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.
And that is suppose to mean something? I am defending the position that Jesus rose from the dead so obviously I believe something supernatural happened. You got nothing.Post# 354
You arrive at your belief there is no God the same way as people who embrace their religion's belief there is a God; without proof. You can't prove there is no God yet you debate the issue. How is that rational? Your position is no different.
Can you answer the question on how your post contributes to the OP or not?
And that is suppose to mean something? I am defending the position that Jesus rose from the dead so obviously I believe something supernatural happened. You got nothing.
You arrive at your belief there is no God the same way as people who embrace their religion's belief there is a God; without proof. You can't prove there is no God yet you debate the issue. How is that rational? Your position is no different.
Can you answer the question on how your post contributes to the OP or not?
The basic premise of atheism is not that God doesn't exist, but that there is insufficient evidence for his existence. it's the same way that you cannot disprove Allah's existence, but rather you are not swayed by the evidence.
Description of Slippery Slope
The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed. This "argument" has the following form:
1.Event X has occurred (or will or might occur).
2.Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because there is no reason to believe that one event must inevitably follow from another without an argument for such a claim. This is especially clear in cases in which there is a significant number of steps or gradations between one event and another. (From the work of Dr. Michael C. Labossiere posted on www.nizkor.org)
The OP makes the argument that “The complete lack of an investigation for a miraculous event is in fact evidence that no miracle occurred in the first place.” Because “the gospels did not record this? That would seem to cut against the narrative of the gospels”. I identified this as a slippery slope fallacy because there is no reason to believe that the authors of the Gospels needed to record, in passing or in detail, details of an investigation in their accounts of the resurrection. The story recorded is about the resurrection and not about the Pharisees or chief priests. We can correctly assume there would have been an investigation because that would be expected; and in fact there is evidence in Matthew that one took place.
We cannot assume the authors should have recorded it.
The only position we can take from the four Gospels on the resurrection is that the authors included the details, from witnesses that were there at the sepulcher, that they deemed necessary to their message.
All of the arguments made thus far in this thread is superfluous if the first argument in the OP cannot be proven. After 364 post not one shred of evidence was offered to prove the OP’s argument. This is the challenge then; are there any rational thoughts or parsimonious explanations to add as evidence that the authors should have include details about an investigation if the resurrection took place?
Wrong, I believe there is ample scientific evidence there is a higher power. It is only your opinion that there is no evidence. I will not reply to your attempt to derail this thread because you cannot provide evidence to support the OP.Wrong, there is no evidence to support your claim god/s exist.
We already discussed my error. Whether you believe my explanation is not evidence on of the validity of your OP. Your attempt to derail your own thread is evidence you do not have anything to back it up.You have accused me of not reading the account in Matthew 28, while at the same time you erroneously claim that the account says the guards inspected the tomb (it does not say this) and also that the guards did not report supernatural activity (it says they did). Anyone who believes in God would think God sent me to humble you, because your ego will not allow you to admit that you've made yourself out to be a fool on this thread.
Then how did they know the body was no longer in the sepulcher? They knew and reported it because they investigated.Do you claim that this investigation was recorded? Then you are WRONG.
You cannot explain this. That is why you play this game of pretending you will when we "catch up".They should have recorded it because leaving it out cuts against the narrative of the gospels. I'll explain this when you catch up. I've already told you this.
Actually I didn't know that. I always thought the basic premise of atheism was that God doesn't exist. Good to know, thanks.The basic premise of atheism is not that God doesn't exist, but that there is insufficient evidence for his existence. It's just like your position (I presume) on Islam: you cannot disprove Allah's existence, but you are also not swayed by the evidence. I think that you knew this but chose to ignore it.
To clarify:Do you claim this investigation was not recorded? Then how do you know it occurred? You've been eating me alive for having no evidence for my claims, yet you have no evidence for this claim of your own. Then I conclude you are saying there MUST have been an investigation? That sounds familiar... oh right, the slippery-slope fallacy you have been citing ad nauseam.
Some of us had very spiritual experiences so that we cannot deny that Scripture is accurate and that there is a GOD!!Wrong, I believe there is ample scientific evidence there is a higher power. It is only your opinion that there is no evidence. I will not reply to your attempt to derail this thread because you cannot provide evidence to support the OP.
Wrong, I believe there is ample scientific evidence there is a higher power. It is only your opinion that there is no evidence. I will not reply to your attempt to derail this thread because you cannot provide evidence to support the OP.
We already discussed my error. Whether you believe my explanation is not evidence on of the validity of your OP. Your attempt to derail your own thread is evidence you do not have anything to back it up.
Then how did they know the body was no longer in the sepulcher? They knew and reported it because they investigated.
You cannot explain this. That is why you play this game of pretending you will when we "catch up".
To clarify:
A slippery slope fallacy is when you say because event A happened then event B will follow and you have no evidence that event B always follows event A. I do not base my evidence of there being an investigation on the premise that an investigation would follow an unexplained phenomenon. However since we both agree that an investigation would follow the events that took place on Easter Sunday then it would not be a slippery slope argument to posit that premise. I based my evidence on the verse that says the guards reported the events to the chief priest. How could they report the body was missing if they didn’t investigate the sepulcher? You agreed with me that the investigative tools available to the guards would have simply been their observation.
I repeat the slippery slope fallacy you made because you have yet to offer a defense for making the fallacious argument. Instead you continue to demonstrate that you do not grasp the concept of that fallacy. This is the crux of your argument and you are held responsible to defend that position. The challenge remains.
Some of us had very spiritual experiences so that we cannot deny that Scripture is accurate and that there is a GOD!!
...and explain conscience...how did it *evolve*?
NoWouldn't you be employing the slippery-slope fallacy here?
The Bible does not say this.
Once again, the Bible doesn't say the guards looked in the tomb.
Either because they were already gone or because they were "like dead men."
Once again, how did the chief priest know there was no body in the sepulcher after the guards “shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done” if the guards did not look? I have asked this question multiple times and you have failed to address it.Simply put, you have not thought this through.
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?