Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You'll have to elaborate further. Either you accept that you could be wrong about your theological commitments or you don't. Thus far you have indicated that you accept that possibility and that you would be willing to revise those commitments if presented with sufficient reasons to do so (1).
It would be helpful if you would answer the questions put to you, rather than being evasive, which is the norm for you.It would be helpful for you to study more in depth on the concept of properly basic belief and the concept of logical possibility. There are many aspects of the concept of subjunctive possibility. Logical, metaphysical, nomological, etc. Etc. Each are different and nuanced. Studying each in depth may help you understand more clearly and more precisely what all is entailed and what all is excluded from the specific subjunctive possibility of logical possibility.
I have attempted to. And I am not trying to be evasive. I can provide you a link to some free online references if you would like.It would be helpful if you would answer the questions put to you, rather than being evasive, which is the norm for you.
I don't know that eyewitness accounts are deeply flawed.
You know how courts of law determine the validity of eye witness accounts, don't you?
They compare the eye witness accounts to the forensic and physical evidence. They also, allow eye witnesses to be cross examined.
I think you would agree, legal procedures are designed to find the truth and if an eye witness is not available to provide their testimony in the flesh, they are not considered valid evidence.
I can supply some links for you if you would like.Could you give me Philosophy 101, or at least an introduction to Philosophy, in one, or a couple paragraphs please?
God Bless!
Yes, please... Are they good ones that you know, there seems to be some disagreement among philosophy teachers about Philosophy itself actually is?I can supply some links for you if you would like.
An eyewitness account is no less an eyewitness account just because the eyewitness is prohibited from testifying in person.
A sworn affidavit in such an instance will be utilized if available.
All of this is quite beside the point really.
Multiple eyewitness accounts of Banjo doing X is something I would have to consider in assessing the veracity of the claims made.
If that is what you want to believe then fine.Whenever an eye witness account can not be compared to physical evidence, or be questioned directly, it is far less reliable.
And when an eye witness can not be directly questioned, it becomes hearsay.
If that is what you want to believe then fine.
I don't share the sentiment. If did I would have to dismiss much of what historians deem to be reliable accounts of historical events.
It isn't just what I believe, but has been supported with studies of eye witness accounts and their reliability.
If any historian claims there are eye witness accounts in the NT, they are simply assuming the unknown authors that penned the gospels, are accurately portraying the same. Many NT historians, do not agree the gospels are valid eye witness accounts.
It appears to be mocking the story of Jesus Christ.This is an interesting way to put it...the old duck test. Let's take the duck test then shall we??
Suppose I told you a story about a guy named Banjo. He's a guy born of a virgin who was being hunted even before his birth because of a prophecy. His mother was a virgin...but she got magically knocked up by a sky spirit from god. When he was born three of the local chieftains followed a glowing green light to his birthplace in an abandoned asbestos shack in a swamp.
When Banjo gets older, he quits his day job wrastling gators to spread the news that he's the son of god. He's got all kinds of fancy powers like turning water to whisky, healing tuberculosis with just his hands, walking around on swamp water without sinking in, and he can bring his friends back to life by whistling Dixie. He only gathers a few followers...but he tells them he's gonna die for their shenanigans, to wash the world clean of shenanigans, and give everyone a chance to get into heaven...cuz he's the only way to get there.
Then he gets reverse hung (strappado) until he dies of internal bleeding...a very painful death indeed. After he's put into a crypt, he reappears to his friends and gives them the lowdown on the rapture and who's gonna win the Superbowl that year...
What do you think of my story?
If you had done that before I already found that it was mockery, it still would not be enough of a change in and of itself, to appear like a convincing claim to truth. There is no indication in your words, that you are saying something that you believe yourself.If I added in names and places of real stuff from an accurate time period...would you think it a story of myth or reality?
Bolded part is an untested assumption. Possibly not true, but it does demonstrate that you are assuming to know something that has not been tested, and then going ahead to base your belief about me on that unverified assumption, and thereby demonstrating bias.You're darn right I believe you're using a double standard...in fact I'm certain of it. There aren't many elements of the story of Jesus that aren't found in many of the mythological stories of his day....yet you don't believe any of those mythological stories to be real.
Well there's more to it than that. Ultimately, it stands up to scrutiny with rigidity that only truth can do.You believe your mythological story to be real....and the best reason you've given me for it is some notion of being able to tell who's lying or not simply by reading their words.
You don't believe this. You are lying and not even ashamed of it.What about Banjo Oi? He died for your shenanigans.
I really don't mind you stating your views, but you also do not answer my questions. That's really rude, fellow.You haven't been paying attention and you have a habit of putting words in my mouth.
If you have followed my posts, you will see, I have made a serious attempt to determine the reliability of the claims made in the NT specifically. I have explained many times how I went about this and I do not find scripture to be a credible source of reality.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?