My Reconciliation Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Who was it that was telling me only a couple of days ago, that its was disingenuous to respond to a question, with another question..? Hmmmmmmm

I don't know --- who? Do you have me mixed up with someone else? Hmmm?

 

[AV1611VET]

Of course, you're just being bloody-minded here.

Whatever that meant.

You know exactly why Bytes' response was a simple period,...

Bytes response was not a simple period. I put that period in there because the software would not let me just use the list tag - (if I said that right). I had to insert something. My point of course, was that he didn't respond.

...because you know exactly how irrational your response is.

Fine, then you respond to it. I'll even take it outside of the Bible, so you won't think you're having to agree with It.

Respond to this, FishFace:

• Let's say only two people in the world exist. We'll call them Adam and Eve. Adam lives in England, and Eve lives in the United States. Eve visits England and happens to enter your home when you're not there. She reads in your diary that you dropped an egg yesterday, and it splattered all over the floor, making a big mess. There is no trace of egg on the floor whatsoever. No egg shells, no yolk, no white, no nothing. Knowing that only two people on earth exist --- who cleaned up the egg mess?

Please answer this with a rational response.

 

[Soul Searcher]

I would assume that it must have been Adam but that would also be assuming that he was telling the truth.

My questions would be how did Eve manage to cross the ocean? How did she know where Adam lived? And why is Adam keeping a diary about broken eggs?

 

[FishFace]

Let's say only two people in the world exist. We'll call them Adam and Eve. Adam lives in England, and Eve lives in the United States. Eve visits England and happens to enter your home when you're not there. She reads in your diary that you dropped an egg yesterday, and it splattered all over the floor, making a big mess. There is no trace of egg on the floor whatsoever. No egg shells, no yolk, no white, no nothing. Knowing that only two people on earth exist --- who cleaned up the egg mess?

There are actually two possibilities:

1. Adam cleaned up the egg mess
2. Adam neither dropped the egg nor cleaned up the egg mess. And whatever was written in his diary was incorrect for some reason.

Please answer this with a rational response.

Well, I have certainly given at least one rational response in your opinion. I would like you to tell me whether #2 is irrational, and if so, why it is irrational. You may well want to go back to the Bible - you may even want to hop on over to GA or, heaven forbid, Philosophy at some point. Both are fine by me.

 

[Soul Searcher]

The problem is AV, that you are assuming God must have cleaned it up because the bible says the flood happened and there is no evidence that it actually did happen. What you seem to not be considering are the following possibilities.

1: The story is made up
2: The story is exagerated
3: The author made a mistake.

All 3 are valid possibilities.

Consider the evidence.
We have no evidence that a global flood ever happened.
We do have evidence that people make up stories.
We do have evidence that people sometimes exagerate.
We do have evidence that even honest people make mistakes.
We have no evidence that a global flood happened.

 

[AV1611VET]

I would assume that it must have been Adam but that would also be assuming that he was telling the truth.

Would you call that "faith"?

 

[Soul Searcher]

Would you call that "faith"?

Not really, I think if she had faith in Adam she would not be going through his things when he is not home.

Edit: I would also add that if she took the time to determine there was no evidence of the broken egg that would also imply that she was not willing to take his word for it. e.g. distrust.

 

[AV1611VET]

There are actually two possibilities:

1. Adam cleaned up the egg mess
2. Adam neither dropped the egg nor cleaned up the egg mess. And whatever was written in his diary was incorrect for some reason.

Well, I have certainly given at least one rational response in your opinion. I would like you to tell me whether #2 is irrational, and if so, why it is irrational.

#2 is not irrational, unless it is impossible for Adam to lie or make a mistake.

(Ya, I know --- then Adam wouldn't have dropped the egg by accident.)

 

[AV1611VET]

Not really, I think if she had faith in Adam she would not be going through his things when he is not home.

Well, before we get too far off-track; my point is that I don't think it is poor exegesis to say that God is the only One capable of cleaning up the mess as well as it was cleaned up.

 

[atomweaver]

I don't know --- who? Do you have me mixed up with someone else? Hmmm?

This certainly implies such, or at the least suggests that it is grounds to discontinue a discussion.

 

[Soul Searcher]

Well, before we get too far off-track; my point is that I don't think it is poor exegesis to say that God is the only One capable of cleaning up the mess as well as it was cleaned up.

I agree God would be the only one capable of cleaning it up but that does not mean that the flood actually happened.

 

[AV1611VET]

I agree God would be the only one capable of cleaning it up but that does not mean that the flood actually happened.

Fair enough ---

 

[FishFace]

#2 is not irrational, unless it is impossible for Adam to lie or make a mistake.

In that case, it seems perfectly unreasonable for you to say people dislike you for what you are when you believe in a global flood without evidence, if the written documentation which you so often rely on is not necessarily accurate.

 

[AV1611VET]

In that case, it seems perfectly unreasonable for you to say people dislike you for what you are when you believe in a global flood without evidence, if the written documentation which you so often rely on is not necessarily accurate.

Our faith can only be as strong as the accuracy of God's Word:

[bible]Romans 10:17[/bible]

And given the fact that we are going to be judged from what's written therein, I'd say God, whose name is Jealous, would have no objection to keeping His words accurate.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Our faith can only be as strong as the accuracy of God's Word:

Only because your faith is in nothing but the words -- try believing in God sometime, and not just his biographers.

And given the fact that we are going to be judged from what's written therein, I'd say God, whose name is Jealous, would have no objection to keeping His words accurate.

I'd say Jealous needs to seek therapy, along with the rest of the Trinity: Codependent and Sadist.

 

[us38]

No, it's not wrong.

Take another look at your answers. What you're telling me is that atheists are unwilling to consider creationists trustworthy until creationists take the same mindset as an atheist.

For example --- look at your answer about my contention that there's no evidence for the Flood:

• Yes, because you believe in the Flood nonetheless.

You still haven't responded to my post. Could it be because it disagrees with you?

 

[Soul Searcher]

Keep in mind that the word used for Jealous God is a different word than Jealous applied to humans and as a result the word jealous is very missleading.

Possible definition
5. Suspiciously vigilant; anxiously careful and concerned for.

 

[FishFace]

Our faith can only be as strong as the accuracy of God's Word:

[bible]Romans 10:17[/bible]

Wrong. Hearing the word allows you to have faith. If you hadn't heard, you couldn't have faith, could you? (Except for manifestations, etc) But that doesn't restrict your faith to how well you heard, or how good the word was.

And given the fact that we are going to be judged from what's written therein, I'd say God, whose name is Jealous, would have no objection to keeping His words accurate.

All argued from the assumption that the word is accurate, i.e. begging the question.

 

[TheManeki]

Our faith can only be as strong as the accuracy of God's Word:

[bible]Romans 10:17[/bible]

Then I pity all the deaf people. After all, the verse literally says "hearing" -- if you can't you're out of luck!

 

[us38]

Respond to this, FishFace:

• Let's say only two people in the world exist. We'll call them Adam and Eve. Adam lives in England, and Eve lives in the United States. Eve visits England and happens to enter your home when you're not there. She reads in your diary that you dropped an egg yesterday, and it splattered all over the floor, making a big mess. There is no trace of egg on the floor whatsoever. No egg shells, no yolk, no white, no nothing. Knowing that only two people on earth exist --- who cleaned up the egg mess?

Please answer this with a rational response.

May I ask permission to make this analogy relevant and reply to it thusly, that you may not throw a tantrem when it no longer says what you want it to say?