Brandon Thorp Confuses Conscience for Consciousness

Quote:

True -- I misread the first part of your proof. But I'm afraid I am misreading it still. I wonder if you could explain both proofs in clearer language.

It might help you to ask specific questions related to aspects of the proof instead of being vague; that way you address it conscientiously.

I am not sure how to explain it any more clearly. Here it is again.

4 Step Perfect Proof for God of the Bible (4SPFG)
1. Exponential progression of conscience (see evidence of) disallows an eternity of the past of cause and effects in the natural realm since the human race would not still be sinning to the extent it still does. Therefore, the Uncreated (always existing) created who is God of the Bible ONLY since none can compare to Christ (by proof of resurrection using the 4SMFA).
2. The preponderance of evidence (trillions+) for cause and effects tell us nothing in the universe is without a cause, otherwise you would have to be God to know if God exists, and obviously, you are not God. It is not necessary to know everything to know if God exists due to overwhelming evidence. Therefore, the Uncreated must exist Who created, the only known available possibility Who is God of the Bible since none can compare to Christ. "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth" (Arthur Conan Doyle; Spock on Star Trek said something similar).
3. Don't argue against a quality of some god that is not the nature of God of the Bible, otherwise you are arguing not against God of the Bible but something else. (It is necessary to point this out because the problem of misreading the Bible happens so often. Since encountered so profusely, it is necessary to say, to remain topic and stop deflection as much as possible.)
4. Exponential progression of conscience disallows the eternity of the past of cause and effects in the supernatural if it exists (the supernatural was proven to exist in Step 1 and 2) since people would not still be sinning as much as they do now. Therefore, the uncreated Creator created who is God of the Bible because none can compare to Christ (by comparison).

4 Step Minimal Facts Approach, Proving the Resurrection of Jesus and that He is God (4SMFA)
1. 95 to 99.9% of skeptical scholars who do their thesis work, are accredited and have peer review journal work done on the resurrection in the past half century (we know this because we counted them-see Gary R. Habermas) agree Paul really wrote and really believed what he wrote in 1 Cor. 15 and Gal. 1 & 2.
2. In these 3 chapters, Paul said he met with Peter, James (brother of Jesus) and John on several occasions in which the first meeting was with Peter and James within 5 years of Jesus' death on the cross, and they all agreed to the reason for being the eyewitnesses, in various group settings, to the bodily resurrection of Jesus.
3. People do not go to their deaths as martyrs if they don't believe in what they are doing. (Church fathers prove the eyewitnesses were put to death for claiming they saw Jesus resurrected, for worshiping Him as God and the only way to be saved was through Jesus.) The apostles really believed they saw, talked with, touched, walked with and ate with the resurrected Jesus, in various group settings given in Scripture, which convinced them He is God and so became bold proclaimers when before they were doubters. Substantial evidence in Scripture testifies to this fact. The Bible is the proof and is allowed to prove something.
4. If no naturalistic theory can account for witnessing the bodily resurrection of Jesus, then it must be true they saw Jesus resurrected, for no other possibility exists in nature or human psychology that fits the data which shows He created us, He is uncreated and salvation is through Him. Since this is not something so complicated the world can't understand it like some aspects of quantum mechanics, a naturalistic explanation should be relatively easy to devise, yet none exist even after all this time to meet the data that skeptical scholars are virtually unanimous on. There is a time to reserve judgment and a time to give into overwhelming evidence. Therefore, we are without excuse.

Thus, Hell would be needed for the unsaved to keep them eternally separated from God's own people. Our prayers go out to those who are unwilling to repent and believe in Christ to be regenerated: to come to the cross as helpless sinners to receive the Lord Jesus as Savior.

Quote:

It seems that you have ascribed to me, or to someone, a belief in an "eternity of the past." I do not believe that the past stretches back, unending, forever and ever. It seems to me that this is something religious people believe.

Lots of atheists as you know believe that the universe always existed, having an eternity of the past. That's why Step 1 of the proof is given to show how this can't be. Maybe some religious people believe like those atheists, but I don't know any Christians who believe that, since as you know we believe in creation: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Gen. 1.1).

Since you don't believe in an eternity of the past of cause and effects, that's great. We can classify you as one of those atheists who believe the universe happened all by itself which violates the laws of thermodynamics.

You can now move onto Step 2 of the 4 Step Proof for God.

Quote:

It seems as though you have pinpointed a particular moment in time -- the present -- and decided that consciences are "exponentially" more developed. I wonder why you think so, and if C.S. Lewis would agree if we brought him back to life.

I don't know what he says about this. All we know are the many evidences of this being true. Let us abide in the evidence. But since this point is related only to Step 1 and not Step 2, you need not discuss it for the sake of proving God to yourself.

Quote:

I also wonder why you've chosen to use the word "exponential." Please remember: "exponential" does not mean "with increasing rapidity." You must have a mathematical constant to establish exponentiality: i.e; one's conscience grows by 10% every 10 years, or something similarly precise.

Exponential does mean increasing rapidity as you see in this chart. 7% per year compounds exponentially.

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/expon...rogression.jpg

Quote:

And if there were an exponential increase in the development of our consciences, I suspect it would take us well beyond the sins of war and genocide quite soon after it became noticeable. This is because exponential growth-rates operate very, very quickly. For a clear demonstration of this, you should look into the story of the Persian chessboard, often called the "Wheat and Chessboard Problem."

Yes I am aware of this, that is why the exponential progression of conscience is in the proof, as we observe it in nature, and agrees with Scripture. 4000 years since Adam to Christ under the law. 2000 years of the church age, the dispensation of grace. 1000 years coming millennial kingdom. After that there is no sin in the New City and New Earth. There you have an exponential progression of conscience. The dramatic effect of exponential progressions...

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/population_growth.jpg

Quote:

As to Paul -- I am not a Bible scholar, and know only what I have read. (The KJV and some apologetics.) There are both Biblical minimalists and Biblical inerrantists who have studied the book in far greater depth than I.

A minimalist is still an inerrant. The only reason he uses minimalism is because he tries to get those who are not saved to agree on something, to find some common ground, something of which most skeptical scholars accept. From there we can prove to you the resurrection, God exists and Jesus is God.

Quote:

Nevertheless, my careful reading of the KJV has taught me this: that the gospels tell irreconcilably different stories, some of which are demonstrably false, and that the Old Testament is precisely the kind of document one would expect out of Bronze-age nomads who know very little about the cosmos.

Are you aware Christian scholars have addressed all known alleged contradictions? I believe in the inerrancy of Scripture because of this. You should find out what they say on your particular issues before assuming something can't be explained. Otherwise, you would taking the overassuming position which is not the humble one. The Bible agrees with the cosmos, so why think otherwise? Of course, back then they didn't know as much as we know, but at least they knew, like in the proof I supplied, something in nature can't happen all by itself (Step 2), because of the preponderance of evidence of the trillions of causes and effects in nature, and there is no evidence for something happening all by itself. A saved soul then with less knowledge can still be saved today with more knowledge, because the foundational truths have not changed.

"For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, 'even' his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse" (Rom 1.20).

Also, realize that using the Minimal Facts Approach, you don't need to analyze a million different things in the Scriptures, because they are secondary issues to the primary proof. So, it would be disingenuous if you spent all your time on the secondary issues and not confront the main issue. You don't have to claim the Bible is inerrant to determine if Jesus resurrected. You don't have to be a scholar, for a child could understand it. How unfortunate too, if only scholars could be saved with more knowledge. God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10.34), so just because you may lack knowledge and you yourself are not a scholar, you really have no excuse for not accepting God's proof.

Quote:

God never told Moses about special or general relativity; he did not describe the structure of the atom or the shape of the earth. Nor did he say whether it was a sin to clog the air with carbon dioxide or fill up a near-earth orbit with space junk. Instead, many of the Old Testament's moral injunctions have to do with oxen. My point is that there is nothing in the Old Testament that you wouldn't expect Bronze-age nomads to come up with on their own. So, with its unreliable gospels and underwhelming Old Testament -- which is also filled with historical inaccuracies, by the way -- the Bible seems a shaky source for something so earth-shattering as a resurrection. Corroborating evidence would be helpful.

For example, nature doesn't happen all by itself. Just as they knew that then we know it now, so you were unable to disprove this fact (Step 2). The first eyewitness Apostles were doubters after Jesus died, but when they saw Him resurrected, they became bold proclaimers. They didn't come up with this on their own, but they were forced to accept the reality Jesus was raised from the dead. Because you are unable to find a naturalistic explanation to explain away the proof for the uncreated Creator and the resurrection of Jesus proving He is God, you should ask yourself plainly why you shut your mind down? What is behind that illogical stance? It is, of course, self-centeredness, the independency to you Creator from the fall, and your sin nature that you prefer to be in which eternally separates you from God. After the millennial reign of Christ, you will be resurrected and cast into Hell for all eternity. I would not wish upon my worse enemy where you are going what you have a foretaste of already. Very sad, really, that you would want to be that way, but God won't force you to love Him. If that is what you want, so you shall have it. After you leave your body of flesh and blood, you will have made a choice for forever.

I am not sure what kind of corroborating evidence you would want more than already exists of 40 writers over 1500 years in 66 books and those famous 17 non-Christian sources. It's interesting, of those 17 non-Christian sources, 12 speak of Jesus' death, 7 of His resurrection and 7 of His deity. Of course they may not want to accept their own report, but they do record it for posterity.

Three of the most amazing prophecies from the OT to the NT are the return of Israel after 2500 years of not being a nation, the timing of when the Messiah would come, and all the various prophecies of specifics of Jesus' encounters many of which He could not have been able to control. Of course there are many others which were all written down before 300 BC on other fulfilments. Take a look at a few of them.

So since you are unable to find a naturalistic explanation to account for the data surrounding the resurrection and which most skeptical scholars agree, you would be admitting Jesus was resurrected and He is God even though you shut your mind down and perhaps deny it outwardly. Most skeptical scholars will concede these points (Gary R. Habermas, a leading scholar on the resurrection, has documented this).

1. Jesus died by crucifixion.
2. He was buried.
3. His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.
4. The tomb was empty (the most contested).
5. The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus (the most important proof).
6. The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.
7. The resurrection was the central message.
8. They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem.
9. The Church was born and grew.
10. Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship.
11. James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus (James was a family skeptic).
12. Paul was converted to the faith (Paul was an outsider skeptic).

These 12 points taken together inescapably lead to the fact Jesus was raised from the dead, proving He is God, and salvation is through Him and Him alone.

Quote:

But is any of this really necessary? The first book of Kings, chapter 18, contains an excellent test for the existence of the God of Abraham. Perhaps we could arrange something similar ...?

- BKT

Why is this necessary? Because you are a sinner, sin leads to death (scientifically speaking) and the second death (proven in Scripture) which is Hell. Unless you are willing to come to the cross as a helpless sinner to receive the Lord Jesus as Savior, surely you will go to Hell. Your choice.

We don't build altars today like they did then, but we have something similar. Altars were for false gods and the One True God. The Bible says a god is really just an idol. For only God is God. Therefore, we can test this out still as you wish. Your idol is what? Whatever you place as the most important thing in your life. What is that? For me it is God my Creator. The way it works in this dispensation of grace is there has been thousands of years of proof, so at this point God simply says, let's see whose altar is the correct one. Is yours? By which your self is the center and various things that go along with your idolatry of atheism. Or will God prevail and thereby choose a people for Himself to be with for eternity and send you to Hell for eternity? The test is on. Hitler tried to disprove the prophecy Israel would become a nation again by trying to annihilate the Jews. So far we see God proving His resurrection, prophecies, atoning for sins, agreeing with science, and you have nothing to counter these facts. You don't even agree with science for heaven's sake! Since your theory is nature has to happen all by itself. That's crazy! That's a crazy way to reject God. It's like saying you have to be God to know if God exists. How could you be any more arrogant?

God makes a liar out of you day by day. "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son" (1 John 2.22). "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death" (Rev. 21.8). This is our altar test between you and I.