Linguistic Apologetics

[InterestedAtheist]

What were you hoping for, and how were you disappointed?

Well, I have been on these forums and others for quite a number of years now. No doubt there are othes with longer records, but I think I can claim to have read and debated most of the "arguments" for God's existence that are popularly out there. And the thing is, they always fail. Sometimes, as we see in the OP, they fall flat straight away. And I think this is because the Christians don't, generally, take the time to put themselves in their "opposite's" shoes. They begin by assuming that Christianity is true, and so are naturally excited and impressed with any "argument" they read which supports this. They come on here all "Oooh, atheists, have you thought of THIS! Checkmate, eh?" - and of course, they find that the atheists have thought of this, have read variations of it many times before, and are not impressed. Generally speaking, the thread ends with the atheists, disappointed in not finding anything challenging, just amusing themselves in educating the theist in the fallacies of what they have posted, and the theist going off in a huff, convinced that they are being persecuted and that the atheists are wilfully blind.

That's what I'm sure we've all seen, time and again. So it would be very nice to see some Christians taking a new approach. It would be nice to see some of them saying that they understand that Christianity doesn't make sense if you don't already believe it, and that they can see how it might look confusing to outsiders.

I was hoping, for a moment, that we might have a new approach. Unfortunately, it wasn't.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

@Tone and others:

You might be interested in this: The Theist's Guide to Converting Atheists.

And, for that matter: How not to convert an atheist.
"Some readers may feel that the items enumerated on this list are all matters of common courtesy in any dialogue, and not applicable just to atheists. I completely agree with such a sentiment. There is no special way to approach atheists that differs from the way one would ordinarily approach any other person; atheists are human beings just like everyone else, after all. The problem is not that atheists are inherently more difficult to communicate with productively, but that there are many religious organizations that persist in actively spreading misinformation about atheism. These groups are not interested in an open debate or an impartial comparison of the facts; their goal is to retain members by casting the alternatives in a poor light. They have no incentive to give the opposing viewpoint a fair hearing, just as a commercial touting the benefits of a product is not going to objectively list the strengths of its competitors. While these tactics may help keep members in line by convincing them that the alternatives are unpalatable, they often fail utterly when used against real atheists; many believers have found to their surprise and chagrin that we are not the arrogant, amoral misanthropes their preachers have told them we are. Similarly, many assertions that routinely go unquestioned by believers do not hold up against a knowledgeable atheist who asks to see the supporting evidence.
It is my hope that the advice presented in this article will encourage theists to view atheism as a serious, substantive viewpoint whose proponents are worthy of respect, even if they do not agree with it. The unreasoning prejudice that too often arises when people are confronted by viewpoints different from their own – theist against atheist, theist against theist – has been a substantial obstacle to peace and understanding among humanity throughout its history. We must learn to overcome this tendency and instead let reason be our guide. Only when all participants treat each other with the seriousness and respect they deserve can the debate truly begin."

 

[Tone]

Well, I have been on these forums and others for quite a number of years now. No doubt there are othes with longer records, but I think I can claim to have read and debated most of the "arguments" for God's existence that are popularly out there. And the thing is, they always fail. Sometimes, as we see in the OP, they fall flat straight away. And I think this is because the Christians don't, generally, take the time to put themselves in their "opposite's" shoes. They begin by assuming that Christianity is true, and so are naturally excited and impressed with any "argument" they read which supports this. They come on here all "Oooh, atheists, have you thought of THIS! Checkmate, eh?" - and of course, they find that the atheists have thought of this, have read variations of it many times before, and are not impressed. Generally speaking, the thread ends with the atheists, disappointed in not finding anything challenging, just amusing themselves in educating the theist in the fallacies of what they have posted, and the theist going off in a huff, convinced that they are being persecuted and that the atheists are wilfully blind.

That's what I'm sure we've all seen, time and again. So it would be very nice to see some Christians taking a new approach. It would be nice to see some of them saying that they understand that Christianity doesn't make sense if you don't already believe it, and that they can see how it might look confusing to outsiders.

I was hoping, for a moment, that we might have a new approach. Unfortunately, it wasn't.

Well, what I'm hearing you say is that you were hoping for a new and challenging approach to arguing for Christianity and you didn't get this. You are correct, you haven't received this from me, because I haven't argued for Christianity. I agree that Christianity is confusing to both insiders and outsiders. I am also hearing that you would like to have the floor to critique the OP. I may not be understanding what you are saying, but correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Do children grow at the same rate?

That doesn't address what I wrote. We're talking about whether information is conveyed clearly. Are you saying that your god has clearly informed you and not clearly informed others? Or that an omnipotent god can't clearly inform everyone equally?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Does your child also allow no noise?

It isn't up to him. I make sure, as any good father would, that there isn't any "noise" in our communication.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Enlighten me please.

You have no coherent concept of 'god', no evidence or arguments that stand up to basic scrutiny, and no good answers to our questions. That is why you fail at convincing atheists.

 

[Tone]

You have no coherent concept of 'god', no evidence or arguments that stand up to basic scrutiny, and no good answers to our questions. That is why you fail at convincing atheists.

All that from a handful of posts huh?

 

[Tone]

It isn't up to him. I make sure, as any good father would, that there isn't any "noise" in our communication.

You are a good father, and you communicate to your child for good. But, there are some who are not good and they will put another message in his ear.

 

[Tone]

That doesn't address what I wrote. We're talking about whether information is conveyed clearly. Are you saying that your god has clearly informed you and not clearly informed others? Or that an omnipotent god can't clearly inform everyone equally?

The information was, is, and will continue to be conveyed. Though, the medium has been compromised, due to enemy interference. Such interference has produced a corrupt message that has gone viral. Therefore, the receiver is prone to perpetuating a muddled transmission. I would imagine that it is inherent in the existence of the "other", that signals from multiple transmitters can ride on the same frequency.

 

[Tone]

Just some information to chew on:

Etymology of ‘Communication’

"Communication means many things to different people to the extent that Peters (1999) writes: "…its popularity has exceeded its clarity." (p. 6) The Latin word communicare meant to 'impart', 'share', or 'make common'. The key root is mun-which relates to 'community', 'meaning' and Gemeinschaft (Peters, 1999:7).

However, Peters also mentions the 'dark side of communication': the Greek term koinoo like the Latin communicare, means to 'make common', 'communicate','impart' or 'share'; yet it also means to pollute and make uncertain. (p. 267). Peters (1999) refers to the inherent problems associated with communication. He refers to writings in psychology that place emphasis on human individuality, where humans are perceived to be "hardwired by the privacy of their experience to have communication problems" (p. 4)."
Synnoeo: Etymology of "communication"

"The etymology of ‘information’ is interesting. Again from Wikipedia:

The English word was apparently derived from the Latin accusative form (informationem) of the nominative (informatio): this noun is in its turn derived from the verb “informare” (to inform) in the sense of “to give form to the mind”, “to discipline”, “instruct”, “teach”: “Men so wise should go and inform their kings.” (1330) Inform itself comes (via French) from the Latin verb informare, to give form to, to form an idea of. Furthermore, Latin itself already contained the word informatio meaning concept or idea, but the extent to which this may have influenced the development of the word information in English is unclear."
The Meaning and Etymology of ‘Information’ | The Informational Turn

 

[Natsumi Lam]

At some point we have to accept the fact to not throw pearls to swine. We can argue, debate and try to prove God to those who chose or do not have inherent faith. Faith and the Word turn spiritual transmitions from Morris code into plain language that is comprehendable yet infinitely deep.

 

[Tone]

"The Hebrew noun דבר (davar, Strong's #1697) is translated as "word." It is derived from the parent root דר (DR), which means "order." The verb form of דבר (davar) is דבר (D.B.R, Strong's #1696) and is commonly found in the Biblical text meaning to "speak," as in the phrase vayidaber YHWH el moshe l'mor (and YHWH spoke to Moses saying). The ancient Hebrew understanding of "speaking," or a "speech," is an ordered arrangement of words. "
Hebrew Word Definitions - Word

"The Proto-Semitic language was originally written with pictographs (picture writings), such as in the letter/pictograph

, a picture of the hand. The Semitic word for a "hand" is "yad" and is the name of this letter, which represents the phonetic sound "Y." Each letter/pictograph in the Hebrew alphabet represents an idea. In the case of the letter

, it represents "work," the function of the hand.

When two letters/pictographs are put together, a Parent Root word is formed. When the

(B - beyt, a house) is combined with the

(N - nun, a seed which continues the next generation) the Parent Root

(BeN) is formed. The two letters of this root have the combined meaning of the "house continues" and is usually translated as a "son", the one who continues the house to the next generation."
Parent Roots of Hebrew Words

 

[Tone]

At some point we have to accept the fact to not throw pearls to swine. We can argue, debate and try to prove God to those who chose or do not have inherent faith. Faith and the Word turn spiritual transmitions from Morris code into plain language that is comprehendable yet infinitely deep.

I challenge any athiest to go back to the beginning..."to the natural things of creation", and to how these things were originally understood in the original language in which the Bible was written, and see the consistency between what is written and what is.

I said this in the OP, so if they are up to the challenge they will follow along as I head back to the beginning. If not, they are free to head elsewhere.

 

[Tone]

At some point we have to accept the fact to not throw pearls to swine. We can argue, debate and try to prove God to those who chose or do not have inherent faith. Faith and the Word turn spiritual transmitions from Morris code into plain language that is comprehendable yet infinitely deep.

Not pearls to swine here, but seed to the earth. Faith comes when the seed joins with a good seedbed...and life is manifested--that's the proof.

 

[Tone]

Not pearls to swine here, but seed to the earth. Faith comes when the seed joins with a good seedbed ...and life is manifested--that's the proof.

"Viable seeds are living entities. They must contain living, healthy embryonic tissue in order to germinate. All fully developed seeds contain an embryo and, in most plant species, a store of food reserves, wrapped in a seed coat. Seeds generally "wake up" and germinate when soil moisture and temperature conditions are correct for them to grow (Miles and Brown 2007). Each seed type has individual needs--take a minute and read about their specific germination requirements."
Seed and Seedling Biology

 

[Tone]

The information was, is, and will continue to be conveyed. Though, the medium has been compromised, due to enemy interference. Such interference has produced a corrupt message that has gone viral. Therefore, the receiver is prone to perpetuating a muddled transmission. I would imagine that it is inherent in the existence of the "other", that signals from multiple transmitters can ride on the same frequency.

The Word of the Creator is the information distributed throughout the earth...it is His seed. The seed that finds its way into a good seedbed, will produce the plant that will grow up out of the soil, that will grow branches, that will sprout leaves and flowers, that will bear fruit...fruit that contains the seed...for the continuity of life itself (Himself). This is the way the Author of life intended it from the beginning and we see it everyday in the world around us. He is the communicator of life and He imparts life generously.

But, there is an enemy and he too has his seed. His seed falls into the soil that is not conducive to life. This is because his harvest is death, corruption, and decay.

 

[Natsumi Lam]

"Viable seeds are living entities. They must contain living, healthy embryonic tissue in order to germinate. All fully developed seeds contain an embryo and, in most plant species, a store of food reserves, wrapped in a seed coat. Seeds generally "wake up" and germinate when soil moisture and temperature conditions are correct for them to grow (Miles and Brown 2007). Each seed type has individual needs--take a minute and read about their specific germination requirements."
Seed and Seedling Biology

Remember there were seeds that were on top of dry ground and the birds ate them up?

 

[Tone]

Remember there were seeds that were on top of dry ground and the birds ate them up?

"When birds eat fruits and berries, they move seeds away from the parent plant. Sometimes they do this by carrying a large fruit away to eat it. Sometimes they do this by eating small fruits and berries whole. When they defecate (poop) in another place, the seeds are also covered with fertilizer. When seeds grow near the parent plant, they may compete for water, light, and nutrients. When they are far away, they don’t compete with the parent or each other as much. There may have been diseases or other living things that attacked the parent plant. Birds may have moved the seeds away to a safer place."
UCSB Science Line


"Birds are important in the life cycle of many plants, because they distribute plant seeds in a number of ways. Plants advertise their seeds to birds by providing colorful, energy-filled fruits or large nuts as a food source. Plants such as the bird cherry have evolved along with birds, reaching a point where their seeds require a pass through a bird's digestive system to help them prepare for germination.

The seeds of some plants, including the nuts of some large trees, serve as a food source for birds. Feeding birds may knock seeds from stems, cones and flower heads as they eat. While this may not spread the seeds far from the parent plants, it can bring the seeds into contact with the soil, where they can overwinter and germinate into a new generation of plants. Birds may also partially crack or nick the seed coat trying to open a seed, allowing it to more easily germinate."
https://www.hunker.com/12517955/how-do-birds-disperse-seeds

"Birds move seeds to locations plants can't reach without help."

Have faith little birdy! Life doesn't give up so easily.

 

[Natsumi Lam]

"When birds eat fruits and berries, they move seeds away from the parent plant. Sometimes they do this by carrying a large fruit away to eat it. Sometimes they do this by eating small fruits and berries whole. When they defecate (poop) in another place, the seeds are also covered with fertilizer. When seeds grow near the parent plant, they may compete for water, light, and nutrients. When they are far away, they don’t compete with the parent or each other as much. There may have been diseases or other living things that attacked the parent plant. Birds may have moved the seeds away to a safer place."
UCSB Science Line
"Birds are important in the life cycle of many plants, because they distribute plant seeds in a number of ways. Plants advertise their seeds to birds by providing colorful, energy-filled fruits or large nuts as a food source. Plants such as the bird cherry have evolved along with birds, reaching a point where their seeds require a pass through a bird's digestive system to help them prepare for germination.

The seeds of some plants, including the nuts of some large trees, serve as a food source for birds. Feeding birds may knock seeds from stems, cones and flower heads as they eat. While this may not spread the seeds far from the parent plants, it can bring the seeds into contact with the soil, where they can overwinter and germinate into a new generation of plants. Birds may also partially crack or nick the seed coat trying to open a seed, allowing it to more easily germinate."
https://www.hunker.com/12517955/how-do-birds-disperse-seeds

"Birds move seeds to locations plants can't reach without help."

Have faith little birdy!

Lol i guess some people are the poop of the Christianity cycle.

Im prob one of them lol

 

[Tinker Grey]

At some point we have to accept the fact to not throw pearls to swine.

Apologists should stop using this phrase. Someone who disagrees with you or doesn't find your arguments convincing is not a pig. The fact that your scripture uses this expressions makes it no less insulting.