And they say, "There's no Evidence ... !!!"

2PhiloVoid · Mar 23, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
Says the guy who just insisted that he wanted a dialogue.

Oh, come now, Ana! It's not as if I've slipped away, silently into the yonder to never be heard from or seen again or, better yet, to have made use of that easy go to: the ignore button.

What's the matter Philo? Did I hit the nail too squarely on the head there?

... I don't know. I heard a lot of pounding, but I didn't feel any pain. Were you using a hammer? :dontcare:

I suppose you can claim I don't understand hermeneutics a couple more times and suggest that if only I were christian I'd understand better....

Granted, I'm sure you understand something about Philosophical Hermeneutics because if you truly are in an analytic line of work, then there is something within your praxis that utilizes at least some aspects of it. What I'm concerned about is that in all of my posturing and referring to Jens Zimmerman's overview of Hermeneutcs, I'm not sure you're quite up to speed on all of the nuances involved in that line of analytic. But, maybe you'll surprise me ...

That seems like a go-to move.

Nope. It's definitely not where I want to go to, but you atheists want things your way in the way that you want them, so there's very little engagement on your parts from what I've noticed, really. No, you all seem to have your "go to" source excuses which amount to coddling your own malcontent with Christianity and bringing in tidbits from either Richard Carrier or Bart Ehrman as you see fit to do.

However, far be it from me to attempt to reduce your motive here to just these fragmentary elements of our human existence. I'm rather hoping that there is indeed more to you atheists in your humanity than just malcontentment and a reliance upon a few voices in the Atheist Thought Market, or worse yet, a full, head-on subscription to Solomon Syndrome Magazine.

2PhiloVoid · Mar 23, 2019

cvanwey said:
This video brought up an interesting point, in which a poster from another thread stated recently...

(start paraphrasing)

'God knowingly created humans, requires them to leap across a 10 meter hole, all-the-while knowing they do not possess the ability to leap this far.'

(end paraphrasing)

Meaning, God created humans with a defect in which they cannot 'fix' on their own. Thus, the only 'solution' requires belief and repent in a 'being' whom clones Himself, sends Himself to earth for torture and death, rises from this event, and asks that people believe it happened under 'questionable' pretenses. The ones that don't, will surely be declined or cast away, according to the writings by men whom claim this was the 'Word of God.'

All-the-while, the ones that are cast away have an eternity to ponder questions, such as...

"Is it really an ultimate sacrifice, if you receive your clone back with you, after a brief stay on earth and maybe in 'Hell'?"

"Why was the criteria for eternal damnation hinged upon whether or not one believed in an event; especially when belief is not really a choice?"

Sounds like a sound plan to me

Well, I'm glad you 'approve' of THE PLAN, cvanwey!

2PhiloVoid · Mar 23, 2019

HitchSlap said:
Yep, sunk cost fallacy.

I think you'd have to indeed show that emotions should play no part in the having and maintaining of Christian 'faith' in order to cite and successfully apply this fallacy, HS. You'd also have to "know" absolutely, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that all the Apocalyptic mumbo-jumbo we find in the Bible is just a bad pipe-dream. And somehow, I don't think you, nor anyone else on this forum, really knows that it is.

2PhiloVoid · Mar 23, 2019

Nicholas Deka said:
I dunno, not really. For me I see a difference here between "He must" and "He could". I'm not making any "He must" claims about this. I'm just saying "He could". And until something is ruled out logically, I see no reason to say "He couldn't". Conversely, when enough things are ruled in logically, then we've got a lot of good reasons to start thinking that anything is possible.

And how do we know the Bible's authors got it right anyways? Either they tried on their own to deduce how God must be, and are just as fallible as us, or God told them how He is through divine inspiration in some way, but perhaps only in a way they would understand and not an entirely accurate picture (think Genesis). Either way, it doesn't seem to be the case that you could really rule out what God can't do.

Ok. I understand you're line of thought here, but I'm going to have to decline from affirming it as being fully cogent. I think there are some complications here you're not recognizing, probably not because you're being self-willed like a lot of these atheists, but because you, like the rest of us, are trying to grapple with the discomfort of this thing we call 'life.' And I can understand that. It's just that at some point, if we want to engage the God of the Bible, then we have to do it on the terms we've been given rather than the terms that the philosophers have laid out for us.

Anyway, I'm not going to club you for all of this. As you may have noticed, I've had my hands full here lately.

That's basically what I was thinking too, actually. Regardless of the evidence, it will be a feeling, and not knowledge.

It will be a "feeling" in the sense that we're talking subjectivity as Kierkegaard, and maybe Pascal, seemed to conceptualize it, more or less. It's just that I'd add in the epistemic notions reflected by Philosophical Hermeneuticists as well.

HitchSlap · Mar 23, 2019

2PhiloVoid said:
I think you'd have to indeed show that emotions should play no part in the having and maintaining of Christian 'faith' in order to cite and successfully apply this fallacy, HS. You'd also have to "know" absolutely, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that all the Apocalyptic mumbo-jumbo we find in the Bible is just a bad pipe-dream. And somehow, I don't think you, nor anyone else on this forum, really knows that it is.

More like ‘shroom infused ramblings of a senile mind.

“Mumbo jumbo” indeed.

2PhiloVoid · Mar 23, 2019

HitchSlap said:
More like ‘shroom infused ramblings of a senile mind.

“Mumbo jumbo” indeed.

Dare I ask why you think that biblical Eschatology is indeed mumbo-jumbo? I'm asking because Apocalyptic Literature does play some role in my set of beliefs, as I would think it does in many Christian sets of beliefs, however theologically diverse they may be from one another. [e.g. ...as you know, I'm sure, Preterism is not Dispensationalism, and Traditional Premillenialism isn't Kingdom Now theology, and so on and so forth.]

Ana the Ist · Mar 23, 2019

2PhiloVoid said:
Oh, come now, Ana! It's not as if I've slipped away, silently into the yonder to never be heard from or seen again or, better yet, to have made use of that easy go to: the ignore button.

Lol is that praiseworthy? Not putting me on ignore?

I suspect that some who've claimed to put me on ignore actually haven't. I keep seeing them posting to no one in particular, about points I've made in the same thread.

... I don't know. I heard a lot of pounding, but I didn't feel any pain. Were you using a hammer?

I could take another stab at making it clearer if that would help.

We could start with an explanation of the intentional fallacy and go from there....

https://www.britannica.com/art/intentional-fallacy0

Granted, I'm sure you understand something about Philosophical Hermeneutics because if you truly are in an analytic line of work, then there is something within your praxis that utilizes at least some aspects of it. What I'm concerned about is that in all of my posturing and referring to Jens Zimmerman's overview of Hermeneutcs, I'm not sure you're quite up to speed on all of the nuances involved in that line of analytic. But, maybe you'll surprise me ...

Let's just assume I'm not....would that affect the validity of any argument that I might present?

How about an easier question....

I know you believe that the method of my interpretation of the bible is flawed....what you fail to explain though, is why?

I'm going to guess that your answer is going to be some version of "because you don't agree with my conclusions"....but maybe you'll surprise me.

Nope. It's definitely not where I want to go to, but you atheists want things your way in the way that you want them, so there's very little engagement on your parts from what I've noticed, really.

Engagement on what? You presented a song...then added no real points. You simply asked "do you agree?"

Those who disagree, you just claim they don't see things "correctly" without really addressing any points they make.

No, you all seem to have your "go to" source excuses which amount to coddling your own malcontent with Christianity and bringing in tidbits from either Richard Carrier or Bart Ehrman as you see fit to do.

If you don't want to defend christian concepts from those evil atheists...why post in Apologetics?

However, far be it from me to attempt to reduce your motive here to just these fragmentary elements of our human existence. I'm rather hoping that there is indeed more to you atheists in your humanity than just malcontentment and a reliance upon a few voices in the Atheist Thought Market, or worse yet, a full, head-on subscription to Solomon Syndrome Magazine.

I would suggest that if you really want to find out....ask.

2PhiloVoid · Mar 23, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
Lol is that praiseworthy? Not putting me on ignore?

I suspect that some who've claimed to put me on ignore actually haven't. I keep seeing them posting to no one in particular, about points I've made in the same thread.

I don't know if it's praiseworthy, but it is often the easy default that some people resort to around here.

I could take another stab at making it clearer if that would help.

We could start with an explanation of the intentional fallacy and go from there....

https://www.britannica.com/art/intentional-fallacy0

That's strange. When I click the link you've provided, it pulls up a page that says "page not found."

Let's just assume I'm not....would that affect the validity of any argument that I might present?

How about an easier question....

I know you believe that the method of my interpretation of the bible is flawed....what you fail to explain though, is why?

I'm going to guess that your answer is going to be some version of "because you don't agree with my conclusions"....but maybe you'll surprise me.

For me to really know for sure whether or not you're taking into account various factors that play in the formation of Christian faith, I'd need to have an in depth conversation with you. In your case, and based upon what we've talked about in the past, I'm prone to think we're just at logger-heads about the whole process of theorizing and analysis and we won't even get to the point where we can even talk about Christianity. But I could be wrong. In fact, I hope I am.

Engagement on what? You presented a song...then added no real points. You simply asked "do you agree?"

Those who disagree, you just claim they don't see things "correctly" without really addressing any points they make.

There's a bit more to my complaint about how atheists don't seem to want to engage. But that may be because my definition of engagement is a bit more time intensive than what the typical conversation often entails or than what the typical person here on CF wants to undertake.

If you don't want to defend christian concepts from those evil atheists...why post in Apologetics?

....because I was "invited" by an atheist to do so.

I would suggest that if you really want to find out....ask.

Oh, ok, then. As an atheist, is there more to your lack of belief in Christianity than just a sense of malcontentment with religion and a reliance upon a few voices in the Atheist Thought Market, or a full, head-on subscription to Solomon Syndrome Magazine?

Ana the Ist · Mar 24, 2019

2PhiloVoid said:
I don't know if it's praiseworthy, but it is often the easy default that some people resort to around here.

I won't disagree with you there....but I also have an empty ignore list, so I'm not impressed by yours.

That's strange. When I click the link you've provided, it pulls up a page that says "page not found."

Yeah...that's what I'm seeing now as well, and yes...it is strange. This is less detailed, but will suffice...

the definition of intentional fallacy

For me to really know for sure whether or not you're taking into account various factors that play in the formation of Christian faith, I'd need to have an in depth conversation with you.

Why would I need to account for those factors? I'm not interested in how you or anyone else arrived at their christian beliefs....I'm interested in the validity of the beliefs.

No offense (and I'm sure you won't take any, since you feel the same way about atheists) but there's only a handful of stories that describe most people's arrival at belief. There may be a great number of variations of those few stories...but the details are subjective. It's the concepts themselves which are up for debate.

In your case, and based upon what we've talked about in the past, I'm prone to think we're just at logger-heads about the whole process of theorizing and analysis and we won't even get to the point where we can even talk about Christianity. But I could be wrong. In fact, I hope I am.

If hermeneutics is the journey, then belief (or lack thereof) is the destination. I can't argue about the validity of the journey though...it's subjective.

There's a bit more to my complaint about how atheists don't seem to want to engage. But that may be because my definition of engagement is a bit more time intensive than what the typical conversation often entails or than what the typical person here on CF wants to undertake.

Intensive in what way?

....because I was "invited" by an atheist to do so.

Oh, ok, then. As an atheist, is there more to your lack of belief in Christianity than just a sense of malcontentment with religion and a reliance upon a few voices in the Atheist Thought Market, or a full, head-on subscription to Solomon Syndrome Magazine?

No idea what the "atheist thought market" is...but I was an atheist before I had heard the term "atheist". As for Solomon Syndrome Magazine....I checked....and couldn't find any such magazine to subscribe to.

So I think it's safe to say that these aren't the causes of my atheism.

Moral Orel · Mar 24, 2019

2PhiloVoid said:
Anyway, I'm not going to club you for all of this.

So a baby seal walks into a club...

That's it for me folks! Good night!

Dave Ellis · Mar 24, 2019

juvenissun said:
Leaf and rock ARE unambiguously evidences of God. What do you mean by unambiguous? Do you know the difference between evidence and proof?

No, leafs and rocks are evidence of universe creating pixies, not your god.

Dave Ellis · Mar 24, 2019

juvenissun said:
You want to see evidence of evidence?
I think you have significant logic problem. Or, you simply do not know what an evidence is. Do you think I am a real person? What is your evidence of that?

No, I'm asking for evidence of the claims that are found in the bible. The bible itself is not evidence of anything.

juvenissun · Mar 24, 2019

Dave Ellis said:
No, leafs and rocks are evidence of universe creating pixies, not your god.

It depends on how much do you understand them. The more you understand, the better they are as evidences of God. As I said, this is the nature of anything called evidence. Can you use a piece of dust as an evidence of murder?

juvenissun · Mar 24, 2019

Dave Ellis said:
No, I'm asking for evidence of the claims that are found in the bible. The bible itself is not evidence of anything.

the Bible is a unique Book (do you know how unique it is?). The Book itself is a very very strong evidence of God.

What is the best knowledge you have (expertise)? If you care, we can talk about it. I will show you the evidence of God in the knowledge which you know the best.

Ana the Ist · Mar 24, 2019

juvenissun said:
the Bible is a unique Book (do you know how unique it is?).

How unique is it?

The Book itself is a very very strong evidence of God.

How so?

What is the best knowledge you have (expertise)? If you care, we can talk about it. I will show you the evidence of God in the knowledge which you know the best.

I'm an expert on my wife's moods lol.

juvenissun · Mar 24, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
How unique is it?
How so?
I'm an expert on my wife's moods lol.

There is no other book written in the same way as the Bible is written. This is a very simple, but an amazing one.

We could talk about your wife's mood as an evidence of God at a later time, if you like to.

Ana the Ist · Mar 24, 2019

juvenissun said:
There is no other book written in the same way as the Bible is written. This is a very simple, but an amazing one.

I'm sure you think this is true.

We could talk about your wife's mood as an evidence of God at a later time, if you like to.

Ok...I'm definitely curious about what you have to say about that.

juvenissun · Mar 24, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
I'm sure you think this is true.

This is a historical fact. Even most atheists who know the Bible accept that. You should accept that too. The Bible is a consistent Book written by multiple authors over a time span of 1500+ years.

That is a powerful evidence of God.

juvenissun · Mar 24, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
I'm an expert on my wife's moods

That means the mood of your wife (so is everyone's wife) is an expression of a very complicate system.

OK, stopped at here for the moment. This complicate system is found nowhere else in the animal kingdom, but only in the female of human. This, is an evidence of God's creation. No other process in the known universe can make this wonderful system.

When you look at your wife, you are looking at a wonderful creature of God.

cvanwey · Mar 24, 2019

2PhiloVoid said:
Well, I'm glad you 'approve' of THE PLAN, cvanwey!

By your response, I'm not sure if you....

1. At least agree that such events are 'required' to ascend to heaven, and wish not to comment or further add your own opinion or scrutinize the method/result?

Or...

2. You disagree with the states steps made, for humans to receive 'salvation' and 'refuge', and you just chose not to interact further?

Or...

3. Other?

And they say, "There's no Evidence ... !!!"

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Aggressively serene!

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Aggressively serene!

Proud Citizen of Moralton

Contributor

Contributor

... and God saw that it was good.

... and God saw that it was good.

Aggressively serene!

... and God saw that it was good.

Aggressively serene!

... and God saw that it was good.

... and God saw that it was good.

Well-Known Member

Similar threads