Clouseau

Who cares? Do have an actual argument to contribute?

Clouseau

Argument by derision is false argument.

So far, there has not been one actual argument from sceptics- mere bile and bigotry instead. Now is this a place for intellect, or not????????

diana

Not only did you take that quote out of context, but either you didn't read the rest of my post or you have poor reading comprehension. I wasn't making an argument; I was making a point, aimed at the OP.

I grant you I routinely say things worthy of your picking a fight with me, if that's what flips your pancake. The comment you just quoted is not one of them. Hang in there, though, mate. You'll get your pleasure of me yet.

d

(Incidentally...I agree with you. Argument by Derision is not any more rational that C. S. Lewis' preferred Argument from Analogy. Both are appeals to pathos--not logos.)

Clouseau

No, no. We don't stamp our feet to do that. We stamp our feet to insist that the supernatural cannot happen.

Miracles don't defy all sense. Give your leg a rest.

Clouseau

Why?

Sauron

He gave you an argument. You ducked it. Here it is again:

If we believe the miracle claims of Christianity, then why not the miracle claims of other religions?

Let the ducking begin.

GenesisNemesis

Because, Clouseau, since natural virgin birth is already possible among some animal species, there would be no need for God to miraculously inciminate Mary. He could've simply allowed natural, human virgin birth. It wouldn't have been so miraculous, and not so unlikely, causing millions of atheists to deny His Holy Existence. However, due to the already-miraculous quality of the supposed event, it is highly unlikely, and we need not suspect that God somehow allowed human parthogenesis for that particular event, because it is outside the area of scientific measurement (which is very useful, by the way.) If we do choose to believe it, however, we would have to let down our ever-so-cherished intellecutal guard, and move into the realm of unholy wishful thinking.

Also, see Occam's Razor.

Sauron

No, we stamp our feet and say "no evidence has ever been brought forth to support a positive claim for the existence of miracles."

And given your habit of ducking points and skipping out on arguments, it's vanishingly unlikely that you personally will interrupt the unbroken string of evidentiary failures.

Sauron

1. Sure there has. You've managed to duck it three times. Once more:

if we accept the miracle claims of Christianity, then by what criteria do you justify rejecting miracle claims of other religions?

2. You also have reversed the burden of proof - deliberately, of course. However, you're the one claiming the miracle; so you're the one who needs to mount the evidentiary argument. It's not up to the skeptics to refute your claim.

How quaint. "Bile and bigotry" - says the man on the anti-Catholic crusade.

It most certainly is.
Which explains your struggle to keep up.

Clouseau

So sorry. I thought you were being sarcastic.

Pick a fight? Heaven forfend!

That's ok, then.