The Irrationality of Unbelief

I posted this in a spirtuality forum, I will try and keep posting the rest of the conversation if it keeps going, I think it shows the irrationality of unbelief. If not, well...you can see how to do it wrong, heh.


agree, but how are sure 5,000 years ago human nature was the same? How do you know that there wasnt a change? Sure, we can look at observable or empirical data and understand certain things. But how can we assume that it has always been the same without a universal constant?

Five thousand years ago humans would have realied even MORE so on instinct.the need to matethe need to eatthe need to be the best male/female so that they COULD matethe need to be violent to defend themselves

So essentially, you assume human nature was the same, or virtually the same, based on a what you see now and assume must have been normative in the past? Not that I dont agree that 5,000 years ago human nature was the same, but a bit farther back I would say that human nature was perfect. It was changed by the introduction of sin into the world, what we have now is normal but not essentially normative. To clarify, it happens normally now, but is not normal for us, it is normal for us to be in communion with God. Evidence of this? 1) Logic - based on empirical evidences 2) Reason - reality only makes sense with a christian wordview 3) Supernatural revelation from the an immaterial being, that is, the Holy Spirit.

So I assert that human nature has changed, we are now seperated from God, literally blinded by sin; and to prove that, since God does exist it must therefore be plain that He exists, for mankind not to realize this, or virtually to deny the God of the bible, must mean that all men are blinded by sin (rom 1:18-32;1 cor 2:14). Since you are blind to your own true nature, or should I say that you dont know entirely who you are in relation to God, you must seek some answer, no?

What is the next step? if for a while you humor me and follow my line of reasoning, if only for the purpose to understand where I am coming from . You assume that the past, present, and future are consistent with what you see today, when you walk across a room you assume you will make it to your goal. Why? You presuppose the brute facts (which arent real) of motion, gravity, and thermodynamics. You assume since they were the same yesterday and today they must be the same today. So you are in a dialectectal relationship of rationalism and irrationalism. You assume constant abstract laws as rational, yet you virtually deny the basis for these laws, that is, the 'why' of consistency or should I say the God of the bible who is back of everything, who is the All-Conditioner. Since you do this, you destroy all knowledge, you destroy rational thought. Or am I wrong, and if I am wrong, why?