Posted: 11/20/2008 5:04:03 PM EDT
| Havent read it yet dont even have it.Wanted to know if anyone can give me the Cliffs notes version of it. |
|
I've read it.
One of our members here on ARFCOM is the author's nephew. The book itself is OK, but I will admit to you that after having seen his "Case for a Creator" taken apart bit by bit (it strongly espouses Intelligent Design as a science which, regrettably, it isn't), I can't help but wonder if this book, too, isn't what it appears. I sincerely hope someone with a better knowledge of the historical veracity of the New Testament will come along and prove me wrong. |
|
I've seen the video and it was good, though me being strongly Catholic I found areas of weakness in his "case for Christ" that my faith happens to make a stronger case for. But he did a fairly good job talking about the ancient Bible manuscripts which happens to be an area of passion that I have.
|
|
Quoted:
I've read it. One of our members here on ARFCOM is the author's nephew. The book itself is OK, but I will admit to you that after having seen his "Case for a Creator" taken apart bit by bit (it strongly espouses Intelligent Design as a science which, regrettably, it isn't), I can't help but wonder if this book, too, isn't what it appears. I sincerely hope someone with a better knowledge of the historical veracity of the New Testament will come along and prove me wrong. taken apart bit by bit according to who? The people arguing against it and a few others who agree? People often think they pick apart every aspect of of christianity to. Not that there aren't unknowns and good unaswered questions. |
|
Quoted:
I've seen the video and it was good, though me being strongly Catholic I found areas of weakness in his "case for Christ" that my faith happens to make a stronger case for. But he did a fairly good job talking about the ancient Bible manuscripts which happens to be an area of passion that I have. I read a book called "More Than a Carpenter" by Josh McDowell. I also really liked the part about the manuscripts. That was very edifying to the Bible. I liked the book overall. You can argue with anything though. I could see where some of his arguments would be easily refuted by non believers. That's just the way it is. Passage Matthew 11:25: Come to Me, and I Will Give You Rest 25(A) At that time Jesus declared, "I thank you, Father,(B) Lord of heaven and earth, that(C) you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and(D) revealed them to little children; Jesus said that. |
|
Quoted:
taken apart bit by bit according to who? The people arguing against it and a few others who agree? People often think they pick apart every aspect of of christianity to. The Case for Christ relies heavily on the tenets of Intelligent Design as a science. Sadly, ID is not science, and more than one of the early "Ah-HA!" planks of ID have since been proven to not have been as "Ah-HA!" as originally thought. The best argument I've seen in this regard is made by a Christian by the name of Francis Collins, who also happens to be the scientist who headed up the Human Genome Project. His book, The Language of God, shows how ID is not what so many believers hoped it would be. The book goes on to make an alternative argument for Belief, but while respecting the boundaries and limitations of both Faith and Science. Since ID has been shown to not be the science it claimed to be, then in my opinion The Case for Christ, which is basically an introduction to ID, fails to make the case it claims. I'm not happy about it, but there it is. If you're looking for scientific proof that there is a Creator, then I regret to say that The Case for Christ does not provide it. |
|
25(A) At that time Jesus declared, "I thank you, Father,(B) Lord of heaven and earth, that(C) you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and(D) revealed them to little children;
Jesus said that. Indeed He did. Proves the point that some things will never be answered by Science, only by Faith. The reverse is equally true. I've learned the difference and now stand in awe of both, AND of the Creator that made it that way. 
|
|
My favorite approaches to proving Christianity is from a philosophical approach, especially more so than from a scientific approach. Science used to be part of philosophy, but has taken more of a path of it's own within the last 100 years. A very good read is a book from Francis Schaeffer called "The God who is there." The God Who is there
He makes great arguement! My favorite is from Pope Benedict XVI called "Introduction to Christianity." Introduction to Christianity You can read the books on the links that I gave. |
|
Quoted:
How would you sxplain intelligent design?  I hope I don't disappoint you with a 2 dollar answer for a million dollar question. But in my comprehension I don't see any other way other than intelligent design, nothing else makes sense to me. As Aquinas explained, in order for something to move there has to be something to move it, nothing begins to move without something to be the first cause of movement. In the same way in order for something to be created there has to be a first cause, something or Someone who gets things started. Something does not come from nothing. If the big bang is right, then there had to be something to have created the matter that started it, something brought non-existence to existence. |
|
Quoted: Please clarify.How would you sxplain intelligent design? Are you asking from the standpoint that ID is science, or asking for an explanation of what ID is? I'll tell you up front, though....... It isn't science. That doesn't prove there is no Creator/Designer, but it certainly doesn't scientifically prove there is. It'a a damned pity, too.  |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Yep, what we have is better than "proof."Why do you need proof? (The 11th chapter of Hebrews comes immediately to mind...  )Respectfully, I say speak for yourself. I'd like God to personally come down here and settle the matter once and for all. This faith thing is needlessly tiring, unless there's a lesson in all of it that I'm missing, which is entirely possible.  |
|
Quoted: An explanation of what ID actually is.I dont need proof this is for an on-going debate with someone who gave me the book to read . Ah! Sorry. In a nutshell, ID is a collection of "highly improbable" occurrences in the scientific realm that "proove" the existence of an intelligent designer. For example, ID claims (or at least did) that the human eye could not have evolved into its current form. Same goes for the cellular flagellum. They also cast doubt on the idea of evolution by pointing to a Cambrian Explosion of life, where life in general suddenly flourished across the globe as if a lightswitch had been thrown (geological timeframe, of course). Sadly, the first two made predictions and assumptions that have since been proven not to be true. I believe the same has happened to the Cambrian Explosion idea, too. The bottom line is that ID does not follow the scientific method, and when it does it fails to hold up under scrutiny and additional data. Again, don't take my word for it (I'm hardly an authority on the matter), take it from believing scientists. I believe the universe was intelligently designed. I think there is a lot of persuasive "data" that points that way, but none of it is hard DATA, and none of it can be proven via the scientific method. So, it's back to faith, and waiting for the proof I hope will someday come, in this life or the next one. Damned frustrating, I'll admit. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yep, what we have is better than "proof."
Why do you need proof? (The 11th chapter of Hebrews comes immediately to mind... )
Respectfully, I say speak for yourself. I'd like God to personally come down here and settle the matter once and for all. This faith thing is needlessly tiring, unless there's a lesson in all of it that I'm missing, which is entirely possible.
What Jesus said to Thomas after he showed him his nail scarred hands is something you might want to take a gander at.
|
|
Quoted:
I'd like God to personally come down here and settle the matter once and for all. This faith thing is needlessly tiring, unless there's a lesson in all of it that I'm missing, which is entirely possible.
From one Catholic to another... yes, there is a lesson that you are missing. Humility. We humans want all the answers and we want them now. It is not necessarily our place to know all the answers. We need to remember our place in the universe, and trust that God knows better than we do what He is doing and why. I'm trying to remember your back story: a) grew up Catholic, fell away in your youth, and am returning (hence need Confirmation)? b) grew up not Catholic and am planning on coming into the Church at the Easter Vigil? Either way, faith is necessary for us while we live on this earth. It can be so easy to lose faith also, and your statement about it being needlessly tiring is a red flag to me. Having taught RCIA and catechism for a few years (ok, more than a few), I've seen and experienced where you're coming from. Make sure you keep praying, especially the Scriptures and the rosary. Don't forget to simply ask for more faith –– sometimes it is as simple as that. |
|
Part of it is wanting confirmation (small "c") already. I'm tired of having these doubts. Another part is wanting to see some real justice (the ass-whooping, fire-and-brimstone, every-knee-shall-bow variety) dished out to those who deserve it. It seems that Evil marches freely across the face of the Earth while Good is always having to explain to Evil every fucking step it tries to take. Frankly, I'm sick of it. Call me impatient. 
|
|
In his time. In his time.
It will be awesome. Don't fall away now. One day we'll all be at his side singing: HOLY, HOLY, HOLY, HOLY IS THE LORD!!!! It's going to be sweet. Better than sweet. Beyond anything we can imagine. Don't let this world and it's wisdom, problems, strife, sidetrack you from the Glory that will be given to us!!!!!!!!! Oh Hallelujah it gives me chills to just even approach this subject!!!! |