Jun 24, 2013

Women In Apologetics [06/23/2013]

-Women in apologetics 
-The argument from desire and its appeal for youth
Special Guest: Sarah Ankenman
Listen Now:
Your browser does not support the audio element.

11 comments:

  1. Hi Vocab, pastor Rob and Pieier, this is Brett Strong...has Valley Girl lost her mind? Postulating Christianity as if everyone's happy go lucky and atheist are the only ones who get their ass kicked in life....who is she trying to fool? Vocab, she needs to be honest!~ don't promote Christianity to be something it is not! Has she read Apostle Paul? the dude was a mess! Mother Teresa, a mess! John Calvin, a mess! Martin Luther, a mess! Charles Spurgeon, a mess! And these people all dedicated their life for Christendom and still a mess! They themselves admitted this, not me but them themselves (and you know this Vocab)! ...but yet she calls out a few atheist who are disillusioned with their life but yet fails to mention Apostle Paul, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther, & Charles Spurgeon--the big boys of Christendom! ALL disillusioned! All suffered depression, deep depression! ...is it any wonder up to 95% of the Christian youth leave Christianity by college? ...when Christians fail to be publically honest--and atheist and agnostics (like Bart Ehrman) are brutally honest...even when it hurts! equals mass exodus of the youth...

    Brett Strong! ...willing to take on all Christians in Skype dialogue :-) ...later guys

    ReplyDelete
  2. The argument from desire was presented on the program. Brett, how do you respond to this particular argument?

    Here's how CS Lewis puts it (this is what Vocab read on the show):

    "A man’s physical hunger does not prove that man will get any bread; he may die of starvation on a raft in the Atlantic. But surely a man’s hunger does prove that he comes of a race which repairs its body by eating and inhabits a world where eatable substances exist. In the same way, though I do not believe (I wish I did) that my desire for Paradise proves that I shall enjoy it, I think it a pretty good indication that such a thing exists and that some men will. A man may love a woman and not win her; but it would be very odd if the phenomenon called “falling in love” occurred in a sexless world."

    Thanks! Stay Strong, Brett!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Let me return a question (I assume you're a bible thumper :-):

    some women DESIRE women and some men DESIRE men (they're called homosexuals)...does that DESIRE prove homosexuality to be true, legit, righteous?

    ...also: the suicide bombers in 9/11 DESIRED 72 young female virgins in heaven; do you think the suicide bombers are in heaven with 72 young female virgins apiece?

    Brett Strong...

    PS: I'm not sure what you're getting at Robert E, but I will tell you this without reserve, all animals (dog's, cat's, pigs, goats, snakes, rats, etc) have desires, deep desires, and we humans are mere animals too, thus desire is part of being animals! ....so desire proves nothing more than we are ANIMALS full of desire

    ...desire has nothing to do with proving some cosmic immaterial farfetched god is real! desire has everything to do with being animals! Grrrrr :-)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for the response, Brett!

    First off, you seem to have not understood the argument. Having a desire is supposed to prove that there is something that exists in reality that can fulfill that desire. So when you ask whether homosexual desire proves the righteousness of homosexual behavior, the question demonstrates that you've missed the point; the argument is not intended to prove the righteousness of the desire or the righteousness of acting upon that desire, but the correspondence of a desire to something that exists in reality that can fulfill that desire.

    Furthermore, as Kreeft would point out, we must distinguish between two types of desires: innate and artificial. Innate desires are natural, like the natural desires we have for food, sleep, etc. There are indeed real things that correspond to these desires. Artificial desires, on the other hand, are externally conditioned (not natural, come from the outside) and may or may not have a correspondence in reality. Your second question about the suicide bombers would be an example of an artificial desire (unless you'd like to argue that the desire for 72 virgins in heaven is innate). Therefore, any talk of the desires of these suicide bombers is irrelevant, since the argument from desire refers only to natural desires.

    But, the truth is, I don't think the argument from desire proves God (but obviously not for the reasons you give). At best, the argument proves the existence of a something out there that fulfills the innate desires people have for paradise or eternal life. This is a far cry from proving the existence of the God of Scripture. So let's move on from this argument...

    There was something in your response that caught my attention. You said humans were 'mere animals'. Let's explore that claim. Obviously, I disagree with that claim. I believe human beings are distinct from animals; the Bible says God created us in His image and likeness and has given us dominion over the whole earth. Therefore, human beings are not 'mere animals'; they are, as the image-bearers of God, necessarily of greater value than animals. And you know this to be true because you, as a human being, are created in the image of God.

    Before you get upset with what I just said, let's consider the example of the suicide bomber again. The bomber (a mere animal) has a desire (72 virgins in heaven) and acts to fulfill that desire. In the process of trying to fulfill his desire, however, he kills several other human beings (mere animals). Was the suicide bomber wrong for doing this?

    Now, let's consider another example. An ant-eater (a mere animal) has a desire (food) and acts to fulfill that desire. In the process of trying to fulfill its desire, however, he kills several ants (mere animals). Was the ant-eater wrong for doing this?

    I look forward to your respond, Mr. Strong!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Robert E...gay love is not innate? ...tell that to homosexuals--because they will flat out tell you that gay love is innate just like food water and sleep so I reject your premise there, my friend!

    (For the record: I'm a happily married man to a hot young wife and we have wonderful kids :-) ...anyways; continuing: we both agree that a desire for god DOES NOT PROVE god (any god)--cool...moving along...we are animals Robert E, no different than a pig or dog! we're just a different species of animal but make no mistake about it we are all animals; indeed we all need sleep, food, air, and water to survive; and we are all born the same way, through the vagina (and some of us were conceived the same way as dogs and pigs--doggy style :-) ...in fact, seriously, doctors say if you want a boy to have doggy-style sex because male sperm swims faster and if you want a girl have missionary style because girl sperm swim slower :-),

    ...anyways...this is a fact Robert E, in the bombers mind he was acting 100% correct; just like the Boston Bombers felt the same way (BTW: I totally disagree with them but it is what it is and no amount of bible quoting can change the truth of the matter) ...and yes, to the ant the ant-eater was wrong but to the ant eater the ant eater was right...just like humans do to one another--why???? because we are ALL ANIMALS!!!! ...NO DIFFERENT THAN A DOG OR PIG ...just like the dogs who likely at the historical Jesus (if there was such a man of the NT) rotted corpse after it hung of the cross for 6 hours ...you see Robert E, animals eat each other, just like the dogs at your Jesus' corpse, the NT Jesus (the historical one) ate other animals while he lived...that's why this saying is forever true...its a dog eat dog world...its both metaphorical and literal because we all are animals...Brett Strong lives!!!! its been fun Robert E!

    ReplyDelete
  6. ps: Robert E...I noticed a made a few typos at the end so I'll reedit it right now:

    we (you Robert E, me, Vocab, your pastor, the bus driver, etc, etc, etc to 7 billion people on planet earth) are ALL ANIMALS!!!! ...NO DIFFERENT THAN A DOG OR PIG ...just like the dogs who likely ate (snacked on/feasted on) the historical Jesus' rotted corpse after it hung of the cross for 6 hours ...you see Robert E, animals eat each other, just like the dogs ate your Jesus' corpse, the NT Jesus (the historical one) ate other animals while he lived...that's why this saying is forever true...its a dog eat dog world...its both metaphorical and literal because we all are animals...Brett Strong lives!!!! its been fun Robert E!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Brett, I'll ignore most of the silly stuff you put and just kind of focus on the parts of your response that actually make a little bit of sense. ;)

    You said:

    >"...gay love is not innate? ...tell that to homosexuals--because they will flat out tell you that gay love is innate just like food water and sleep so I reject your premise there, my friend!"

    It doesn't matter whether it's innate. I didn't say either way. To reiterate, the argument from desire is not supposed to prove the righteousness of the desire or the righteousness of acting upon the desire. The argument is supposed to prove that there exists something in reality that corresponds to innate desires. If homosexual desire were innate, it would only prove that something exists in reality that would fulfill the desire.

    You also said:

    >"...in the bombers mind he was acting 100% correct; just like the Boston Bombers felt the same way (BTW: I totally disagree with them but it is what it is and no amount of bible quoting can change the truth of the matter)"

    Why do you disagree with the bombers' actions? Is it merely a matter of personal preference (you just so happen to dislike bombings), or is there another basis for your disagreement? Is bombing people an evil act?

    >"...and yes, to the ant the ant-eater was wrong but to the ant eater the ant eater was right...just like humans do to one another--why???? because we are ALL ANIMALS!!!!"

    So is the ant-eater wrong in the same sense the bomber is? Is there any difference between what the bombers did and what the ant-eater did? Or you seriously implying that the violent deaths of several human beings caused by the explosion of a bomb is equivalent to the deaths of several ants caused by the appetite of an ant-eater?

    Thanks...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Robert E...u should check out my debate I had with Jeff Durbin at Redemption radio June 2012, its the most popular show in their history (#1)...way more popular then Sye Brugenccate was a guest and Dan Barker too (and it addresses the ant eater scenario and the Muslim bombers)...anyways, to cut to the chase, innate desires does not prove a god or any god exits--period! C S Lewis was loosing it when he made such a ignorant remark! ...to be sure anyone can throw out a farfetched remark (like Cs Lewis did); but proving it to be true is a whole other thing which you and C S Lewis cannot do & will never be able to do because your god and Jesus are fictional characters in the fiction based book called the bible...anyways, nothing wrong will believing fairytales, like the OT and NT, just don't be dogmatic---so cool :-)


    Brett Strong lives!

    ...hey Robert E, I'm looking to fill up my (BrettStrong) YouTube channel with interesting dialogue (w/different opponents) so if you want to do a Skype conversation over the topics we are discussing (so I can post it on my YouTube Channel and u can do the same with your website) let me know ASAP...for we can do it ASAP...about an hour sounds great...let me know when you reply ...thanks ...

    ReplyDelete
  9. ....one more thing Robert E...(I have this entire 4th of July week off) so if you know anyone, this week, who would like to do a Skype AUDIO dialogue about any Christian subject, from Jesus being fake to abortion being whatever the woman wishes, just let me know with a reply...thanks...

    Brett Strong lives!

    PS everyone (including the great Vocab Malone :-)): I am so utterly confident Christianity is a religion based on fiction, or at best a religion based on improvable farfetched ideas, that I am willing to take on any Christian dogma out there (be it the Christian god, Jesus, hell, abortion, gay marriage, we are animals, morals, the bible, etc)...so anyone who believes Christianity is that true then lets do a Skype AUDIO dialogue ASAP on the Christian topic you'd like...

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don't think I can do a Skype debate, mainly because I lack the necessary computer equipment. However, I have some friends of mine who have expressed interest in debating you, so I'll let you know.

    You neglected to respond to my questions about the bomber and the ant-eater, which were:

    -Why do you disagree with the bombers' actions? Is it merely a matter of personal preference (you just so happen to dislike bombings), or is there another basis for your disagreement? Is bombing people an evil act?

    -So is the ant-eater wrong in the same sense the bomber is? Is there any difference between what the bombers did and what the ant-eater did? Or you seriously implying that the violent deaths of several human beings caused by the explosion of a bomb is equivalent to the deaths of several ants caused by the appetite of an ant-eater?

    I'd appreciate a proper response, if you don't mind.

    Also, I noticed you seem to be fond of saying "Brett Strong lives!" Yes, Brett Strong lives. But only until Brett Strong dies. Then what of Brett Strong? What will Brett Strong say when Brett Strong meets his Maker?

    ReplyDelete
  11. hey Robert E... my friend, you don't need equipment! 0! ZERO! ..all you need is a cell phone or a land line...that's it...I have audio Skype...I call your cell or landline, Skype records the conversation, bingo (Vocab knows this)....whatever subject you would like for about 45 minutes or so...I'll send you a copy and you can post it on your web site and I'll do the same ...but hey, I'd be more than happy to dialogue with your friends in the same manner so please let them know, ASAP, we'll do it tomorrow, day after tomorrow, etc; because I have this entire 4th of July week off to be with my hot wife and do some fun dialogue...looking to build my name and content on my YouTube channel (so I'm willing to take on anybody, just like street evangelists Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron; those guys are well known but yet they tackle the average Joe daily on the streets and put that content on their website--I'm looking to do the same ...I've debated on a lot of radio shows (STR, Redemption, Backpack, etc) but they own the copyright therefore I must do it this way...

    Brett Strong lives...for anyone who reads this and wants to dialogue for 45 minutes, this week, ASAP, (back to work next week) on a number of topics or just one topic and we will post it on our own websites just shoot me an email at: b.brettstrong@yahoo.com ...thanks///I'm like the apostle Paul taking on all comers w/out fear because I'm just that confident that Christianity is based on fiction or improvable farfetched ideas...

    topics of interest:

    Jesus is fiction
    Christian god is fiction
    the bible is fiction based
    what's wrong with abortion?
    what's wrong with gay marriage?
    there are no ultimate morals--all morals are relative
    euthanasia
    we are not divine we are animals
    etc, like the bible is not logical and so forth

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for your comment!

Follow by Email

There was an error in this gadget

CONTACT INFO:

To find out more about the ministry of BACKPACK APOLOGETICS or to schedule a speaking event at your church or school, contact Vocab:

E-mail: vocab@vocabmalone.com