Questions for Apologists?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-07-2012, 03:30 PM (This post was last modified: 20-07-2012 03:44 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 02:43 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Once a claim is made, and therefore enters reality, you can only have a positive, neutral, or negative stance towards it.

You can't have "no stance" towards it because it exists. The only way that you can have a "no stance" is not having the knowledge of the claim. Once your ignorance has been removed, it is impossible to claim "no stance".
Sorry. You can defer, and say "sounds like crap, but I'll check it out later".
The claim does not "exist", (except in the claimant's head). What if I don't hear it ?
Metaphysics is all bullshit.
And saying you have a "negative stance" can be completely relative.
Claim : There is a 1957 Chevy orbiting Pluto.
The degree of the negative response depends on the plausibility/probability, (importance) of the claim.
The unspoken, (falacious) premise, is that all claims are of equal importance, and all responses are equal or even "considered" for more than 1/2 a second.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 03:40 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:29 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(20-07-2012 03:25 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  ...Which is exactly the type of double-standard that one would try to tease out with that question, to be followed up with "from their point of view, your god is false and your faith is blasphemy, and your method of reasoning leaves an outsider with no way to decide which one of you is right."

Faith.

I believe God grants us faith in Him because we are elect. Those that do not have faith have not been given it; therefore, they aren't elect.

In this same way, God gives us faith that Christ is the one true way.
"Faith" is not a method of detecting who's right and who's wrong. It is assumed that both the Muslim and the Christian have faith in their respective gods. To simply state that one is right and the other is not (as you have) is a double-standard, because the Muslim could make the exact same argument in the exact same way and your standard (because it is doubled) would not allow his argument to be found correct, despite being identical. That's irrational and illogical.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 04:22 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:29 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(20-07-2012 03:25 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  ...Which is exactly the type of double-standard that one would try to tease out with that question, to be followed up with "from their point of view, your god is false and your faith is blasphemy, and your method of reasoning leaves an outsider with no way to decide which one of you is right."

Faith.

I believe God grants us faith in Him because we are elect. Those that do not have faith have not been given it; therefore, they aren't elect.

In this same way, God gives us faith that Christ is the one true way.
So your God creates people/souls for the express purpose of sending them to hell to be tortured forever through no fault of their own.

Don't you see the insanity of your belief?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2012, 05:00 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 04:22 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(20-07-2012 03:29 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Faith.

I believe God grants us faith in Him because we are elect. Those that do not have faith have not been given it; therefore, they aren't elect.

In this same way, God gives us faith that Christ is the one true way.
So your God creates people/souls for the express purpose of sending them to hell to be tortured forever through no fault of their own.

Don't you see the insanity of your belief?
He can't see, because he isn't able to without God.

He isn't able to feel without God.

He isn't able to think without God.

We are nothing without God.

Talk about some monstrous thinking right there.

It devalues Humanity and Civility, and morality to say that we couldn't have come up with ANYTHING without God.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
20-07-2012, 08:44 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:17 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  I am more than fine admitting I have a negative stance towards belief in a deity.

I believe there is no God, I reject the idea of a God.

They are negative stances.

I don't believe in a God is a negative stance because you don't side with that deity, and you have no wishy-washy attitude towards it's existance.
I wish people were as straight forward as you. Many Atheists make me dizzy with the playing of word games and such.

In a way, though, I might be acting a hypocrite. Sometimes I will admit when I feel there is something to question whether god actually exists or not. If I feel shaky about my stance, I usually am not afraid to say it out loud and let people know, and know why I feel that way.
So.. I hope I'm not being hypocritical that way. I just try to be honest and rational.

I want to know the truth. I am not satisfied until I do..

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2012, 12:47 AM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 08:29 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(19-07-2012 09:34 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  That depends on your definition of divine inspiration. We really need a Christianese thread to explain the difference in words that theists and the rest of the world use. He did so in Acts. So he either stays in that book or he gets to be as out of context as my revelation quote.Revelation 19:9 - "These are true words of God." If that doesn't apply any where else in the bible then how can Matthias apply anywhere else in the bible other than in it's own story?Actually it's not. By pointing out the problems you force a person to rectify things, and learn how they do so.
Hopefully the cognitive dissonance the contradictions provide will eventually force a person to drop the bible all together.

Interestingly it's fun to see how you adapt to arguments. Big Grin

NOTE: This is what arguing with an apologist is like.

Oh okay, I see what you're getting at with the Matthias thing... sorry misunderstood.

You're saying why did Jesus give authority to Judas to judge. I'm saying He didn't because Matthias replaced Judas. You're saying that Jesus said this before Matthias. Got ya.

Jesus excludes Judas in the verse by saying "in the regeneration". "Regeneration" is the phrase that describes a person's realization of their election. Those that followed Christ and were regenerated will be on the thrones. Jesus could have easily not said this; however, He knew of Judas' betrayal so made was deliberate with His words.

The twelfth disciple would be Matthias (some say Paul).
Nope I'm not saying that at all.

Mark, Matthew, and Acts are separate books. The were included into one book the bible.

Luke wrote Acts, Mark wrote mark, and Matthew wrote Matthew.

What I am saying is that if something as important as Matthias replacing Judas happens in acts why is it not mentioned in the other books, and how can you say since nothing is mentioned of Matthias in the other books that Matthias applies to them?

To me it does seem out of context to use Matthias in other places where he is not mentioned. Which I say is equally as bad as my use of the revelations quote.

I'm sure we could argue this point forever but I know that there is a very important distinction you are putting in place. It deals with how you define inspiration.

Inspiration is
1: The process of being mentally stimulated to do or feel something, esp. to do something creative.
2: The doctrine that the Bible was written by the influence of God. It is, therefore, without error in the original documents. It is accurate and authoritatively represents God's teachings (2 Tim. 3:16). As such it is a revelation from God which implies direct knowledge about God, creation, man, salvation, the future, etc. It is an illumination in that it shows us what we could not know apart from it. (from carm.org)

So in this case on the first definition allows human fallibility to come into play and not take the bible literally at all. I reached that point in my faith too, but then I realized that I couldn't base my life in god on the bible cause I could be following errors. Which lead me to the rejection of the bible. Tongue

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2012, 01:08 AM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(20-07-2012 03:05 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(20-07-2012 03:01 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  This makes a lot more sense then the vague work-around that many Atheists have been offering.

One thing I really want to know is, what are Atheists trying to avoid by being defined a certain way?
Maybe once I know that, I will understand more why it's a big enough deal to them to go to lengths just to prove otherwise.

I can't answer that since I'm not an atheist.

My assumption is that they want discredit and insult the belief as much as possible. They want to make it seem so insignificant and ludicrous that they don't even want to acknowledge it into existence. Some may feel that if they even acknowledge it, then that gives credence to the idea.

Again, likes I said, these are just my assumptions.
Maybe this is true for some atheists.



I was a believer. Reading the bible, and being involved in science,
logic, reason, psychology etc... lead to each belief I had being
chiseled away. IE prayer, faith, the bible, personal relationship with
god, testimonials, morality, creationism and the pseudoscience, and
finally god



Eventually I came to think, who am I, what do I know, etc.. Utterly lost
I decided to flush away all that I knew. My thinking was flawed and I
needed to fix that.



Knowing that thinking as been done since the dawn of man I thought other
people must have figured out how to think better than I have. I looked
for help and found a great book on critical thinking.



Now I have the tools to tell fact from fiction, and in a world where anybody can say anything, you need those tools.


What does that have to do with atheism. Well I refute what I came to
know as false, to bring those willing to question closer to reality.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2012, 01:11 AM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(21-07-2012 12:47 AM)fstratzero Wrote:  Luke wrote Acts, Mark wrote mark, and Matthew wrote Matthew.
[Image: tumblr_m57xd65swZ1qjvxfho1_250.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
21-07-2012, 01:12 AM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
Sorry. Couldn't resist Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
21-07-2012, 01:25 AM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(21-07-2012 01:12 AM)morondog Wrote:  Sorry. Couldn't resist Tongue
No problem. A lot of people do not understand that the books are indeed separate from one another.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: