Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Testing The Christian Apologists
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 61 of 1086 (865723)
10-29-2019 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Phat
10-29-2019 4:17 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
quote:
So I have two questions for atheists: 1)What is the source of this immaterial reality known as reason that we are all presupposing, utilizing in our discussions, and accusing one other of violating on occasion?; and 2) If there is no God and we are nothing but chemicals, why should we trust anything we think, including the thought that there is no God?
He asks two utterly stupid questions. Throw him away.
I mean, come on Phat. The man is just another huckster. We have answered those two utterly stupid questions and even you will be able to provide the answers.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 4:17 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 62 of 1086 (865726)
10-29-2019 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Phat
10-29-2019 3:34 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Phat writes:
And you, Mr.Tangle are just as bad. You all always get on Faith for being so set in her ways and yet you are not providing any better arguments than the ones the apologists make. Until and unless you listen to at least one podcast I will likely disregard everything else that *you* say. I swear you guys are as bad as the Populists.
The man says
quote:
that atheists simply do not want to believe
Which is wrong. I'm an atheist and I'm telling you that that is wrong. It's got nothing to do with not wanting, it about there not being anything there to believe.
Like you and all the fundy believers I've ever met, he simply can't understand that and if he can't understand that he needs to shut up about everything else. It's basic.
And then there's this
quote:
and many wouldn't even if presented with irrefutable evidence.
Only a idiot would refuse irrefutable evidence. There are idiotic atheists but really, that's just nonsense.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 3:34 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 1086 (865728)
10-29-2019 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Phat
10-28-2019 2:06 PM


Re: The Evolution Of The God Character
Can you make a valid argument that people invent various "Jesus" Characters just as they invented "god characters" in the OT? If so, I think we are closer to defining God through Jesus and to a lesser extent through the additional writings of Paul, Peter, and John.
Westboro Baptist Church.
Is anything in their poisonous interpretations akin to the Jesus you've come to know and love?
Its all a matter of interpretation. One man revels and delights in the idea that Jesus is going to come back with a sword, separate the tares from the wheat, and judge them for all eternity. Others seem to think he was sweet-natured and loved the world so much that he opted to immolate himself in the most brutal fashion as a testament to his love for humanity. Both are scriptural but does the heart not differ radically in interpretation of who Jesus was from person to person?
We all fashion for ourselves a god that differs from another's interpretation.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Phat, posted 10-28-2019 2:06 PM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 6:53 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 64 of 1086 (865729)
10-29-2019 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Hyroglyphx
10-29-2019 6:47 PM


Re: The Evolution Of The God Character
You do know that Westboro Baptist Church doesn't even exist; that it is all a spoof.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-29-2019 6:47 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Theodoric, posted 10-29-2019 7:02 PM jar has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 65 of 1086 (865731)
10-29-2019 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by jar
10-29-2019 6:53 PM


Re: The Evolution Of The God Character
Ahh yes it does. And Fred Phelps was a real person to.
Westboro Baptist Church - Wikipedia
Did you mean Landover Baptist Church
Landover Baptist | Where the Worthwhile Worship. Unsaved Unwelcome
Landover Baptist Church - Wikipedia

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 6:53 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 8:36 PM Theodoric has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 66 of 1086 (865732)
10-29-2019 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Theodoric
10-29-2019 7:02 PM


Re: The Evolution Of The God Character
Yup. you're right. It's impossible to tell the real one from the spoofs.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Theodoric, posted 10-29-2019 7:02 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Theodoric, posted 10-29-2019 9:17 PM jar has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 67 of 1086 (865734)
10-29-2019 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by jar
10-29-2019 8:36 PM


Re: The Evolution Of The God Character
For the lurkers out there. There's a law for that.
Poe's law - Wikipedia
quote:
Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of the views being parodied.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by jar, posted 10-29-2019 8:36 PM jar has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 68 of 1086 (865743)
10-30-2019 3:21 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Phat
10-29-2019 3:02 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Phat writes:
atheists simply do not want to believe
Do you think children want to stop believing in Father Christmas?
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 3:02 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Phat, posted 10-30-2019 3:59 AM Tangle has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 69 of 1086 (865744)
10-30-2019 3:59 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by Tangle
10-30-2019 3:21 AM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Anyone who outgrows God had a limited view of Him to begin with. More likely you were convinced by some rational argument.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Tangle, posted 10-30-2019 3:21 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Tangle, posted 10-30-2019 7:56 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 71 by jar, posted 10-30-2019 8:31 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(4)
Message 70 of 1086 (865746)
10-30-2019 7:56 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Phat
10-30-2019 3:59 AM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Phat writes:
Anyone who outgrows God had a limited view of Him to begin with. More likely you were convinced by some rational argument.
Please stop making things up in order to keep intact the wrong model you have in your head.
Up until the age of about 14 I believed just as devoutly as you do in the whole package, probably more so as I had no doubt at all about it and knew nothing about anything else.
And then I didn't.
If you remember not believing in father christmas it was very similar. It was nothing to do with being rational it was a bloody revelation. The smoke blew away and the fiction was gone.
It might make you feel better somehow to think you know things about how atheists feel but when they tell you you're wrong, you should listen. If you want to learn anything that is. Otherwise you carry on telling me what I should feel like in order to keep you're beliefs about me intact. Just be aware that you're wrong.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Phat, posted 10-30-2019 3:59 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 71 of 1086 (865748)
10-30-2019 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Phat
10-30-2019 3:59 AM


on beliefs
Phat writes:
Anyone who outgrows God had a limited view of Him to begin with.
Anyone who thinks they know God has a limited view of Him! More likely they just create the God they want.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Phat, posted 10-30-2019 3:59 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(2)
Message 72 of 1086 (865749)
10-30-2019 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Phat
10-29-2019 3:32 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Thugpreacha writes:
In response to atheists who simply say they lack a belief in God and that the onus is on the believers to support the argument, he challenges by asking them to give their explanation (as far as they believe) as to how the universe came about.
First - there are plenty of non-God explanations for the origin of the universe that don't involve God.
And most of them have more evidence behind them then God does.
Second - that doesn't even matter. Let's just take the worst case "atheist scenario" here that the atheist's only answer is "I don't know how the universe came about."
Why do you think this supports a God-answer in any way?
How would this imply that believer doesn't need to support their argument that God created the universe?
Think of a non-God, general situation:
We have a problem.
There are two men trying to figure it out.
First man: "I don't know what to do."
Second man: "I know what to do - we should all respect my country's president and then everything will be better."
First man: "How will that help?"
Second man: "We just need to do it."
First man: "But the problem is here - what is your country's president going to do about it?"
Second man: "If your answer is 'I don't know' - then obviously we need to respect my country's president."
What you're saying is that the second man doesn't need to support his argument because the first man's answer is "I don't know?"
How does this make sense?
Everyone should ignore the problem and start respecting this guy's president just because he said so, with no evidence at all that the president of another country is going to help or provide an answer in any way?
The basic premise is that the one providing a claim ("we need to respect my country's president and then everything will be better...") needs to support it.
It's obvious that anyone else saying "I don't know what to do" adds 0 amount of credibility to the unsupported claim that's been made.
It's obvious that any other unsupported claim, say "Do 300 jumping jacks a day! That will solve all problems everywhere!!" has just as much support as respecting the other fellow's president.
So - what would you do?
Support the other country's president just because some fool spouted a few words?
Start doing jumping jacks until the problem goes away?
Or continue to look for a solution that actually has some evidence to support it in helping to fix the problem and ignore all the crazy weirdos?
Apply this procedure to your statement:
quote:
In response to atheists who simply say they lack a belief in God and that the onus is on the believers to support the argument, he challenges by asking them to give their explanation (as far as they believe) as to how the universe came about.
Then review this:
Thugpreacha writes:
Turek has some valid arguments.
Does he, though?
Because if this is your best example - then he clearly does not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 3:32 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Phat, posted 10-30-2019 12:48 PM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 73 of 1086 (865750)
10-30-2019 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Phat
10-29-2019 4:17 PM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Thugpreacha's Apologist writes:
If atheistic materialism is true, it seems to me that reason itself is impossible. For if mental processes are nothing but chemical reactions in the brain, then there is no reason to believe that anything is true(including the theory of materialism). Chemicals can’t evaluate whether or not a theory is true. Chemicals don’t reason, they react.
Chemicals can't evaluate whether or not a theory is true.
But no one promotes that they do such a thing.
People promote that mental processes evaluate whether or not a theory is true.
And mental processes are quite capable of doing such a thing.
No God required.
Chemicals don't reason, they react - true.
Mental processes don't reason, they react - false.
Did you think about this at all?
For if mental processes are nothing but chemical reactions in the brain, then there is no reason to believe that anything is true(including the theory of materialism)
This doesn't make sense.
Why can't a mental process, made of "nothing but chemical reactions in the brain" do more than a simple chemical reaction on it's own?
Why can't a mountain of snow, made of "nothing but snow flakes on a mountain" do more than a simple snow flake on it's own?
Wait - we can hold the Winter Olympics on a snow-covered mountain, but we cannot hold the Winter Olympics on a single snow flake.
This idea that a group of things cannot be anything more than what a single aspect is capable of is ridiculous to the point of stupidity?
Not only is reason impossible in an atheistic world...
Just as building houses is impossible in a world that has single 2'x4's?
Just as using roads is impossible in a world that has bits of asphalt?
Just as flying over seas is impossible in a world with sheet metal?
Just as talking to our friends and family is impossible in a world where sounds make single notes?
Just as showering every morning is impossible in a world with drops of water?
Seriously... the idea is so laughably preposterous I can't believe you're suggesting that anyone take it seriously.
So I have two questions for atheists: 1)What is the source of this immaterial reality known as reason that we are all presupposing, utilizing in our discussions, and accusing one other of violating on occasion?; and 2) If there is no God and we are nothing but chemicals, why should we trust anything we think, including the thought that there is no God?
1 - The source or reason is our ability to look at evidence and make judgments due to the chemical processes in our brains.
-The fact that your Apologist says this is impossible is immaterial to it actually being possible - especially when we all do it everyday, without God.
2 - We should trust some of the things we think, including the thought that there is no God, because trusting things that are supported with evidence is our best-known-method to knowing things about the world. It's what took us out of the Dark Ages and allowed us to flourish in this Information Age.
-We should trust it because it works - all without God.
-If you want to say it works better with God, I'm all ears - but I'm going to need more than your say-so, and your apologists' saying-so-that-goes-against-what-we-see-in-reality. I'm personally incredibly interested in any method that would be better - why wouldn't anyone?
Thugpreach writes:
I like that bit about chemicals.
Me too.
Mind-bending, when you think about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Phat, posted 10-29-2019 4:17 PM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by GDR, posted 10-30-2019 11:40 AM Stile has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 74 of 1086 (865752)
10-30-2019 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Stile
10-30-2019 9:01 AM


Re: Mark Mittelberg
Stile writes:
People promote that mental processes evaluate whether or not a theory is true.
And mental processes are quite capable of doing such a thing.
No God required.
People promote that mental processes evaluate whether or not a theory is true.
And mental processes are quite capable of doing such a thing.
God, as in an intelligent creator, was required to make mental processes possible.
It is all belief.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Stile, posted 10-30-2019 9:01 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Stile, posted 10-30-2019 12:48 PM GDR has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 75 of 1086 (865762)
10-30-2019 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Stile
10-30-2019 8:36 AM


Turek & Hitch
Thugpreacha writes:
Turek has some valid arguments.
Stile writes:
Does he, though?
Turek learned much of his world view from the late Dr.Norman Geisler. Critics will mention ( jar) that Geisler was involved in the Chicago Statement On Biblical Inerrancy Geisler was noted (largely by other apologists and Biblical Christians) as a foremost authority. And to be honest, as I delve into this topic regarding the honesty and worth of apologetic thinking in general, I am very much aware of how the critics and opponents of such a world view see it all as. Turek is not my best case apologist by any means. He is quite good, though...based on listening to some of his podcasts. (which few if any of you will bother to do) The world views are totally different and diametrically in opposition to each other.
Does God Exist? (Frank Turek vs Christopher Hitchens) This was Turek's first formal debate. Some critic wisely pointed out that he was overly ambitious to have tackled Hitchens the first time out. To jars credit, I can support the argument that he was simply out to make a name for himself and sell his book.
Because if this is your best example - then he clearly does not.
I respected Dr.Turek for a comment he made about Christopher Hitchens shortly after the man's passing:
Dr.Turek writes:
I don’t see how anyone who knew Christopher Hitchens could think that a man with such admirable qualities and talents was nothing more than a collection of chemicals— the product of unintelligent processes. Christopher’s intellect, wit, courage, passion, and immense personal charm are evidence to me of a Divine Being— a Divine Being who loves human freedom so much that He would even allow the gifts He bestows to be used against Him.
For those who think that Christopher would be upset that his death furthered the idea of God, please keep in mind that I think his life furthered the idea. If he were still here, he would debate that, but he wouldn’t be upset that a debating opponent thought he was evidence of God. Christopher Hitchens was too big a champion of free thought to begrudge a man his argument. I am blessed to have known him.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Stile, posted 10-30-2019 8:36 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Stile, posted 10-30-2019 1:42 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 79 by ringo, posted 10-30-2019 3:29 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024