Note: The following is part 3 of the outstanding questions from the UNCG Debate on 9-2-10. My responses below are in blue font.A: Doesn’t morality change over time with societies and cultures? (slavery, Polygamy, Women’s Rights, etc)? If so, doesn't that prove the validity of secular humanistic morality and disprove the validity of Biblical morality?
In one sense morality does change with time and culture, but in another sense it does not. For instance, some things that were sin under the Law of Moses are no longer sin in the New Covenant era because Christians are no longer under the Law of Moses. However, there are certain behaviors that have always been sinful and will always be sinful. Examples would include idolatry, murder, rape, adultery, fornication, disrespecting your parents, pedophilia, bestiality, homosexuality, drunkenness, stealing, lying, etc. The types of behaviors listed in the second category above are always wicked and sinful in God's eyes, regardless of what your culture believes or what era you live in.
A: In middle school, 13 year old children are taught that the Greek and Roman gods were created for the sole reason of explaining that which is unknown! Zeus threw lightning bolts from heaven. Given this, would it not follow that the Christian God was created to also explain that which is unknown what happens after death, what is moral, how and when to work?
First, if your assumptions about the Christian God being unknown were true, it would follow about as much as when atheistic cosmologists appeal to the unknown to explain reality today. A great example would be the "naturalism of the gaps" involved with explaining how the universe came into being out of nothing apart from God by positing the "multiverse theory"; a theory that has no empirical evidence whatsoever to substantiate it. Another example of "naturalism of the gaps" would be appealing to the Oort cloud as the explanation for why we still have comets today when in reality they should have gone out of existence long ago if the universe is billions of years old.
Second, it is not true that the Christian God is unknown since He has revealed Himself in creation and Scripture, therefore your objection is moot.
A: Are you able to address the opening statements by the Agnostics about the reliability of the Bible’s textual basis, the existence of Jesus, and the existence of Adam and Eve?
Yes, these are easily answered if given enough time.
1. Regarding the reliability of the text of the New Testament, see my article Textual Criticism Done Dan Brown Style.
2. For a thorough rebuttal of the Christ-Myther theory see here: Were Bible Stories and Characters Stolen from Pagan Myths?
See also, Was Jesus Christ just a copycat Savior Myth Part I and Part II.
I also recommend excellent scholarly refutations such as Reinventing Jesus and The Heresy of Orthodoxy.
A: how does someone born without senses perceive God?
The same way a person born with senses does, by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit (John 3:3-5). Spiritual perception does not ultimately come about by empirical means nor is it negated by dulled or deadened senses, as is seen in the New Testament accounts of the believing blind, deaf, and leprous who were healed because of their saving faith. Also, in our modern times, many believe on Christ without eyesight, hearing, or an ability to feel objects. I know, for I've ministered to several of them.
A: In the bible, says we are God images, but we are not perfect then why the Christian God can be perfect?
The once innocent and undefiled "image of God" (i.e., mankind) has become fractured and broken (but not destroyed completely) through original sin whereas God cannot sin because He has no sin nature and no concomitant ability to sin. The original man and woman that He created innocent and upright with the moral ability to freely choose to obey or rebel against Him does not mitigate against His own sinless nature and character since God is not His creation and His creation is not God (Titus 1:2; 2 Corinthians 5:21; James 1:13-15).
A: Do you accept that no body is born a “Christian” but rather ideas and belief systems are of man’s creation and imposed on said new born?
It's not either/or but both/and. I do not deny that people are influenced by the culture they are born into. That's a given. However, the Bible explains that God Himself determines the circumstances into which people will be born (Acts 17:26) and the circumstances by which they will come to hear and believe the gospel (Romans 9-10). Thus, it fits perfectly well with Biblical revelation to expect that a large majority of people that are born into Christian homes become Christians. By the way, I wasn't born into a Christian home, so I'm an exception to the above generality.
A: If God is all powerful why doesn’t he speak to us all directly, but rather use people to tell us messages.
The question assumes that one of the requirement for the title "all powerful" is that God speak audibly to us today. But why should I accept this assumption? It certainly isn't a believing assumption, for God has already made Himself clearly known in creation (Psalm 19; Romans 1:19-21), in our consciences (Romans 2:14-15), and in Christ (Romans 10:17).
Hearing an audible voice from the sky or seeing a vision in your head does nothing to make you a true believer (Matthew 28:17; Luke 16:31). Apart from the Holy Spirit regenerating your soul, you will ultimately reject God, even if you hear from Him audibly. Just look at the nation of Israel in Exodus 32 with the golden calf incident. Look at the false prophet Balaam who was used mightily by God in spite of his unbelief (Numbers 22-24). These people had a daily manifestation of God in visible form through a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. Balaam was spoken to personally by God and even given clear instructions to follow and Balaam followed those instructions, yet as far as we know, he died a lost man that never was relationally connected to the very God he audibly heard from. The Israelites in the Old Covenant era and the Jews in Jesus day saw miracle after miracle yet they grumbled, rebelled, and rejected God and God's prophets. The reason why God doesn't speak audibly to the world from a divine megaphone in the sky is because in the former times He spoke through prophets, visions, and signs and wonders, but in these last days He has spoken to us through in His Son, Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1-2). That means that what you have in creation, conscience, and Scripture is all the "speaking" that you need, and it's a more certain way of communicating truth to you than by what you think God should provide (2 Peter 1:16-21).
A: Why does the foundation of logic come more easily/naturally from the Christian concept of God than from the Muslim, Jewish, or Hindu concept of God?
Great question. The short answer is that any theistic religion can sufficiently ground the immaterial laws of logic. Thus, to show why we aren't Muslims or Jews would have more to do with comparative studies between the Qur'an, the Torah, and the 66 books of the Protestant Bible and showing where both Islam and Judaism are in error in their understanding of Christian theism and their misinterpretation of their own sacred texts.
Hinduism doesn't pass muster because it is a polytheistic religion with inherently self-contradictory notions of the divine, thus it, like ancient Roman/Greek polytheism doesn't provide the sufficient conditions needed to ground abstract, immaterial, logical laws.
