Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

What would it take for the atheist to believe in God?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    The point being that fictitious characters are placed in real-life settings. The Battle of Borodino took place. St Petersburg was and is a real city. Napoleon and Czar Alexander I were real people.

    However, the Rostovs, and Pierre Bezukhov are fictitious characters in Tolstoy's work.
    If that was your point then please do explain why you choose a fictitious person (Harry Potter) in a fictitious place (Hogwarts) to do so?

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

      I suggest you actually read Carr's paper and Van Seeters book before offering pronouncements.
      If I had not read the books, I would not have been able to provide the relevant page numbers, or the text therein that does not appear in the Wikipedia article.

      The issue of the waning acceptance of JEDP was also addressed four years ago on this site,

      Originally posted by psstein View Post

      The Documentary Hypothesis (or JEDP) is still the view of the majority of OT scholars. Other views, like the supplementary hypothesis (Van Seters, most notably) and the fragmentary hypothesis have become increasingly popular in recent years.

      I hold to something like the fragmentary hypothesis.

      My issue with the DH is that the division of sources seems arbitrary and I'm not convinced that there inexorably has to be an evolution of Israelite religion in the way that Wellhausen and later writers saw.
      And the methodological flaws of JEDP are ably documented in a satirical piece, "New Directions in Pooh Studies," published in On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967-1998, Volume 2 (JSOTSup 292; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), pp 830-839.

      1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        If that was your point then please do explain why you choose a fictitious person (Harry Potter) in a fictitious place (Hogwarts) to do so?
        Reading the post in question, one could be forgiven for thinking that she was dismissing the possibility of resurrection.
        1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
          I suggest you actually read Carr's paper and Van Seeters book before offering pronouncements.
          Advice you should take wrt the Bible.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            It's the Catch-22 that atheists love.

            They demand testimony attesting to a miracle from someone who isn't a Christian because they'd be biased.

            But what sort of person do they expect to find? Someone who can testify to the veracity of a miracle -- but still chooses not to believe? I doubt there are many folks like that.
            There were some. People who wanted so much to believe their preconceptions that though they could not deny the miracles, refused to believe that God had anything to do with them. Also note, quite a few people who have witnessed miracles have to fight to believe they weren't hallucinating - which is frequently a more comforting assessment.

            Advice you should take wrt the Bible.
            Had she read either of them herself, she would NOT be recommending that I do so. Both destroy her claim that JEDP is the hypothesis accepted by the overwhelming majority of Theologians.
            Last edited by tabibito; 11-26-2021, 09:27 AM.
            1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

            Comment


            • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

              There were some. People who wanted so much to believe their preconceptions that though they could not deny the miracles, refused to believe that God had anything to do with them. Also note, quite a few people who have witnessed miracles have to fight to believe they weren't hallucinating - which is frequently a more comforting assessment.



              Had she read either of them herself, she would NOT be recommending that I do so. Both destroy her claim that JEDP is the hypothesis accepted by the overwhelming majority of Theologians.
              JEDP was big half a century or so ago. Since then it has lost much of its luster. I think it raises some valid points but proponents went way too far with their claims and dissections.

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                If I had not read the books, I would not have been able to provide the relevant page numbers, or the text therein that does not appear in the Wikipedia article.

                The issue of the waning acceptance of JEDP was also addressed four years ago on this site,



                And the methodological flaws of JEDP are ably documented in a satirical piece, "New Directions in Pooh Studies," published in On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967-1998, Volume 2 (JSOTSup 292; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), pp 830-839.
                Someone started a thread about that. I believe that's the same thread where a certain someone couldn't see the word "volume" in spite of it being repeatedly pointed out, and she still continued to demand it.

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                  JEDP was big half a century or so ago. Since then it has lost much of its luster. I think it raises some valid points but proponents went way too far with their claims and dissections.
                  The killer was probably the lame dissections. The current "big three" each owe some of their foundation to JEPD, and many proponents still adhere to the flawed methodology. The problem is the start point - it doesn't find a problem and try to explain the causes, rather, it invents an explanation and then tries to find a problem to fit.
                  1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                    JEDP was big half a century or so ago. Since then it has lost much of its luster. I think it raises some valid points but proponents went way too far with their claims and dissections.


                    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                    The killer was probably the lame dissections. The current "big three" each owe some of their foundation to JEPD, and many proponents still adhere to the flawed methodology. The problem is the start point - it doesn't find a problem and try to explain the causes, rather, it invents an explanation and then tries to find a problem to fit.

                    How apposite was Pope.
                    "It ain't necessarily so
                    The things that you're liable
                    To read in the Bible
                    It ain't necessarily so
                    ."

                    Sportin' Life
                    Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      Someone started a thread about that. I believe that's the same thread where a certain someone couldn't see the word "volume" in spite of it being repeatedly pointed out, and she still continued to demand it.
                      Reading through the thread, I now understand why I had that deja vu feeling when the topic came up here.
                      1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                        How apposite was Pope.
                        Prithee elucidate
                        1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                        Comment


                        • Nothing new, just a sampler related to Dr. Keener's book, for those interested.


                          Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                          Beige Federalist.

                          "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                          Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                          Let's go, Brandon

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                            There were some. People who wanted so much to believe their preconceptions that though they could not deny the miracles, refused to believe that God had anything to do with them. Also note, quite a few people who have witnessed miracles have to fight to believe they weren't hallucinating - which is frequently a more comforting assessment.
                            This hypothetical subjective view of possibly how 'some people' consider miracles does not address the objective reason why atheists reject the existence of God. Atheists understandable seriously question the validity of miracles past and present. The bottomline for atheists is objective verifiable evidence for such claims, and this includes the existence of God. Atheists are fundamentally philosophical naturalists.

                            Hint: The word after miracle in the dictionary is mirage.

                            Of course, among those who strive to explain subjective miracles claim a source other than Gods(s) they because the 'cannot bring themselves to reject miracles' and attribute Many groups that deal with speculation of the supernatural come up with many different explanations, but not atheists.



                            Had she read either of them herself, she would NOT be recommending that I do so. Both destroy her claim that JEDP is the hypothesis accepted by the overwhelming majority of Theologians.
                            Not an issue in this thread, but claims of the theory of JEDP being destroyed is a very biased over statement. Theologians vary in their view from liberal to very conservative interpretation.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                              The bottomline for atheists is objective verifiable evidence for such claims, and this includes the existence of God. Atheists are fundamentally philosophical naturalists.
                              And philosophical naturalism is not a rationally defendable position.
                              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by seer View Post

                                And philosophical naturalism is not a rationally defendable position.
                                Why? It is based on consistent and reliable objective verifiable evidence, where as theological beliefs in God are subjective and very variable and inconsistent and without objective variable evidence.

                                All the Theological apologetic arguments require assumptions based on belief.
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seer, 01-20-2022, 01:10 PM
                                41 responses
                                219 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mossrose  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 01-09-2022, 05:51 AM
                                187 responses
                                871 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Seeker, 12-08-2021, 11:31 PM
                                474 responses
                                2,750 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Seeker
                                by Seeker
                                 
                                Started by seer, 10-11-2021, 07:32 PM
                                472 responses
                                3,038 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by seer, 10-06-2021, 06:21 PM
                                370 responses
                                2,259 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Machinist  
                                Working...
                                X