The circular argument of God and miracles

[Albion]

Pretty sure it does mean more. .

No. Actually, it doesn't.

But you've had more than a few chances now to add something to the discussion and have chosen just to keep repeating the same comment, so it's bye-bye time.

 

[miknik5]

The testimony of two or three are needed to validate a truth.

You don't believe human testimony. But there is another who will testify

 

[Loudmouth]

No. Actually, it doesn't.

I just demonstrated that it means more. People can invent stories. Typewriters can't.

But you've had more than a few chances now to add something to the discussion and have chosen just to keep repeating the same comment, so it's bye-bye time.

The whole point was the circular argument used by theists. You have perfectly illustrated our point.

 

[Loudmouth]

The testimony of two or three are needed to validate a truth.

You need evidence that is independent of a person. Last I checked, two or three people can still invent stories.

You don't believe human testimony. But there is another who will testify

You don't believe human testimony, either. Look at all the deities that also have human testimony to back them, yet you don't believe in those deities.

 

[DogmaHunter]

No. Actually, it doesn't.

But you've had more than a few chances now to add something to the discussion and have chosen just to keep repeating the same comment, so it's bye-bye time.

When the comment doesn't sink in, one can only repeat it.

Humans wrote the bible, just like humans wrote anything else that was ever written down on this planet.

If you wish to go ahead and claim that some other, non-human, entity played a part in writing this particular story, that's fine... but realise that the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that claim.

Until you have anything more then just these empty claims, there is no reason to believe you.

 

[miknik5]

You need evidence that is independent of a person. Last I checked, two or three people can still invent stories.



You don't believe human testimony, either. Look at all the deities that also have human testimony to back them, yet you don't believe in those deities.

There arent dieities sir!
That's the problem already:

Many profess to have god(s) but deny The Son. He who denies The Son denies The Father who sent Him

And that man in a sense calls God a liar. He does not believe Gods testimony which He has given of His Son

The man who receives Gods testimony which He has given if His Son sets to his own (spirit) seal that Gods Word is true.
Because that man has That Witness in him who testifies with his spirit to the Truth of the Word of God

(Reference 1John5)

 

[quatona]

Is there a Christianese <-> English translator somewhere on the internet?

 

[miknik5]

Is there a Christianese <-> English translator somewhere on the internet?

No just be a Berean and read the Word of God yourself

You can start with 1John 5
If you have a problem afterwards I don't know what to tell you

 

[miknik5]

Further you should have already understood that there aren't deities. The fact that one would suggest this already proves they are willing to believe many spirits but not One God and One Spirit

If you're having problems understanding that you can always Google Gods question which stands today:

Who will cause Ahab to fall

"To the Testimony and the Law. If they speak Not according to This Word, it is because there is no Light therein"

 

[miknik5]

Circular argument indeed

There are many voices and spirits to acknowledge?

But not The one and only True and Living God?

Isaiah 8 is sufficient

Oh...and so is also "itchy ears"

 

[Albion]

When the comment doesn't sink in, one can only repeat it.

Really? I suppose that's what an education in engineering rather than in the liberal arts will do to you.

Humans wrote the bible

Say it a thousand more times if that's all you have, but we all know that humans penned the scriptures. That's not the issue--and you know as well as I do that it's not.

 

[miknik5]

Quatrona

I've already forgotten our disagreement. Care to remind me what it was?

 

[miknik5]

autocorrect issues again. I have edited my initial post. Maybe that will help you in deciphering the Christianese

Or better yet. Do the work yourself

Be a Berean and search the scriptures yourself

 

[miknik5]

I don't like the word deity or theist being attributed to those who know God

And from those who sit here and argue with those who do know God to suggest many is absolutely ridiculous

As if willing to believe many rather than believing the many who testify of One God and Father of The Lord Jesus Christ

Who in His Wisdom by sending His Son shut up the mouths of every lying spirit who mutters anything and everything but The Testimony

Read Isaiah 8

And stop asking those who know The Truth to do your work


Those who seek shall find those who ask it shall be given those who knock The DOOR shall be opened and HE alone will come in and "eat/fellowship" with you and you with HIM

And you will learn of HIM from HIM

 

[DogmaHunter]

Really? I suppose that's what an education in engineering rather than in the liberal arts will do to you.

Huh?

Say it a thousand more times if that's all you have, but we all know that humans penned the scriptures. That's not the issue--and you know as well as I do that it's not.

Your posts on the matter, suggest otherwise.

But, I'll play...

Please, remind me what the issue is, then?

 

[Albion]

Whether what was written down (by humans) was/is their own thinking or, to the contrary, was inspired by God and therefore is revelation.

To use an analogy, very few people would summarily dismiss the transcript of the court's proceedings as recorded by the court stenographer by saying it's nothing but her opinion, but that approach is the whole of your argument against the Bible.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Whether what was written down (by humans) was/is their own thinking or, to the contrary, was inspired by God and therefore is revelation.

It seems to me that the default position on that, is that it comes from the minds of humans - just like every other story told/written by humans.

Adding another, non-human, entity to the mix, would be a rather extra-ordinary claim in need of supportive evidence. Got any?

To use an analogy, very few people would summarily dismiss the transcript of the court's proceedings as recorded by the court stenographer by saying it's nothing but her opinion, but that approach is the whole of your argument against the Bible.

That's an extremely invalid analogy. Judges demonstrably exist and court proceedings are common verifiable knowledge.

 

[Albion]

It seems to me that the default position on that, is that it comes from the minds of humans - just like every other story told/written by humans.

That would be your "take" on the matter, and some of us feel that there's enough evidence for us to conclude that it's revelation. There is no way to resolve the issue to everyone's satisfaction.

That's an extremely invalid analogy. Judges demonstrably exist and court proceedings are common verifiable knowledge.

And the courthouse may not have been built to code. And the judge might have been getting over the flu.

None of that relates to the analogy itself. The point is simply that because a human wrote something down does not establish that it's nothing other than his own thinking.

 

[Loudmouth]

There arent dieities sir!
That's the problem already:

Many profess to have god(s) but deny The Son. He who denies The Son denies The Father who sent Him

And that man in a sense calls God a liar. He does not believe Gods testimony which He has given of His Son

The man who receives Gods testimony which He has given if His Son sets to his own (spirit) seal that Gods Word is true.
Because that man has That Witness in him who testifies with his spirit to the Truth of the Word of God

(Reference 1John5)

Again, those are the words of men.

 

[Loudmouth]

No just be a Berean and read the Word of God yourself

It's the word of men.