counterfeit christianity impedes the progress of society
However, true Christianity is good news and hope for a world that is lost and broken

But if your faith is leading you to reject settled science, then it may be putting you into the former camp rather than the latter.

 

[RCM]

Not in my summary, but they're there in the essay. See Matt 10:23 & 16:28

Matthew 10:23 "But whenever they persecute you in one city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes."

Matthew 16:28 "Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom."

Matthew 24:32-36 "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."

Luke 21:7-24 They questioned Him, saying, "Teacher, when therefore will these things happen? And what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?" And He said, "See to it that you are not misled; for many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He,' and, 'The time is near.' Do not go after them. "When you hear of wars and disturbances, do not be terrified; for these things must take place first, but the end does not follow immediately." Then He continued by saying to them, "Nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be great earthquakes, and in various places plagues and famines; and there will be terrors and great signs from heaven. "But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you, delivering you to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for My name's sake. "It will lead to an opportunity for your testimony. "So make up your minds not to prepare beforehand to defend yourselves; for I will give you utterance and wisdom which none of your opponents will be able to resist or refute. "But you will be betrayed even by parents and brothers and relatives and friends, and they will put some of you to death, and you will be hated by all because of My name. "Yet not a hair of your head will perish. "By your endurance you will gain your lives. "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. "Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city; because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled. "Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people; and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

Luke 21:25-33 "There will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth dismay among nations, in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves, men fainting from fear and the expectation of the things which are coming upon the world; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. "Then they will see THE SON of MAN COMING in a cloud with power and great glory. "But when these things begin to take place, straighten up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near." Then He told them a parable: "Behold the fig tree and all the trees; as soon as they put forth leaves, you see it and know for yourselves that summer is now near. "So you also, when you see these things happening, recognize that the kingdom of God is near. "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all things take place. "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away."


When you are doing Biblical theology there is the 20/20 rule, that is 20 verses before and 20 verses after so that you interpret within context and that you are not mistakenly practicing eisegesis

The Matthew 16 passage is followed by the transfiguration in Matthew 17 so that is easily explained

The Matthew 10 passage is more difficult to correctly interpret, however the context surrounding Matthew 10:23 has wording like Luke 21 which clearly points to the end of the age, and what is more there is an indefinite time element in regards to the Gospel going to the cities in Israel, which is timing that only God knows

Furthermore in regards to Russell's fallacious argument, Matthew 24 and Luke 21 reference the budding of the Fig Tree as a prerequisite to the coming of the Son of Man with the generation identified as the time element, Luke also mentions all the trees. This time element could not have been fulfilled during Jesus' time on earth, especially after the Jews were dispersed in 70 A.D. and finally in 135 A. D.

The budding Fig tree is representative of the nation Israel which was reborn in 1948 and the generation that witnessed the rebirth of the nation Israel will not entirely pass away before some of them witness the events written in the Book of Revelation

A double fulfillment or a near and far fulfillment of Jesus' prophetic words the first of which some of it took place in 70 A.D. with the completion of the prophecy coming in the very near future


RCM

 

[Eightcrackers]

John wrote by the Holy Spirit, from Christ.

Prove it.

And John was himself a witness to all that was said.

See above.

 

[cjab]

Prove it.

See above.

It's up to you to prove John to be a false witness. There can be no presumption as to that on your part.

 

[Lucian]

Which means Romans 1 explains why people like Russell deny the truth.

I doubt it. Russell wasn't what we could call a pagan, but they're in view in Romans 1.

 

[Furion]

I doubt it. Russell wasn't what we could call a pagan, but they're in view in Romans 1.

I love to bring this up. Romans 1 describes three things that trip man up, and your Russell fella cannot escape.

Not thankful to God
Refuse to give God glory
Don't consider God's words as worthy to remember and follow.

This is the indictment of the unbeliever. Can you fight it?

 

[Lucian]

Some of the texts of Deuteronomy, especially those from Qumran, have helped to elucidate the LXX as translation...

As interesting as this post, I'm unsure how it quite answers my question.

 

[Lucian]

I love to bring this up. Romans 1 describes three things that trip man up, and your Russell fella cannot escape.

Not thankful to God
Refuse to give God glory
Don't consider God's words as worthy to remember and follow.

This is the indictment of the unbeliever. Can you fight it?

I don't understand your question, I'm afraid. But Romans 1 is certainly no general indictment of 'the unbeliever' in our sense of the term.