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

How can we know that God is?

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

  • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    The above are known as coincidences, not prophecies. Likewise the 1898 novel Futility [aka The Wreck of The Titan].
    Forecasting that Mars not only had two moons but their approximate sizes and rate of revolving around Mars is a heck of a lot of coincidences all rolled into one.

    Forecasting the day of someone's death and the means they will die also pushes the boundaries of coincidence.

    But even if they are nothing but coincidences, the fact is that such "coincidences" do take place and is therefore hardly a legitimate reason for discounting something as evidence it must have been written after the fact.

    If Gulliver's Travels were examined by certain scholars, they would have no choice but declare that Swift's book wasn't actually written until well over a century after his death.

    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
      Forecasting that Mars not only had two moons but their approximate sizes and rate of revolving around Mars is a heck of a lot of coincidences all rolled into one.
      On that, the existence of two moons was hypothesised by Kepler, but the distances are interesting.

      But even if they are nothing but coincidences, the fact is that such "coincidences" do take place and is therefore hardly a legitimate reason for discounting something as evidence it must have been written after the fact.
      Especially when the forecast doesn't mention a time frame. You would think that a later author might say that Jesus said something along the lines of "this generation shall not pass, or 50 years shall not pass ... and there will be not one stone left on another." If you want to record a post hoc prophecy, you don't want it to be mistaken for an off the cuff remark.

      If Gulliver's Travels were examined by certain scholars, they would have no choice but declare that Swift's book wasn't actually written until well over a century after his death.
      A reasonable assessment: even with Kepler's speculation taken into account, it would be safe to assume that there would still be some.
      Last edited by tabibito; 06-27-2022, 09:40 AM.
      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
      .
      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
      Scripture before Tradition:
      but that won't prevent others from
      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
      of the right to call yourself Christian.

      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Forecasting that Mars not only had two moons but their approximate sizes and rate of revolving around Mars is a heck of a lot of coincidences all rolled into one.

        Forecasting the day of someone's death and the means they will die also pushes the boundaries of coincidence.

        But even if they are nothing but coincidences, the fact is that such "coincidences" do take place and is therefore hardly a legitimate reason for discounting something as evidence it must have been written after the fact.

        If Gulliver's Travels were examined by certain scholars, they would have no choice but declare that Swift's book wasn't actually written until well over a century after his death.
        Do you consider all your examples in your previous post "prophecies? Or were they simply remarkable coincidences?
        "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 tabibito View Post
          A reasonable assessment: even with Kepler's speculation taken into account, it would be safe to assume that there would still be some.
          That is far from a "reasonable assessment" as only someone who knew nothing about the rest of Jonathan Swift's life and the various primary sources pertaining to it could make such an observation.

          "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 tabibito View Post

            Source Criticism of Winnie the Pooh highlighted problems with Source Criticism that I had identified before ever hearing the name for the process.
            So the question arises; how and in what way is the article more scholarly, accurate, or authoritative because a professor wrote it than if a layman had written it?
            False dichotomy. Winnie the Pooh is universally recognized as a relatively modern work of fiction and therefore not subject to historical-critical methodology. Whereas the gospels and the Jesus story is, given that it is widely regarded as actual history.
            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

              False dichotomy. Winnie the Pooh is universally recognized as a relatively modern work of fiction and therefore not subject to historical-critical methodology. Whereas the gospels and the Jesus story is, given that it is widely regarded as actual history.
              I see. You consider it reasonable to question an accredited scholar's understanding that the analogy is valid; or scholars rather, given that other scholars endorse his assessment.

              It is an object lesson in the flaws of the historical critical method when erroneously applied, and particular elements are self evidently applicable to given texts to anyone who bothers to check certain claims made founded (or rather, foundered) on the method. Whether it can be rightly applied might be a matter for debate.
              Last edited by tabibito; 06-28-2022, 01:54 AM.
              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
              Scripture before Tradition:
              but that won't prevent others from
              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
              of the right to call yourself Christian.

              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                That is far from a "reasonable assessment" as only someone who knew nothing about the rest of Jonathan Swift's life and the various primary sources pertaining to it could make such an observation.
                Knowing nothing about other matters, and even on occasion despite knowing them, has not stopped any number of scholars in the past.
                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                .
                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                Scripture before Tradition:
                but that won't prevent others from
                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                Comment


                • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                  I see. You consider it reasonable to question an accredited scholar's understanding that the analogy is valid; or scholars rather, given that other scholars endorse his assessment.

                  It is an object lesson in the flaws of the historical critical method when erroneously applied, and particular elements are self evidently applicable to given texts to anyone who bothers to check certain claims made founded (or rather, foundered) on the method. Whether it can be rightly applied might be a matter for debate.
                  You are confusing Literary Studies, i.e., the study of written works of the imagination, with alleged actual events in Human History. Only the latter is subject to historical-critical methodology.
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                    You are confusing Literary Studies, i.e., the study of written works of the imagination, with alleged actual events in Human History. Only the latter is subject to historical-critical methodology.
                    On this, I have assessed Crews' (and others') claim that the historical critical method is flawed, and found those claims validated. Crews has provided a valid analogous satirical demonstration of just how that flaw plays out. Again, if you can provide any viable counter-argument (beyond the aforestated bare assertion) I'll review my assessment. Meantime, you're in disagreement with the findings of accredited scholars (which you have declared improper).

                    In a brief quiz in a university lecture, to demonstrate the processes of the historical critical method, ten examples of actual claims were provided for scrutiny. In that same lecture, within five minutes, four of the claims had been demolished, the remaining six took a bit longer. Tis a pity that I didn't think to keep records.
                    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                    .
                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                    Scripture before Tradition:
                    but that won't prevent others from
                    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                    of the right to call yourself Christian.

                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                      Knowing nothing about other matters, and even on occasion despite knowing them, has not stopped any number of scholars in the past.
                      Would you care to cite some examples of scholars making uniformed comments? Or does that remark represent another of your subjective opinions?
                      "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 Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                        Would you care to cite some examples of scholars making uniformed comments? Or does that remark represent another of your subjective opinions?
                        I see that you're still trying to turn discussion away from topics to discrediting persons.

                        You might want to consider what happened to Semmelweis, the first (recorded) doctor who tried to enforce hygiene among doctors ... but that was before Pasteur; too far in the past?
                        How about eugenics? ... Still too far in the past?
                        How about the Fen Phen fiasco?

                        But of course, almost anyone who speaks in contradiction of what eventually proves to be correct, whether the person subscribes to the prevailing majority consensus or opposes it, would serve to demonstrate of my claim.
                        Last edited by tabibito; 06-28-2022, 06:40 AM.
                        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                        .
                        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                        Scripture before Tradition:
                        but that won't prevent others from
                        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                        of the right to call yourself Christian.

                        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                          Would you care to cite some examples of scholars making uniformed comments? Or does that remark represent another of your subjective opinions?
                          You appear to hold that opinion regarding anyone who as the audacity to disagree with your pontifications from upon high atop your comfy chair, regardless of academic qualifications.

                          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
                            You appear to hold that opinion regarding anyone who as the audacity to disagree with your pontifications from upon high atop your comfy chair, regardless of academic qualifications.
                            Our mutual friend is remarkably keen to make sweeping statement but is very reluctant to provide supporting evidence [outside of his own personal opinions].
                            "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 tabibito View Post

                              I see that you're still trying to turn discussion away from topics to discrediting persons.

                              You might want to consider what happened to Semmelweis, the first (recorded) doctor who tried to enforce hygiene among doctors ... but that was before Pasteur; too far in the past?
                              How about eugenics? ... Still too far in the past?
                              How about the Fen Phen fiasco?

                              But of course, almost anyone who speaks in contradiction of what eventually proves to be correct, whether the person subscribes to the prevailing majority consensus or opposes it, would serve to demonstrate of my claim.
                              I am requesting that you provide evidence for your comments.

                              The examples you have given are not strictly relevant to your observations on the historical method.

                              "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 Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                                Our mutual friend is remarkably keen to make sweeping statement but is very reluctant to provide supporting evidence [outside of his own personal opinions].
                                Your opinion concerning this hardly has anything whatsoever to do with the fact that you summarily dismiss acclaimed academics if they disagree with you and instead of trying to show where they may be mistaken, you typically look for any excuse you can find to hand wave them off.

                                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

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                14 responses
                                42 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                78 responses
                                411 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X