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.
Then you still haven't told me "what evidence convinced you".
So what evidence convinced you?
It's not pointless at all. I want to know what is true. If you know something true, particularly if it is going to affect me eternally, I want to know what it is and I want to know how you know it.
What evidence convinced you of the resurrection?
So no evidence. OK.Why repeat myself? The bible, and everything it makes allusions to, comes as one interconnected passage. For me, as I’ve worked through parts of it in reference to the context in which they were written, over time it has made more sense. Like anything else written in another era, you need to find ways of putting yourself in the writer’s shoes to understand what their meaning is. The bible on its own terms is valid, this childish business of demanding it fit in with some other set of temporary notions about the world is not worth bothering with. The bible claims the proof of it is in the pudding, in various ways, and for me that has generally turned out to be true.
Get your money back on your mind-reading helmet.No, you don’t. You have already decided what you consider to be true, and you are attempting to insist that the bible should be definable within those terms. Good luck with that, as they say.
Get your money back on your mind-reading helmet.
So no evidence. OK.
Get your money back on your mind-reading helmet.
I'm not insisting on anything. I'm asking you for evidence. You don't have any.
Back to my previous answer: What have you got?Again, back to the question you wouldn’t answer- like what?
Yeah, see, evidence that you can't present to me is useless to me.You’re asking why I believe - as I said a couple of times, my belief is based on the ‘proof is in the pudding’ type, being as that is the kind of evidence the scriptures claim for themselves. For reasons of your own, you appear to believe there should be some other sort of unspecified ‘evidence’, without which the bible can not be true. Given that you have this absolute standard, surely it is beneath you to discuss such things with mere mortals? If you deign to perhaps you could produce your own ‘evidence’ of something or other so the world can gasp in amazement at the sheer truth defining amazingness of it.
Back to my previous answer: What have you got?
Yeah, see, evidence that you can't present to me is useless to me.
This is a dodge. Either you have evidence or you don't. You don't.Like what? In asking this question presumably you have something in mind? A Polaroid maybe? A 2000 year old witness? A Grateful Dead roadie?
That this is an apologetics forum where you are supposed to defend your faith. This sub-forum is part of the sub-forum Outreach. If you aren't here to convince me, why are you here?? And your point is?
except that for you to live as if it were true "works".
That this is an apologetics forum where you are supposed to defend your faith. This sub-forum is part of the sub-forum Outreach. If you aren't here to convince me, why are you here?
The point is that you aren't defending your faith; you aren't "reaching out". You are complaining that the questions aren't to your liking.
If you aren't here to convince me, why are you here?
Is there evidence that someone rose from the dead 2,000 years ago? Like what?
If you want an actual discussion of the topic you need to a) ask better questions and
b) respond to people who ask you questions. I find it hard to understand what you hope to get from these closed loops you keep posting.
That’s a fair question. I occasionally see a thread like this and think there might be something to discuss, but invariably it’s just a revolving door of fixed belief in disguise. I don’t know why I bother either tbh.
Why repeat myself? The bible, and everything it makes allusions to, comes as one interconnected package. For me, as I’ve worked through parts of it in reference to the context in which they were written, over time it has made more sense. Like anything else written in another era, you need to find ways of putting yourself in the writer’s shoes to understand what their meaning is. The bible on its own terms is valid, this childish business of demanding it fit in with some other set of temporary notions about the world is not worth bothering with. The bible claims the proof of it is in the pudding, in various ways, and for me that has generally turned out to be true.
Hey hey
I am in no way convinced by this trilemma. I would like to first see how you apply it before I could consider such a thing.
Well check this out.
I gave you the option to go on the offense and you said "Anyway, is there anything you wanted to discuss aside from semantics, or do you truly want to delve into the definition of nihilism?"
I took you up on the offer and asked you "What does meaningless mean to you and how does it fit in with your philosophy?"
You post this article about - the trilemma - which has a section that says "The trilemma is a thought experiment used to demonstrate the impossibility of proving any truth, even in the fields of logic and mathematics."
I assume that when you replied with this trilemma, it has a relevance to your philosophy and it is intergal to how you prove the impossibility to demonstrate ANY truth, even in the fields of LOGIC and MATHS.
I supplied a very simple math equation (.eg 1+1+1+1=4) for you to demonstrate how the trilemma is a thought experiment used to demonstrate the impossibility of proving ANY truth, even in the fields of LOGIC and MATHS.
2. How can you demonstrate that the word seed is defined in terms of other words?
Here is my question again
If I have a seed and no others then we label that seed as one or singular to express quantity.
We label the seed, "seed". This way you and I cannot get confused when we communicate.
I find another seed of the same variety and label my quality as 2 seeds. I find another and label that quantity as 3. I find yet another one and call this quantity 4.
1+1+1+1=4.
The truth is I have seeds of the same variety that yield the number 4.
1. Show me how the thought experiment (.eg trilemma) demonstrates the impossibility of proving ANY truth, even in this mathematic equation?
In the metaphysics of identity, the ship of Theseus is a thought experiment that raises the question of whether an object that has had all of its components replaced remains fundamentally the same object.
It is supposed that the famous ship sailed by the hero Theseus in a great battle was kept in a harbor as a museum piece, and as the years went by some of the wooden parts began to rot and were replaced by new ones; then, after a century or so, every part had been replaced.
The question then is if the "restored" ship is still the same object as the original.
My intent to label the seeds with numbers was to show quantity (.eg to demonstrate the impossibility of proving ANY truth, even in this mathematic equation?).
The ship of Theseus is not a relevant question as the thought experiment relates to; if components are replaced does something remain fundamentally the same object.
We are talking about a mathematical outcome and the truth of the equation.
Lets say you and I are walking together. I find a unit of reproduction of a flowering plant, capable of developing into another such plant. I call it a seed to differentiate from other things and so we I communicate to each other about this unit of reproduction.
3. Does the seed have an identity and is identity meaningless?
Now please excuse me however you seemed to have missed a question. I shall repeat it.
My uncle dies and I notice that every person - who lived on this earth - eventually dies.
4. It is a certainty that all who live will die. Show me how this thought experiment demonstrates the impossibility of proving this truth?
Cheers
I would love to probe and explore these statements.
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?