Biff the unclean

Perhaps my point would be clearer if we shifted what is being judged from tradition to race. Suppose instead of saying your tradition is less plausible because I belong to a different group let me say that Blacks are less intelligent. And how do I know that? What IQ test, what standard of intelligence do I use? I say that because I’m White.
See what I’ve done there? Instead of using a valid standard that actually measured intelligence (or plausibility) I just exhibited racial prejudice.

What does that even mean? What Absolute Truth? How can you have "interpretations" if it's absolute? I know it’s just a Christian buzz word that you guys like to show off now and then but…it isn’t plausible.

Johnny Skeptic

What did Jesus actually accomplish, and what is the true nature of God? No one knows. There is no evidence that Jesus' death actually remitted the sins of mankind. There is no evidence that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. There is no evidence that Jesus never sinned. There is no evidence that Jesus is the Son of God. He might have been a powerful alien who knew about the Old Testament, wanted to be worshipped, and fulfilled supposed messianic prophecies. There is no evidence that God is good. Hurrican Katrina is proof enough of that. There is no evidence that God is not amoral.

Some of these arguments are from my thread that is titled 'Apologists assume too much about the nature of God.' The contents are the same as a thread that I started at the GRD forum that is titled 'I can concede the Resurrection and still invalidate Christianity.' I have found out from experience in a number of debates at the Theology Web and here at the IIDB that the apologist is at a loss to adequately defend the nature of God. Contrary to what Christians claim, the Resurrection is not the most important topic to discuss. The Resurrection is completely irrelevant unless it is first reliably established what the true nature of God is. All that Christians are after is a comfortable eternal life, and although they are not aware of it at this time, ultimately they couldn't care less who provides it for them. If you want to buy a chicken for dinner, do you care who provides you with a chicken? Of course you don't as long as a chicken is available. Truly, the God of the Bible is replaceable, but eternal comfort is definitely not replaceable.

CJD

Biff, come on, don't call a taxi just yet. You're in shock (I know, this happens to everybody. Me too). I'll stay with you. Talk you through it. Just let the relativity wash over you. You'll see. We'll all be here on the other side waiting for you. Now, relax [CJD slides a beer down the bar toward Biff].

CJD

Incidentally, this fails, for your being white has nothing to do with it. It is the social tradition from whence you came that makes such racist statements plausible. Even the IQ test is biased to one degree or another. There is no escape. Transcendence, Biff. That's the only way I know of that may lead out. But then, "transcendence" to a metaphysical naturalist says more about me than "reality," rigtht?

CJD

austin2

why read the KJV?

read the original, with original commentary

too many people get their information about Torah and Judiasm from people who reject Judiasm and would repalce Judiasm

Roger Pearse

A very important question. Abraham wasn't of my racial group, so he can't have been that special. Worse still, he was a JEW! (Or he would have been, if there had been any around to be one of). He didn't speak English either, when everyone knows God speaks English.

It just goes to show how wrong those people are who suppose the bible to be inspired.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Chaupoline

Reality exists outside of our perception of it. What we believe is real is not necessarily what is real. It is because of this that the Scientific Method was created.

http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/ph...AppendixE.html

In order for this system to work there must be an Absolute Truth. Our version of Truth may or may not match up with Absolute Truth though. This is how you can have "intrepretations" if truth is Absolute. We do not know what the Absolute Truth is. We just know what we think it might be. We can never know what Absolute Truth is.

Biff the unclean

If it isn’t perceived (read that also as deduced by some testable means) then there is no way that you can have any information about it. This brings us once again to intellectual honesty and “traditional� claims of knowing things that, in fact, are not known.

Thank you, I make my living as a zoologist which is pretty much a scientist of sorts.

No, there just have to be FACTS
Absolute means perfect, complete, pure. An interpretation necessitates a change and any change of an absolute means that it is no longer absolute.

Then tell me what you think it might be, since you are the one who brought it up. I’ve already told you what I think it is…a Christian buzz word without any substance.

Chaupoline

We can not know anything other than that we are. All we have is speculation based on our senses. This was stated by Rene Descartes. What we then have is a system of beliefs that no one can prove. This is the initial faith that everyone first experiences. The world that we percieve exists.

The second belief that many of us learn around the age of two is that the world exists outside of our perceptions of it. This is our second act of faith. Again this isn't a fact. There are no real facts in the world, because everything is based upon our perceptions.

There are no FACTS.

Everything is based on the initial speculation. Our interpretations of what Absolute Truth is does not change Absolute Truth. It is just our way of trying to understand the Absolute Truth. This is why I differentiate between Truth and Absolute Truth. Truth is our interpretation of the Absolute Truth.

I think that Absolute Truth is what exists outside of our perceptions. My version of Truth that I adhere to regarding an apple is:

http://www.hort.purdue.edu/ext/senior/fruits/apple1.htm

The Absolute Truth regarding the apple is everything about the apple. It's genome, and things that we may not have even conceived of yet. Absolute Truth is everything that exists outside of our perceptions and considerations. Absolute Truth is reality.

Biff the unclean

It’s possible to know a great deal. For instance one thing that I know is that the money your parents spent on tuition for those philosophy classes back in sophomore year was wasted money.

That would be about the time you started believing in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and God wouldn’t it?

That’s good, so when I take a swing at your head with my handy Louisville Slugger it isn’t a fact that your head will really, really hurt. That’s just a perception after all and as such doesn’t count.

Oh? Is that a fact?

Ummmm…you haven’t come up with any Absolute Truths all you’ve done is write like a character in a Douglas Adams novel.

That can’t be because you are presenting it as a fact and you just warned me that there are no facts

If you keep going around telling people that it isn’t possible for you to know anything they might just take you at your word. Then where will you be?

Hmmm are we getting back to religious traditions again? If absolute truth is reality and you cannot perceive all reality do you feel that this gives you license to ignore what you do perceive in judging the plausibility of religious traditions?