Comments on: Christianity on Trial @ Auckland University

By: Christianity on Trial – Tuesday Night « Theology Geek NZ

Christianity on Trial – Tuesday Night « Theology Geek NZ — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:22:04 +0000

[...] More information is available here. [...]

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 05:57:03 +0000

I believe in the possibility of demonic activity including the oppression or even control of individuals. After all Jesus believed it happened, and we can’t go to a higher authority than that.

However I would be very careful about diagnosing individuals as being in that condition.

That said, Jesus claimed that demons could be cast out with prayer, so it’s pretty easy to treat. Certainly we don’t need the waterboarding and bondage that makes it into the Herald. =)

By: Leighton Keats

Leighton Keats — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 04:31:20 +0000

Jason, I can’t fault the logic in your arguments:

A) Because of this young Christians (of any age) are told to “simply believe” in the face of the many challenges their infant faith will receive in the secular arena.

B) The second reason is for our opponents. Atheists are not the enemy; they are lost souls in need of the Saviour.

But I would like to ask what may appear to be an unrelated or irrelevant question. So I beg your indulgence on this matter:

Do you believe in the spiritual oppression or control of individual human beings by demonic forces?

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 05:01:54 +0000

Leighton, there are two main reasons for engaging with atheists.

The first is for other believers. To the Church’s eternal shame we have forsaken the intellectual roots of our great tradition. Because of this young Christians (of any age) are told to “simply believe” in the face of the many challenges their infant faith will receive in the secular arena. Seeing other Christians engage, and defeat, their atheistic opponents in an open forum allows them to see that the intellect is involved with the Christian commitment. They will be strengthened in their faith, and encouraged to pursue at least a layman’s understanding of the philosophical and theological understandings that underlie Christianity.

The second reason is for our opponents. The Christian does not do battle simply to defeat an opponent. His goal is to tear down intellectual edifices that keep another soul from knowing the saving grace of God. Recently I had the deep joy of seeing an agnostic who I had crossed words with in the past has become a Christian.

Atheists are not the enemy; they are lost souls in need of the Saviour.

By: Leighton Keats

Leighton Keats — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 06:21:22 +0000

Today, many best-selling atheists argue that belief in God is delusional and a roadblock to political, moral, and scientific progress.

A question: Do you believe the bible the inspired word of god and authentic revelation from the living God. The truly divine source of political, moral, and scientific progress?

If so does it really matter what the atheists think given that the creation does not judge the Creator. Why even acknowledge their flawed reasoning?

By: Madeleine

Madeleine — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 22:51:41 +0000

I am not qualified Nils, I am still one paper short of an LLB (though that is being dealt to at this very moment).
“Madeleine Flannagan (Law Student)” just does not have the right look next to the others on the list with letters after their name.
I agree Richard Ekins would have been a good choice, ditto Glenn; there are a lot of good, qualified people to choose from but you have to remember that people have to be available and probably not reside in the South Island, so maybe another time?

The line up looks interesting to me so I don’t get your issue. Come along and decide what you think of each after you’ve heard them.
.-= My last blog-post ..Christianity on Trial @ Auckland University =-.

By: Nils

Nils — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 22:16:36 +0000

Michael Drake and Joe Fleener? The first two I understand, the second two I do not.
Also why stick to just science, philosopy and theology? With a title like this I expected a legal speaker in the mix given that the law is used to thwart christian inclusion and there are all manner of juicy human rights issues around religious inclusion.
Madeleine or Richard Ekins should have been included and where is Glen Peeples?