spin

I get the point.

Johnny Skeptic

What I want to know is what is the minimum number of persons that constitutes a people? Is two or more persons not a people? If so, what is unusual about the fact that there are two or more Jews alive in the world today?

You have only checked out the claimants here on earth. The universe is quite large. You have quite a lot of checking left to do.

Why are you trying to prove that God can foretell the future?

Can you reasonably prove that God is not amoral? Can you reasonably prove that God is not an advanced alien being who can predict the future, and that he is not seeking to find people who will worship him, and that he intends to send some people to heaven? God has never stated anything about heaven. All of those claims came from Bible authors. Why do you trust the authors?

Columbo

So let us analyze the form of your fallacious argument;

"All X(arguments) I've(Spin) heard seem inevitable and absurd.(A)

Because these arguments (X) are absurd, therefore this should be a lesson to Columbo, therefore Columbo's position is absurd

Is that the form of your argument? That because you think other arguments are absurd, = my argument is absurd? That's fallacious.

X is A
Because X is A, Y is A. invalid. I've forgotten the specific name to the fallacy but it is certainly a fallacious form.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to Columbo: You have a lot of confidence in Bible prophecies, but I do not see any evidence at all that any of then were divinely inspired. What criteria do you use to reasonably prove authorship and dating? The Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest known Bible, and they post date most Old Testament prophecies by centuries. Why do you exclude a reasonable possibility that many, if not most Old Testament prophecies were written well after the fact, and by authors other than the prophets?

spin

I'm always amused at the way some people try to manipulate a degraded form of symbolic logic to impress the world.

Generalisations are rarely aimed at covering all situations. Rules of thumb are rules of thumb. We almost always work on implicit rules of thumb. It's called filtering. Hey, every now and then you might filter out something relevant. If you didn't do it, you'd still be processing information until doomsday everyone else excludes.

But do keep babbling about fallacies you've forgotten the names of, it is entertaining, if one bothers to get past the alphabet soup.


spin

Columbo

add hominem fallacy. My spelling bares no relevance to my claims.

link

As we can see, I am (A). And my spelling has no connection to my claims yet you seek to make derision at my expense when it is quite clear that I am endowed with the ability to whoop yo ass, despite my spelling.

Why sir, if you knew anything logical, you' know that the recognition of the form of an argument is what counts. If you can't see how other people's arguments wouldn't make my claim false then there is no hope for you. And how ironic that you call my words babble when the fallacy you're using is based on that very thing.

Need I remind you of your words?

Notice the clear attempt to imply that because YOU think a fundy no-brainer defence wriggly, then prophecy is what? Not true? Then what? My argument is untrue?


You are atleast commiting this fallacy which I could find;

HERE is just a starter. But infact your clear babble about fundies won't negate prophecy nor my argumetns for prophecy.

Even if X is absurd, and a whole bunch of fundies (Y) made outrageous claims(Z), that doesn't negate prophecy (A).

So you see - it's the knowledge of the form of arguments that counts. Your ridicule is unfounded. My observation of fallacious form came without a specific fallacy in mind, to my credit.

Columbo

I do not see any evidence that they are not divinely inspired. A small but very relevant logical observation!

You came close to an argument from ignorance. Even lack of evidence doesn't mean that prophecy is not true. Unless one could say with certainty that the particular evidence must be in place.

So far I only see none-believers coming up with arguments to try and get rid of the cohesive and consistent, obviously correct correlations between OT and NT.

For example the suffering servant. This was completed in Christ. The arguments against are simply for the purpose of disliking the obvious and sensible conclusion.

spin

And nobody was talking about your spelling.

Yeah, I guess you're right. All you need is something to argue about.

You're still doing it!

You can quote me as much as you like here.

You are working on a different definition of what a prophet does from what they did. This leads you to your problems.

As I can't see you getting around to discussing anything and as you keep reducing your comments to alphabet soup, I guess I'll just have to wait until you have something to say that's at all interesting.


spin

Columbo

Name the problem/s.

A prophet does/did? Elaborate. Pretend I can't read your mind.

Listen, all I'm doing is examining everything you say to make sure it is correct. Your last sentence doesn't actually prove I have any problems. It's just a statement. So far you laugh at fundies and so I am apparently also up for some group-derision. How dumb do you think I am? I can read that with my eyes closed. I know exactly where it leads.

Maybe my coherent logic is alphabet soup to you, but so far the links seems to be some evidence that I know what I'm saying. Thus we have a communication problem. Maybe it's because I'm English and you're from nowhere.

Maybe we should just agree to disagree. So far I've no reason to disbelieve in prophecy, when I know that a sceptical enquiry will lead me nowhere. My points were that the OT and NT correlate nicely. Now Jesus is a Jew, so he isn't stealing anything.

spin

A prophet, nby), was not concerned with predicting futures. A nebi felt himself to be the voice of god on the state of the world. This usually cashes out in social or theological criticism of a given status quo, what's going wrong, what god wants, what god's going to do because of the status quo. To think of a prophet as a fortune teller misses the whole point.


spin