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.
Exactly! I take full responsibility for my actions and life.Every humans is responsible for the trajectory of their unique soul. No one can convince another adult of something except for the unique adult. We all have to make the decision.
Exactly! I take full responsibility for my actions and life No sacrifice needed (immoral IMO).
Sounds like we agree (sans the soul part).
I have said nothing about validity. I have asked for evidence for the claim. No one seems to have any. I do not believe things without evidence.You have repeatedly answered your own question(s) about the validity of apologetics to you.
You can't convince them, but you can provide compelling evidence to assist their confidence level that the claim is true. It's really simple.Every humans is responsible for the trajectory of their unique soul. No one can convince another adult of something except for the unique adult. We all have to make the decision.
Do you apply this same approach to other, non religious contexts?
I have said nothing about validity. I have asked for evidence for the claim. No one seems to have any. I do not believe things without evidence.
You can't convince them, but you can provide compelling evidence to assist their confidence level that the claim is true. It's really simple.
Sounds a bit narcissistic, as I don’t to think people care as much as you think they do. It sounds like you’re trying really hard to get us to accept your epistemology as sound.Oh, man! It's too bad you haven't hung around here consistently over the past couple of years because I've answered this same question multiple times ...
... but don't worry, I know John Loftus' argument of the Outsider Test for Faith only all too well. (I mean...I do have his books, y'know! I've also had more than one university class on Eastern Philosophy and World Religions...... too.)
I know. I know. Everyone is just looking for that 'chink' in my armor ... well, good luck in finding it.
Sounds a bit narcissistic, as I don’t to think people care as much as much as you think they do. It sounds like you’re trying really hard to get us to accept your epistemology as sound.
Actually, you've misunderstood me.
I'm not here to assert an "epistemology."
I'm here to tear them a new hole. I'm here to skewer each supposed epistemological framework for the gap jawed vampire that each epistemological notion is ... Kapeesh?
In addtion to that project, my second project is to continue to continually assert, in an ever ongoing, repeated, never-ending fashion that: If we want to land on the Moon, that will require one set of epistemic notions.
But if we want to touch the face of God, that will require a different set of epistemic notions.
If you say so.See? Simple.
I don't think I have.
Seems like you are.
Is that what you think people think of you? Sorry, I admit I missed where you've done this.
Ok.
Here's where you fail. As I alluded to earlier, I don't care what you believe. That you've convinced yourself a god exists and you know him personally, and really want us to understand your reasons for belief don't concern me. Please tell me, what "epistemic notions" you considered before becoming a Christian?
If you say so.
If you're not here to listen to us "apologize" for the Christian Faith, then YOU have no business being here.
IF you don't "care," then why is coming onto CF and making challenges (or offering smirks)
I don't find your purpose for being here legit, really.
Of course, unfortunately, you're "free" to be ... here, nevertheless.
I don't approach any conversation by looking for weak spots in a persona armor. I am legitimately asking questions to have a dialogue. I think there is a lot of anxiety on this forum about feeling like people need to protect themselves from the attack of others. When I ask a question, I may be exploring the persons ideas in order to understand and strongman them. Or, I might be asking questions socratically to follow the logic of their idea to its natural conclusion. Either way, no one should avoid discussion on a discussion forum. But it is actually difficult to get a real conversation going with anybody here. Everyone is so scared of ideas. That is my personal experience and I hold my opinion conditionally.Oh, man! It's too bad you haven't hung around here consistently over the past couple of years because I've answered this same question multiple times ...
... but don't worry, I know John Loftus' argument of the Outsider Test for Faith only all too well. (I mean...I do have his books, y'know! I've also had more than one university class on Eastern Philosophy and World Religions...... too.)
I know. I know. Everyone is just looking for that 'chink' in my armor ... well, good luck in finding it.
No, validity has to do with the logical structure of an argument or syllogism. You are using it in the colloquial sense. That's normally fine, but in a philosophical discussion is a bit confusing.You are asking for something that will validate what you do/not believe via apology - whether it is possible and whether it is functional. Evidence is subjective; what I consider evidence is not evidence to you.
Your intellectual anxiety about you faith claims is now obvious; you do not have good reasons for your claims--you just take them on blind faith. That is my conclusion after asking you repeatedly for evidence and having you respond with obfuscation.It is not that simple: the compelling evidence is likely only compelling to you (or whoever is asking for the evidence). Evidence is subjective, so it depends on your mind rationalizing what you receive to determine whether or not it is compelling to you.
Your intellectual anxiety about you faith claims is now obvious; you do not have good reasons for your claims--you just take them on blind faith. That is my conclusion after asking you repeatedly for evidence and having you respond with obfuscation.
No, validity has to do with the logical structure of an argument or syllogism. You are using it in the colloquial sense. That's normally fine, but in a philosophical discussion is a bit confusing.
Evidence is not subjective if it is relevant and factual. You have had every opportunity to provide evidence and still you don't--I think you have none and are aware of it.
Probably a bit like playing pigeon chess?
Then I am finished conversing with you. Done.As I told you it is not the job of a Christian or layperson to convince another adult of something: everyone is responsible for their own spiritual trajectory.
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?