Questions for Apologists?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-07-2012, 01:12 PM (This post was last modified: 27-07-2012 01:26 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Questions for Apologists?
No matter what apologists say, the arguments are, ( as their OWN theological systems say), "faith is a virtue". Virtues are , (only) , "granted", by the holy spirit. The arguments can take one only so far. In the end, the "leap", (of faith) is required. The only question, remaining, at the end of the day, is why, and where, (at what point), does one consent to make the leap.

Hint: There is nothing going on in your brain, which is not chemically mediated.

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
27-07-2012, 01:25 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(27-07-2012 01:12 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No matter what apologists say, the arguments are , as their OWN theological system says, "faith is a virtue". Virtues are , (only) , "granted", by the holy spirit. The arguments can take one only so far. In the end, the "leap", (of faith) is required. The only question, remaining, at the end of the day, is why, and where, (at what point), does one consent to make the leap.

Hint: There is nothing going on in your brain, which is not chemically mediated.

I've always been an 'Evidentialist' myself. I take some things myself on faith, but when it comes to dialoging the existence of God with others, I believe that there is a way to figure this out without going into faith.

For me, it isn't faith that causes me to believe; it's reason.
Faith is just something I have in what I believe will see me through to the end that I am unsure of.
I don't use it as a tool for my actual belief in His existence.

If the Apologists that I meet tonight and tomorrow take the Faith approach when answering my questions, then I will not be impressed. I could talk to an average pastor if I want those kinds of answers..

“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
27-07-2012, 01:38 PM (This post was last modified: 27-07-2012 02:26 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(27-07-2012 01:25 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  
(27-07-2012 01:12 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No matter what apologists say, the arguments are , as their OWN theological system says, "faith is a virtue". Virtues are , (only) , "granted", by the holy spirit. The arguments can take one only so far. In the end, the "leap", (of faith) is required. The only question, remaining, at the end of the day, is why, and where, (at what point), does one consent to make the leap.

Hint: There is nothing going on in your brain, which is not chemically mediated.

I've always been an 'Evidentialist' myself. I take some things myself on faith, but when it comes to dialoging the existence of God with others, I believe that there is a way to figure this out without going into faith.

For me, it isn't faith that causes me to believe; it's reason.
Faith is just something I have in what I believe will see me through to the end that I am unsure of.
I don't use it as a tool for my actual belief in His existence.

If the Apologists that I meet tonight and tomorrow take the Faith approach when answering my questions, then I will not be impressed. I could talk to an average pastor if I want those kinds of answers..

Well since you are an evidentialist, and there is no "evidence", but only Arguments From Ignorance and /or "god of the gaps", the apologetic thing is really only a lack of creativity. Actually, what you may be saying is that you have, a priori, agreed that it is reasonable to use either, or both, induction and deduction to conclude there is a deity extant.

The entire "evidentialism"/ "apologetic" argument is founded on the flawed assumption that the universe is intuitive to human brains. That has been proven false, by, among others, Einstein, (Relativity), Hesienberg, (Uncertainty), and Dirac, (Spinnors).

So yes, in the end, evidence is what is important. The question is, what and why do you accept as evidence.

There is also no reason, if one concluded a "cause" is required, that that has to be a personal god, or anything else, in the billions of other possibilities.

So, yes, do write down their arguments, please.

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
27-07-2012, 01:46 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(27-07-2012 01:38 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Well since you are an evidentialist, and there is no "evidence", but only Arguments From Ignorance and /or "god of the gaps", the apologetic thing is really only a lack of creativity. Actually, what you may be saying is that you have, a priori, agreed that it is reasonable to use either, or both, induction and induction to conclude there is a deity extant.

The entire "evidentialism"/ "apologetic" argument is founded on the flawed assumption that the universe is intuitive to human brains. That has been proven false, by, among others, Einstein, (Relativity), Hesienberg, (Uncertainty), and Dirac, (Spinnors).

So yes, in the end, evidence is what is important. The question is, what and why do you accept as evidence.

There is also no reason, if one concluded a "cause" is required, that that has to be a personal god, or anything else, in the billions of other possibilities.

So, yes, do write down their arguments, please.

Essentially, all of what you are saying here is basically what I spin around in my head all day.
The problem is, getting the answers to the tough questions by using all the resources available. As far as I can tell, this is going to take a long... long long long time.

“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
27-07-2012, 01:56 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
So I just listened to Habermas, and Licona. They are pathetic.

Licona uses as his argument for the gospels, (just as the Longnecker priest dude does), that there is no "history" which is not biased, then proceeds to ignore his own argument, and say we should accept the gospels, anyway. He commits the falacy of the False Analogy, when he brings up Dawkins, (who is not a biblical scholar).

Haebermas is laughable. He says he wins, no matter what the arguments are, because of his methodology. If the methodology and "naturalistic experiences" are what supports him, then he also has to agree the witches of Salem, Mass are also really witches.

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
27-07-2012, 02:24 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
Hey Ideas, could you add,

"What makes your chosen religion true? How do you know that it's true and not the other ones which *also* claim 100% divine inspiration and truth, and incidentally are not compatible with yours?"

'Cos frankly I've never heard a decent answer from anyone on that...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
27-07-2012, 02:33 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(27-07-2012 02:24 PM)morondog Wrote:  Hey Ideas, could you add,

"What makes your chosen religion true? How do you know that it's true and not the other ones which *also* claim 100% divine inspiration and truth, and incidentally are not compatible with yours?"

'Cos frankly I've never heard a decent answer from anyone on that...

The answer to that one is pretty lengthy so I will probably not ask that question.
I've already got a pretty good idea where the question leads on that topic.

“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
27-07-2012, 02:38 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(27-07-2012 02:33 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  
(27-07-2012 02:24 PM)morondog Wrote:  Hey Ideas, could you add,

"What makes your chosen religion true? How do you know that it's true and not the other ones which *also* claim 100% divine inspiration and truth, and incidentally are not compatible with yours?"

'Cos frankly I've never heard a decent answer from anyone on that...

The answer to that one is pretty lengthy so I will probably not ask that question.
I've already got a pretty good idea where the question leads on that topic.
Tell me how it goes on xbox,k?

[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
27-07-2012, 02:39 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
[Image: rejected.gif]

Ironically I got this from a theology site Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2012, 02:40 PM
RE: Questions for Apologists?
(27-07-2012 01:25 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  I've always been an 'Evidentialist' myself. I take some things myself on faith, but when it comes to dialoging the existence of God with others, I believe that there is a way to figure this out without going into faith.

You'd be the first. The problem you run into trying to prove God through philosophy is that you'll be forced to erect a double-standard that keeps the same evidence from proving every religion's god(s). No matter whether you posit a first cause, intelligent designer, or miracle-doer, you have to accept that anybody's god(s) can fill such a role and there will never be a way to prove divine causation through reasoning alone.

Trying to prove God through science would be more effective for convincing us, but God fails test after test. The Templeton Prayer Study was the hardest hit, and it's unlikely that any theist will claim again that prayer can be tested. Intelligent Design proponents have still not formulated a way to test and/or falsify their claims that life was created. Archaeology and study of historical texts do sometimes verify people, places, and events in the bible but there are more bible claims debunked by these methods than given evidence.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Starcrash's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: