Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Polycarp · 06-24-2002, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by IntenSity:
I find them very refreshing. As for me, I will start another thread with the questions Polycarp has ducked citing lack of time. The simplest cop-out of all times.

There isn't a single person who posts here who would have a discussion with someone who demanded answers to 53 questions. Is this how you always discuss topics - ask someone a massive list of questions and then label them a "cop-out" when they refuse to answer all of them? Get real. I think you're being unreasonable.

NOGO · 06-24-2002, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Marduck
"Is Christianity all about the evidence? "
No, it's about faith only. If every word of every Gospel were historically true you would still need faith to believe Jesus was who he said he was and not some sort of demon or alien or creature from another dimension comming to Earth to play jokes on the locals. Humans have no means or criteria to determine if a being with great inhuman like abilities is the Son of the Creator of the Universe or something else, it still requires faith and 'believing' what he said was true.

If belief is not based on evidence then what is it based on?

Faith according to dictionaries is
"Belief that does not rest on logical proof or physical evidence."

If Jesus was never born then the disciples would have no physical evidence. Would they have believed anyway?

Obviously their belief was based on their interaction with Jesus. That is evidence. Why should we settle for anything less ????

Polycarp · 06-24-2002, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by brighid:
Other than the anecdotal personal experiences that have helped you decide upon this particular conclusion, could you please delineate your logical reasoning a bit more as the previous statements are very vague and leave many unanswered questions.

A wise man once said,

"This is BC&A, not Critique Polycarp's Wacko Beliefs."

I don't see the relevance in delineating my entire belief system.

NOGO · 06-24-2002, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Polycarp
You read into my statement what you wanted it to say, not what I actually said. I didn�t say that god probably exists because 80-90% of the people believe in god(s). I simply said that it is not extraordinary to claim something that is believed by 80-90% of the people. I was anticipating the oft-quoted mantra �Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence�.

An extraordinary claim does not become ordinary with increasing number of people who believe in it.

"Ordinary" and "extraordinary" do not qualify the belief and how common place it is. The words qualify the claim itself.

It is not extraordinary to claim that 80 to 90 percent of people believe in God. Actually I don't believe that the number is that high but the claim, even if untrue, is not extraordinary.
However, to claim that God exists is an extraordinary claim which requires extraordinary evidence no matter how many people believe in it.

I am surprized, Polycarp, that you attempt to confuse these two issues.

brighid · 06-24-2002, 11:33 AM

Agreed � BUT � I do see the value of delineating it. I am not suggesting you write a dissertation on how you came to believe the Christian God over all other Gods and Goddesses, but I think it is a useful exercise. I realize that most theists are reluctant to critically evaluate their claims in comparison to other forms of theism, and I don�t mean this as an insult and I hope you do not take it as such. But faith claims are not built on logic, they aren�t critically evaluated with equal treatment of evidence (especially in relation to identical or similar claims of other faiths) and when delineated that path often exposes the lack of actual reasoning of the theist. I think most theists are aware of it, and for personal reasons refrain from doing too much self-reflection or deep inquiry into the basis of their faith. I understand this, to a degree that is but I cannot for the life of me understand why one would choose come to a higher forum and discuss the evidence of the Bible/Christianity in any sort of logical or evidentiary matter and ignore the foundations of your own faith in a similar manner.

I respect your personal feelings and choices, but I am truly interested in understanding this thought process more precisely. I must also admit that I am interested in exposing the incongruent nature of that process and hopefully illuminating those areas of doubt.

Why hold a belief system to be true if you aren�t willing to really examine it from all possible angles and upon discovering information critically examine it and honestly apply it to either the construction or deconstruction of that belief system?

B

lpetrich · 06-24-2002, 01:12 PM

Quote:

LP:
And I wish to remind everybody that Jesus Christ had reportedly taught that one ought to remove parts of one's body that make one commit sins.
Deggial:
huh?
I've never heard that.
Doesn't that involve decapitating yourself?
And through that, suicide?

You guys ought to read your Bibles

Matthew 5:29-30, 18:8-9, Mark 9:43-47 -- If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off. If your eye causes you to sin, cut it out. Being maimed is preferable to being tossed into Hell.

Matthew 19:12 -- consider neutering yourself for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven.

Thus, if free will causes one to sin, then it is best not to have it.

Polycarp · 06-24-2002, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by brighid:
Why hold a belief system to be true if you aren�t willing to really examine it from all possible angles and upon discovering information critically examine it and honestly apply it to either the construction or deconstruction of that belief system?

I don�t mean to be rude, but your post made me laugh. I find atheism to reflect an �incongruent nature�. What you really want to do is debate entire belief systems (atheism vs. Christianity). I don�t think this is the forum for such an occasion, that�s probably a discussion for the �existence of God� board.

I can assure you that I�ve critically examined theism, atheism, agnosticism, pantheism, polytheism, Islam, Judaism, Christianity, ethical systems, etc. My entire belief system isn�t relevant to the topic I was trying to discuss with my hypothetical time-travel story.

Your concern that I may be unwilling �to really examine it (my belief system) from all possible angles� is entirely unfounded. Tell me an angle from which I should examine it and I�ll respond. Or better yet, why don�t you show me the �logic� you used to arrive at atheism as the correct belief system regarding the issue of god�s existence?

I was once an agnostic. Let me really get people around here riled up by saying that it was only after I critically examined those beliefs that I became a Christian.

Yeah, yeah� the crowd may commence with the verbal throwing of stones now�

Polycarp · 06-24-2002, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NOGO:
An extraordinary claim does not become ordinary with increasing number of people who believe in it.

"Ordinary" and "extraordinary" do not qualify the belief and how common place it is. The words qualify the claim itself.

It is not extraordinary to claim that 80 to 90 percent of people believe in God. Actually I don't believe that the number is that high but the claim, even if untrue, is not extraordinary.
However, to claim that God exists is an extraordinary claim which requires extraordinary evidence no matter how many people believe in it.

I am surprized, Polycarp, that you attempt to confuse these two issues.

I am surprised that you are failing to see what is quite obvious.

For the benefit of our discussion, why don't you give an example (excluding god's existence) of an EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that is believed by at least 80-90% of the population, but that you believe to be false.

This is not a claim regarding the opinions of people, but a claim to truth.

I think this will help us to clarify the issue. Any of your fellow skeptics can help you by providing their own examples.

NOGO · 06-24-2002, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Polycarp
I was once an agnostic. Let me really get people around here riled up by saying that it was only after I critically examined those beliefs that I became a Christian.

Let me start ...
I'll bet an arm that before you were an agnostic you were a Christian.

NOGO · 06-24-2002, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Polycarp
For the benefit of our discussion, why don't you give an example (excluding god's existence) of an EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that is believed by at least 80-90% of the population, but that you believe to be false.

Science has really made this question difficult.
If we go back a couple of centuries them it all becomes that much simpler.

Let see...
Witchcraft, ghosts, haunted houses, souls ...

Is that enough.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-24-2002, 11:33 AM	#75
brighid Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: somewhere in the known Universe Posts: 6,993	Agreed � BUT � I do see the value of delineating it. I am not suggesting you write a dissertation on how you came to believe the Christian God over all other Gods and Goddesses, but I think it is a useful exercise. I realize that most theists are reluctant to critically evaluate their claims in comparison to other forms of theism, and I don�t mean this as an insult and I hope you do not take it as such. But faith claims are not built on logic, they aren�t critically evaluated with equal treatment of evidence (especially in relation to identical or similar claims of other faiths) and when delineated that path often exposes the lack of actual reasoning of the theist. I think most theists are aware of it, and for personal reasons refrain from doing too much self-reflection or deep inquiry into the basis of their faith. I understand this, to a degree that is but I cannot for the life of me understand why one would choose come to a higher forum and discuss the evidence of the Bible/Christianity in any sort of logical or evidentiary matter and ignore the foundations of your own faith in a similar manner. I respect your personal feelings and choices, but I am truly interested in understanding this thought process more precisely. I must also admit that I am interested in exposing the incongruent nature of that process and hopefully illuminating those areas of doubt. Why hold a belief system to be true if you aren�t willing to really examine it from all possible angles and upon discovering information critically examine it and honestly apply it to either the construction or deconstruction of that belief system? B

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.