K

Joel:

No I don't feel there is adequate evidence for any of these beliefs. I don't believe in any deities because there isn't adequate evidence for ANY of them.

My day to day interaction with the earth tells me that it seems to be flat. I wouldn't call it critical thinking for me to use that to ignore the overwhelming evidence that says it's not flat.

How is this committing a logical fallacy? I'm simply showing that belief in things for which there is no credible evidence is not the hallmark of critical thinking as you claimed earlier.

HoosierGuy28

Ronin

Not worthy of an answer.

If it's willed by God then it's not horrendous. My love for God is unconditional.


I don't know, I'm not God. I'm sure He's blessing at least parts of it.

Yes

Have a great day

Joel

daemon

Sorry, HG, but apparently you've misunderstood the fallacy. You claimed that billions of people believe in the supernatural, therefore this should be evidence of its existence. This does not logically hold true, as such a proof would be argumentum ad numerum.
Non sequitur. So what? You still haven't established the Bible as being a source of completely factual information.

Assertion does not constitute evidence.

crownboy

Joel, I've read Mc. Dowell's book, and found it lacking even when I was a Christain.

Can you please quote for us the personal attacks you talk of in the critiques? I've read the critiques, and they are very professional, not to mention accurate. Perhaps you should read the entire thing before you cast judgement, I guarantee you you'll not be dissappointed .

[ October 23, 2002: Message edited by: crownboy ]</p>

Mageth

You are a rather confusing individual, and hardly in a position to accuse me of any logical fallacies.

A bit of an ad hominem there.

What "logical fallacies" have I committed? If my hard questioning of your assertions confuses you, then so be it.

That in itself is a logical fallacy because the topic of discussion was not what God or gods are acknowledged, but the fact that billions of people acknowledge the existence of a supernatural being or beings.

OK, what logical fallacy did my question commit? There are thousands of god-beliefs; if your assertion is true, why does everyone not believe in the same god?

And again with the argumentum ad numerum that the "fact" that billions of people believe in something is evidence that what they believe is true

Facts are dependent on reality, not acknowledgment.

The irony of this statement when compared with your "billions of people" claim!

If you don't accept that grass is green, it doesn't negate the fact that the grass is green.

Likewise, because you believe the bible is true, does not make the bible true, any more than you believing the grass is pink makes the grass pink.

Not at all, I have lots of friends who are atheists and agnostics and we communicate just fine.

Do any of your friends agree that they "refuse to see what they don't want to see"? I doubt it.

Furthermore, if you are determined to disregard evidence just because it doesn't fit what you want to believe, then you are blinding yourself to truth.

Continuing with the strawman fallacy that I "disregard evidence just because it doesn't fit what you want to believe," I see.

I approach things the other way around, personally. I base what I believe on the evidence. I've asked you for your purported "facts" and "evidence"; supply good ones and I'll honestly consider them, not disregard them out of hand. If you come up with new, irrefutable "evidence" for the Christian god (good luck), you may win a convert!

On a side note, what do you think of the very strong evidence supporting evolution? Do you disregard it because it doesn't fit with Genesis 1-3?

This is testable too. Why don't you try to prove to me that George Washington existed, and I'll see how long I can run around in circles and deny any facts you use to support it. I bet I could argue against it indefinitely.

Your point is? Misdirection? Masking your confusion over criticisms of your assertions? How about let's not dicuss the existence George Washington, and instead discuss the existence of God, which is more fitting with the topic of this thread. Facts? Evidence you've personally witnessed?

Mageth

Not worthy of an answer.

Is god omnipresent? If he is, does it not follow that he's in Ronin's pants?

crownboy

Oh yeah, Joel, I forgot to ask my question.

Does your interpretation of the bible cause you to discount evolution, or do you accept it as God's creative mechanism?

(looks like someone just ask it, oh well, guess my question should be easy, then ?)

Ronin

"Is God in my pants right now?"

Not worthy of an answer.

Why not?

"Even if this divine Being 'willed' the most horrendous tragedies in the world by act or ommission to act, can you still love God unconditionally?"

If it's willed by God then it's not horrendous. My love for God is unconditional.

Thank you for your brevity and brutal honesty.

Your answer stands as a testament to the foul nature of theism, especially Christianity ~ for it unwaveringly justifies the most savage terrors.

"Is God blessing America?'

I don't know, I'm not God. I'm sure He's blessing at least parts of it.

It is a mute point using your mindset, Joel ~ as your deity is given carte blanche to actually render each of the very real horrors we stand witness to on a daily basis ~ unconditionally.

"Are we 'under' God?"

Yes

I see London, I see France ~ I don't see Yahweh's underpants.

~ Never thought I'd get to say that ~ so, sue me.

Have a great day

This post has assured me of one very great day.

Thank you, Joel.

Carry on.

Amazon

Hi, Joel!
I'm Jennifer.

I have been reading this thread with great interest, and I'm impressed with your persistence, good nature, and follow-through on so many questions.

I wanted to stick my 2 cents in because, I too have read (and will continue to read) books of apologetics. You never know if someone is going to stumble upon actual evidence for the existence of god(s). I'm familiar with Josh McDowell's work - just to name a popular example - and he has been exposed as a "selective researcher". He likes to stop looking (or stop revealing to his readers) when he finds "evidence" that fits his foregone conclusions, instead of daring to dig further.
I'll direct you to one example: read what his critics have to say about his research of the writings of Josephus. His manner of making the "evidence" fit his conclusion is illustrated well.

You're getting a lot of requests for evidence, and maybe you're not sure what we're getting at. I'm not trying to condescend here, I'm just going to venture a framework that might be acceptable if you wanted to put something forth for us to consider:

1. Description of supernatural occurrance.
2. How was it supernatural (not natural, completely outside natural laws)?
3. Was there anyone with you?
4. If so, do they have the same belief in the supernatural as you?
5. If you had a witness, did you discuss the event at length afterwards (we all know that those discussion can influence "memory")?
6. Is there anything physical left over from the experience that can be examined (a token, a scar, anything)?
7. What time of day did it occur?
8. Were you in familiar surroundings?
9. Have you witnessed the same supernatural event more than once?
10. If so, were the circumstances similar?

I could go on forever, but what I'm getting at is that assertions without evidence don't really mean anything to us. Our frustration becomes apparent when our attempts to salvage real evidence from people who have supposedly had exposure to the supernatural are thwarted by "I know what I saw and I don't have to defend that to anybody."
Please help us understand you better by illustrating why you are sure you have experienced the supernatural in any form.

Ronin

Is god omnipresent? If he is, does it not follow that he's in Ronin's pants?

Well, I won't be a braggart ~



[ October 23, 2002: Message edited by: Ronin ]</p>