Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10
Results 181 to 189 of 189
  1. #181
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    59
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If the Bible were true, the existence of God would be undeniable. If the Bible was "God's Word", I doubt you would have to tell/prove it to me, it would be self evident.
    I referenced this comment of yours in my comments to PGA in another thread...and simply want to acknowledge to you that I did. This is a line of commentary I have used in debate with theists often...although your wording here quoted is exceptional.

    My post is the last post in:

    http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/s...474#post557474

  2. #182
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    113
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2
    I see you failed to answer my questions yet once again, Belthazor. I put them there as a consideration for you. How well does Christianity justify its claims?
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If the Bible were true, the existence of God would be undeniable. If the Bible was "God's Word", I doubt you would have to tell/prove it to me, it would be self evident.
    God's existence is undeniable for millions.

    The Christian worldview does not see humanity as robots. That is not the way God created you. You have a volition, a will. You can deny anything.
    "As a man thinks, so he is." (Proverbs 23:7)

    My observation is when people are fed something long enough they often tend to believe it. We live in a society that for the most part thinks secularly. You think in secular terms.

    My advice to take or leave: Test your worldview truth claims. See how well it makes sense of life.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    But to answer your question, some predictions/prophesy in the Bible could be true, I have not said otherwise.
    Would this mean that all references in the Koran have to be false? Surely it can have "truths" in it as well and still be incorrect?
    Not all references to the Qu'ran, no. Every worldview borrows some aspects of truth from the real.

    The question comes with its views of exclusivity. That is where it departs from the authentic. Both Judaism and Islam deny who Jesus Christ is. Therefore either they are right, or Christianity is right. Either Jesus was who He claimed to be in the NT writings or He was not. Logically He can't be both who He said He was and not who He said He was. One thing is logically certain; someone has it wrong. That is the premise you have to work on to think logically.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Also, predicting a city in the middle east in that time would be destroyed is not much of a prediction.
    Belthazor predicts Palestinians will have their own "state" in this century". If it happens am I brilliant or a Prophet?
    What of prophesy in the Bible that has not come true
    When in this century will they have their state? What will that state encompass? How long will it last?

    You don't realize the significance of Jerusalems destruction and what it meant to the Jewish people under the covenant. If you took the time to read Deuteronomy 28:15-68 you would understand that when God brought foreign armies against His covenant people He was bringing judgment upon them. The destruction of their temple would be the most horrific event in the history of their nation. Their complete way of life, the whole economy they lived under would be changed forever. Their way of life revolved around keeping the covenant they had with God. He said He would protect them and keep them safe as long as they obeyed His commands (Deuteronomy 28:1-14).

    So when you read through the list of curses in Deuteronomy 28:15 onwards, you see the calamity spoken of there is being exercised by God in A.D. 67-70 with the surrounding and destruction of the city. In the Olivet Discourse, there are many references to the curses of the covenant.

    Luke 21:20-24 (NASB)
    20 [1] “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. 21 Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city; 22 because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled. 23 Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people; 24 [2] and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

    [3] Matthew 24:28 Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather.

    [4] Matthew 24:7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes. 8 But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs.

    Fulfillment:

    [1] Deuteronomy 28:16; Deuteronomy 28:20; Deuteronomy 28:25; Deuteronomy 28:45-46; Deuteronomy 28:52; Deuteronomy 28:55; Deuteronomy 28:57

    [2] Deuteronomy 28:32; Deuteronomy 28:36; Deuteronomy 28:41;

    [3] Deuteronomy 28:45-46

    [4] Deuteronomy 28:47-48

    ***

    The Book of Revelation is John's account of the Olivet Discourse. See how Deuteronomy 28:59 applies in the book regarding plagues: https://www.biblegateway.com/quickse...egin=73&end=73

    Seven-fold judgments written of in Revelation are applications of the curses of Deuteronomy 28 and Leviticus 26:

    Leviticus 26:18
    If also after these things you do not obey Me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.

    Leviticus 26:21
    ‘If then, you act with hostility against Me and are unwilling to obey Me, I will increase the plague on you seven times according to your sins.

    Leviticus 26:24
    then I will act with hostility against you; and I, even I, will strike you seven times for your sins.

    Leviticus 26:28
    then I will act with wrathful hostility against you, and I, even I, will punish you seven times for your sins.

    Revelation 5:1
    [ The Book with Seven Seals ] I saw in the right hand of Him who sat on the throne a book written inside and on the back, sealed up with seven seals.

    Revelation 6:1
    [ The First Seal—Rider on White Horse ] Then I saw when the Lamb broke one of the seven seals, and I heard one of the four living creatures saying as with a voice of thunder, “Come.”

    Revelation 8:1
    [ The Seventh Seal—the Trumpets ] When the Lamb broke the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour.

    Revelation 16:1
    Then I heard a loud voice from the temple, saying to the seven angels, “Go and pour out on the earth the seven bowls of the wrath of God.


    ***

    I could go on and select verse after verse of the Olivet Discourse and show its fulfillment in history and with regards to some instances at a later date in the NT writings themselves. For example, Jesus told His disciples that they would preach the gospel to the ends of the (known) world - the world they understood - then the end would come. (The end of what? The end of the age/old covenant age)

    Matthew 24:14
    14 This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come. (also Matthew 28:18-20 - "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations...I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”)

    Romans 1:8
    First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, because your faith is being proclaimed throughout the whole world.

    Romans 10:18
    But I say, surely they have never heard, have they? Indeed they have; “Their voice has gone out into all the earth, And their words to the ends of the world.”

    The gospel preached in all the world again in Colossians:

    Colossians 1:6, 23
    which has come to you, just as in all the world also it is constantly bearing fruit and increasing, even as it has been doing in you also since the day you heard of it and understood the grace of God in truth;....23 if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.

    We read in Acts of the missionary journeys of the apostles into different regions of the world they knew at that time, the Roman Empire or fourth kingdom spoken of in Daniel 2:40-43.

    So, when you, Belthazor, claim you can prophesy by "predicting a city in the middle east in that time would be destroyed" you are overly simplifying. Scripture is very detailed about prophecy.

    [QUOTE=PGA2]I don't think anyone is capable of making an entirely "free will" decision because every decision is built upon a worldview that influences how we look at the world. You are not neutral in what you believe. You have baggage you take with you when you look at the three religious beliefs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Not at all what I meant.

    The INFORMATION must be available, what you do with it does not affect your free will at all.....
    The Bible charges that humanity suppresses the truth of God because they PREFER to do what is wrong. It is easier to set God aside and ignore what they know deep-down in their inner-being to be true. In this way THEY become the master of their fate for a while (they think they control their fate); they call the shots, they become little gods in deciding what is right and wrong for the brief time they are on earth.

    Romans 1:18-26 (NASB)
    Unbelief and Its Consequences
    18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
    24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
    26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions...
    28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,...
    32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

    So, the information is available to each one of us, per the Bible. Believe it or don't. We not only have the universe itself as a revelation of God, but we also have His written disclosure to humanity!

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2
    From the time Adam chose 'his' way, he was not receptive to God's ways. Thus, God testifies to humanity that they cannot solve their problems without His guidance and He put barrier in the way so that man can realize it by the evil present when man decides.
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If I were to take this as true:
    God knew before he created Adam that he would "fall". Why bother? God knew for absolute CERTAIN most humans would not be Christian by 2018.
    Yes, God knew what Adam would do. An all-knowing Being knows all things.

    Why bother you ask; to save some for a relationship with Him. By His grace, His message through His written Word/revelation is available to humanity. His message of His existence has always been available by what has been made.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    He would have known for CERTAIN, that he would still "have" to kill almost all life on the planet in the Noah/Great Flood FOR NOTHING!! Why flood the planet and kill people in such a gruesome way. knowing they would still "sin"? (And what of the other life that was senselessly killed for nothing?).
    Oh wait, only land animals would affect mostly. Ocean life was probably mostly ok..
    Though, there is no evidence left of this massive happening.
    He gave humans the same qualities He has; a will, volition, reason, the ability to love, the ability to create things by using their minds. Adam represented humanity in that He decided to do his own thing. We also choose to do our own thing, apart from God. Adam decided he would find out/know both good and evil. We inherit his nature. That is why Scripture tells us we need to be born again/anew. We need God's grace operating in our lives once again for we are dead to God relationly otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Adam had the morals of a child, and eating a piece of fruit is worthy of lifetime punishment? Really? (did you ever sneak a cigarette or alcohol from your parents?)
    God gave Adam a free will. Adam was not burdened/in bondage with all the baggage humanity has acquired living for so long without the guidance of God. Adam had a relationship with God in the Garden, that if he had continued in that relationship, he would have continued to learn from God of His goodness. Adam chose to disobey God's commands, even though God listed the consequences.

    The fruit represented a choice - live with God in His goodness, or live in a relative, subjective mindset where Adam decided for himself.

    The very reason God made humans in His image and likeness was so God would not have robots. He could have programmed the being to do precisely what He wanted, but He gave humans the ability to choose, in Adam. Since the Fall the lesson of history (His story) is that man when left to his own ability does evil continually. God, from the beginning, promised He would provide a better way (What is known as 'the golden chain of redemption' starts in Genesis 3:15). That promise meets its fulfillment in Jesus Christ - the Second Adam. He did what the first Adam was unable to do. In the Son becoming a man, a man (Jesus) lived in perfect obedience to God, thus, restoring what was lost in the Garden, eating of the tree of life and living forever. A man was responsible for sin entering the world, so, a Man was responsible for taking sin from the world (for all who believe in Him).

    God has given humanity an example of what man is capable of through history. He has shown humans what it is like to live life in their capacity without Him. He has shown humans by choosing a covenant people who agreed to do His will. They demonstrate to us that they do not have what it takes to be holy as He is holy. Speaking of what it takes - their works - notice that every religion but one requires its believers to work or earn merit with God. Christianity places the burden of 'works' on another. We are judged on Jesus' works!). They, judged on their accord, continually do evil. He showed them the cost of doing evil. It required the life be taken, yet He provided a scapegoat, a sacrifice that they were to lay their hands on to identify with it taking their place. But this sacrificial system, the taking of animal life, only COVERED their sins until the perfect, once for all sacrifice could be made. Their sacrifice of atonement had to be made every year, continually. That once for all sacrifice (Hebrews 9:15; Hebrews 9:23-28) meets all God's righteous requirements. It pays the PENALTY for our sin, and it is pure and holy, satisfying the righteousness of God.

    So, when you come before God after you die physically, for judgment, either you answer for your sins on your merit, or you take the provision God has offered by His Son to atone for those sins (His merit). It is by faith in His sacrifice that saves us from the wrath of God. That is the Good News of the Gospel, which while we were still sinners Christ Jesus died for us, to present Himself as a Substitute in our place before God.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    What was the Devil doing in the Garden "of Eden anyway? I thought Evil/Devil could not be in the presence of God?
    Satan was there to offer humans, represented in Adam, another choice. In this way, Adam was free to choose God or reject God (Romans 5:12, 17).

    Evil is not in the presence of God in that evil does not share a loving relationship with God. God separates Himself from evil, even though He has permitted it for a time that GOOD will come from it.

    The good that comes from it is that people understand the evil they do and seek a means of escape from it. Some find that means that sets them free from evil; others do not.

    To my way of thinking (and I'm not positive of whether I'm right here), everlasting torment is living separated from the love of God for eternity in a place where everyone is selfish and self-centered and where evil is magnified far greater than it ever was on earth because of living without restraint.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If I were skeptical of this claim:
    DNA shows that all humans did not come from one person.
    If Eve came from Adams rib, she would have XY chromosomes.
    You assume that when God made woman from the man that He did not change her composition in fundamental ways. News for you, women are not the same in physiology, let alone in their genetic make-up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    DNA also shows humans share some common DNA with all other life on earth.
    We share common characteristic because we live in the same world, eat some of the same foods, share the same environment. The difference between humans and animals is that our minds are different than the animal brain. Your worldview believes it is because we have evolved from simple to complex. My worldview thinks that it is because God CREATED us DIFFERENT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Geology and the fossil record show life on earth starting simple and becoming more complex.
    The myth of the "common ancestor" being a biological ameba! The data does not come already interpreted. People do that by their worldview bias and confirmation bias. You build on one of two basic frameworks.

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2
    How does life arise from inorganic material?
    How does it acquire consciousness?
    How does something devoid of intellect, intent/will, without direction but random, sustain anything indefinitely?
    How well does your worldview make sense of morality?
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Again, if God created humans as you say, he did it from "nothing" and said consciousness also came from "nothing".
    Not nothing - from Himself; His Mind. That is something, just not the PHYSICAL universe. The physical universe originated from a SPIRITUAL Being. For us the physical comes first, then the spiritual. God IS Spirit. There is no beginning or end of God. He IS. That is why history for Him is the eternal present. He sees the end from the beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Please show that "nothing" or a "state of nothing" can even exist. There is no known place in the universe that that is or has "nothing"....
    I'm not arguing that nothing can exist. I'm arguing that the physical has not always existed. I'm arguing that God materialized the physical from His Mind. I'm arguing that once (time) there was no universe. I'm not arguing that once there was no God. Eternity would hang outside of time.

    Time needs a beginning, or else you would never get to the present.

    Do you understand that last concept or would you like me to explain the thinking further?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I believe you missed post #145 sir.
    I will check it out.
    You can call me Pete, or Peter if you prefer.

    Peter

  3. Likes MindTrap028 liked this post
  4. #183
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    God's existence is undeniable for millions.
    Um, no.
    Undeniable can not mean that.

    ---------- Post added at 08:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    We live in a society that for the most part thinks secularly. You think in secular terms.
    On this point Peter, I agree completely

    ---------- Post added at 08:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    Not all references to the Qu'ran, no. Every worldview borrows some aspects of truth from the real.

    The question comes with its views of exclusivity. That is where it departs from the authentic. Both Judaism and Islam deny who Jesus Christ is. Therefore either they are right, or Christianity is right. Either Jesus was who He claimed to be in the NT writings or He was not. Logically He can't be both who He said He was and not who He said He was. One thing is logically certain; someone has it wrong.
    A point I have been trying to make as well

    ---------- Post added at 08:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:48 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    Satan was there to offer humans, represented in Adam, another choice. In this way, Adam was free to choose God or reject God (Romans 5:12, 17).
    Yes!
    AND God knew before he created man that if Satin Was in the Garden, Adam would "sin"!!!!!

    ---------- Post added at 08:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    We share common characteristic because we live in the same world, eat some of the same foods, share the same environment. The difference between humans and animals is that our minds are different than the animal brain. Your worldview believes it is because we have evolved from simple to complex. My worldview thinks that it is because God CREATED us DIFFERENT.
    Not at ALL.
    DNA is why you have arms. Two instead of three or ?.
    It has everything to do with your physical nature. Every aspect.

    ---------- Post added at 08:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    I'm not arguing that nothing can exist. I'm arguing that the physical has not always existed. I'm arguing that God materialized the physical from His Mind. I'm arguing that once (time) there was no universe. I'm not arguing that once there was no God. Eternity would hang outside of time.

    Time needs a beginning, or else you would never get to the present.

    Do you understand that last concept or would you like me to explain the thinking further?

    You are quite "protective of your thoughts" (or however you said it)..........

    ---------- Post added at 09:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:56 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post

    The myth of the "common ancestor" being a biological ameba! The data does not come already interpreted. People do that by their worldview bias and confirmation bias. You build on one of two basic frameworks.
    Huh....
    Geology has to be the least contested science out there.....

    ---------- Post added at 09:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:02 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post

    I will check it out.
    You can call me Pete, or Peter if you prefer.

    Peter
    I look forward to response Peter

  5. #184
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    113
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Um, no.
    Undeniable can not mean that.

    ---------- Post added at 08:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 PM ----------



    On this point Peter, I agree completely

    ---------- Post added at 08:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 PM ----------



    A point I have been trying to make as well

    ---------- Post added at 08:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:48 PM ----------



    Yes!
    AND God knew before he created man that if Satin Was in the Garden, Adam would "sin"!!!!!

    ---------- Post added at 08:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 PM ----------



    Not at ALL.
    DNA is why you have arms. Two instead of three or ?.
    It has everything to do with your physical nature. Every aspect.

    ---------- Post added at 08:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 PM ----------




    You are quite "protective of your thoughts" (or however you said it)..........

    ---------- Post added at 09:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:56 PM ----------



    Huh....
    Geology has to be the least contested science out there.....

    ---------- Post added at 09:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:02 PM ----------



    I look forward to response Peter
    So, I take it you are finished objecting to the position I laid out on prophecy?
    Does that mean you see the logic behind it, you still hold that anyone can prophesy with 100% accuracy, you believe the prophecy was written after the fact, or you do not want to continue examining the proof/evidence?

    I'll finish my reply to 145 then back to this post, Belthazor.

    Peter

  6. #185
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    So, I take it you are finished objecting to the position I laid out on prophecy?
    Does that mean you see the logic behind it, you still hold that anyone can prophesy with 100% accuracy, you believe the prophecy was written after the fact, or you do not want to continue examining the proof/evidence?

    I'll finish my reply to 145 then back to this post, Belthazor.

    Peter
    Ok, let's see where that goes and we will get back to this.


    Those of us with long "Identities" are used to abbreviations, please feel free to address me as "Belt" or as you see fit.

    I hope your evening is going well peter
    B

  7. #186
    Administrator

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    10,373
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Well, if it's gonna bother you this much, I will try to use different terminology ....

    How about, the more outlandish the claim, the easier it is discarded...
    Hmm.
    maybe, when the claim defies the "laws of reality as we experience daily" there needs to be a better reason to believe the person's claim than if they said they typed a message on a keyboard.

    I don't know...you are taking this point much more seriously than I meant it, I'm thinkin
    Ha, yes it is possible that I am.

    The reason though is that I suspect that we too often smuggle in biases when we try to do this. For example, when we say "outlandish" or "we experience daily" we are introducing confirmation or belief bias into the mix. Hence why I tend to lump that into the psychological factors affecting acceptance rather than the warrant. A middle schooler would have a hard time accepting economics since they differ from the laws of reality they encounter daily, but an adult wouldn't have that same issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor
    Things that violate physical "laws" on a whim perhaps?
    I think that that might be an untenable position for the definition of supernatural in philosophic literature based on how we define physical laws. Physical laws are laws that apply within this universe presuming no external influence. Take a basic law of thermodynamics, that entropy tends to increase. That is a general law, but we create increasing order all the time as humans. It doesn't mean we really violate the law so much as it means the law's ceteris paribus conditions don't apply. The same would be argued for supernatural events. They don't violate physical laws so much as certain physical laws don't apply when supernatural causes are present. (If you think this is special pleading, I would note that this is true in mainline physics as well within multi-verse hypotheses, as well as some variants of quantum gravity iirc).

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor
    You aren't going to try to take me to one of them "brain in a vat" arguments are you ?
    :-) Not that I know of. Rather I was going to highlight that human beings have a hard time accepting a lot of self-evident facts. So when we say that a truth would be undeniable we would need to remember that people think all kinds of normal, everyday things aren't undeniable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor
    Let's try a stab at this type:

    All kinds of testimony of people being healed thru prayer. Cancer, diabetes, all kinds of diseases and such. But never one limb growing back?

    Or do you have a supernatural/defies physics type of example you like?
    I honestly don't have a lot of familiarity with the claims of healing through prayer so I wouldn't be prepared to defend it as a concept.

    To be fair, none of my apologetics really run towards the miracle type, so I am generally not as familiar. The exception might be a defense of the resurrection as the best explanation for the historicity of the empty tomb and the post-mortem appearances. That argument is perhaps a bit much for this thread?
    "Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire
    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.” -G.K. Chesterton
    Also, if you think I've overlooked your post please shoot me a PM, I'm not intentionally ignoring you.


  8. #187
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    458
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Apisa View Post
    No, meaning I want to change the subject.
    But why? You've confirmed that you'd respond that you believe Zeus doesn't exist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Apisa View Post
    Look...as far as I am concerned, a strong atheist is an individual who asserts that NO GODS exist...or asserts a "belief" that NO GODS exist.
    Then all I can tell you is that you might want to re-consider your position on the usage of the term, since the common usage now appears to be simply "lacking a belief in a deity or deities". Here's some references:
    https://www.define-atheism.com/
    https://www.canadianatheists.ca/profile/
    https://www.atheists.org/activism/re...about-atheism/
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism

    Further, regarding the etymology, I'd like to know what you think of define-atheism's explanation: https://www.define-atheism.com/etymology/

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Apisa View Post
    If you cannot go along with that...let's terminate this particular part of the conversation.
    Dude, I had just explained for you that my question allows for that. I really don't understand why this is so difficult for you. Again: What's wrong with holding the strong atheistic belief that Zeus doesn't exist? Is it just a belief that Zeus or fairies for sure don't exist, or is that rationally justified? Where do we draw the line and why?
    These questions are simply focusing on a specific deity, and saying nothing of whether the person in question also denies any/all other deities. Feel free to assume the question is referring to a strong atheist in the sense you're used to: someone who denies any/all deities. The question is about the apparent acceptability of their denial of one specific deity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Apisa View Post
    Okay...give me an example of a "specific theistic claims which are perfectly acceptable to deny outright" and then prove it.
    Zeus is a specific theistic claim which appears to be perfectly acceptable to deny outright. You're proof that it is acceptable to deny Zeus, since even you stated you believe Zeus does not exist, but don't appear concerned about support for that position.

  9. #188
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    59
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    FUTUREBOY

    Zeus is a specific theistic claim which appears to be perfectly acceptable to deny outright. You're proof that it is acceptable to deny Zeus, since even you stated you believe Zeus does not exist, but don't appear concerned about support for that position.
    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    But why? You've confirmed that you'd respond that you believe Zeus doesn't exist.
    I did not. I defy you to find any post here where I said “I believe…” ANYTHING. It simply is not something I would say.

    Do keep in mind the significant difference between, “I do not believe Zeus exists” and “I believe Zeus does not exist.”

    One is a statement of “belief”…which I would not make.

    The second is a statement about a “belief” I do not share with others who may have it.

    Then all I can tell you is that you might want to re-consider your position on the usage of the term, since the common usage now appears to be simply "lacking a belief in a deity or deities". Here's some references:
    https://www.define-atheism.com/
    https://www.canadianatheists.ca/profile/
    https://www.atheists.org/activism/re...about-atheism/
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism
    None of these links worked for me, but I copy and pasted them.

    It was a waste. The first two are essentially the same source…and deals with the word “atheist” rather than “strong atheist” which is what we were discussing. The third does about the same thing.


    The last actually describes a “strong atheist” the way I do. “Strong atheism (sometimes equated with "theoretical atheism") makes an explicit statement against the existence of gods.”

    Strong atheism, in almost every description I’ve ever seen, (there might be one somewhere that has it wrong)…is the assertion that NO GODS EXIST.

    Further, regarding the etymology, I'd like to know what you think of define-atheism's explanation: https://www.define-atheism.com/etymology/
    It made many of the same points I made about not deriving as many atheists suggest from theism.

    Here is what I offer from the on-line etymological dictionary.

    atheist (n.)
    1570s, "godless person, one who denies the existence of a supreme, intelligent being to whom moral obligation is due," from French athéiste (16c.), from Greek atheos "without god, denying the gods; abandoned of the gods; godless, ungodly," from a- "without" (see a- (3)) + theos "a god" (from PIE root *dhes-, forming words for religious concepts).


    Dude, I had just explained for you that my question allows for that. I really don't understand why this is so difficult for you. Again: What's wrong with holding the strong atheistic belief that Zeus doesn't exist? Is it just a belief that Zeus or fairies for sure don't exist, or is that rationally justified? Where do we draw the line and why?
    Since strong atheism is the rejection of all and any gods…I fail to see how it can be used that way.





    These questions are simply focusing on a specific deity, and saying nothing of whether the person in question also denies any/all other deities. Feel free to assume the question is referring to a strong atheist in the sense you're used to: someone who denies any/all deities. The question is about the apparent acceptability of their denial of one specific deity.
    Feel free to use the word the way I and most of the sources we’ve used say it should be used; namely; to reject all and any gods.

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism

  10. #189
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    Quote Originally Posted by Squatch347 View Post
    I think that that might be an untenable position for the definition of supernatural in philosophic literature based on how we define physical laws.
    Don't think I was trying " for the definition of supernatural in philosophic literature ".
    We were discussing claims (and evidence) having a "weight" which I guess wasn't the best choice of words.

    Evidence has varying degrees of "believability"
    I think claims share their own version of this.

    Make any better sense?

    ---------- Post added at 05:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:24 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Squatch347 View Post

    :-) Not that I know of. Rather I was going to highlight that human beings have a hard time accepting a lot of self-evident facts. So when we say that a truth would be undeniable we would need to remember that people think all kinds of normal, everyday things aren't undeniable.
    Now if we were just talking about humans here, I would agree with you, but we are discussing humans AND God.

    The Omni being can certainly handle his existence being "undeniable"?
    Why would God not want it to be known for sure, he existed?

    Allowing that his existence be known for sure seems a given (if I read my bible correctly).....

 

 
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10

Similar Threads

  1. Philosophy: Does a necessary beng exist, and is it consistent with the theistic God?
    By cstamford in forum Member Articles & Essays
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: October 15th, 2015, 05:02 AM
  2. Replies: 20
    Last Post: April 25th, 2015, 08:37 AM
  3. The Theistic Definition Thread
    By Meng Bomin in forum Religion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 26th, 2007, 02:13 PM
  4. Theistic Evolution????
    By nanderson in forum Religion
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: April 13th, 2006, 05:53 AM
  5. Theistic Death
    By Iluvatar in forum Religion
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: April 2nd, 2005, 08:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •