Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-09-2015, 07:57 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
(10-09-2015 06:56 AM)epronovost Wrote:  I don't want to be mean with you Tomasia, but if there is no new argument against Christianity, it might be because there is nothing new to critique. What do you want us to do? Demonstrate that the Earth isn't the center of our solar system (we did that)? Demonstrate that there is no soul (we did that)? Demonstrate that God didn't create man 6000 years ago (we did that)? [/quote[Demonstrate that every single religious book, including the Old and New Testament, contain falsehood that were common belief at the time that range from the world is flat, God wield lightning bolts to women are inferior to men and our race is the only pure human race (we did that)?


To summarize your argument here. Many of the stories in the bible don't correspond to actually historical events or happenings, like the Garden of Eden, the Flood, Samson killing a bunch of folks with donkey's jawbone. And you think these beliefs are central to Christianity? Dang, you mean there was no talking snake?

You must have unlocked a real mystery by asserting that folks a couple thousand years ago didn't know how old the earth was, or the shape of it, or about the rotation of the earth? It'll probably come as a surprise for you to learn that they probably didn't give a shit about this stuff either. Some how you think a central christian belief, is a belief that writers of scripture were able to tap into some well, that revealed to them the mechanics of the universe, the age of the earth, a knowledge of events that occurred long before they ever appeared on the scene?

Quote:Demonstrate that the character of Jesus Christ might be a composite creation based loosely on a preacher of the time much like king Arthur or Robin Hood (we did that)? Demonstrate that everything that Christian have built in their religion and faith was based on a predeceasing cult that targeted the same group of people (we did that)?

I'm also not sure how seriously to take your argument about what Jesus "might be", is it some tactical endorsement of the Ahistoricist and Mythisicist positions? Is it the Jesus composed by non-christians like Bart Erhman, and Reza Aslan? Liberal historians like Marcus Borg, and John Dominic Carson? If it's the Carrier and Price view, sorry that has fail written on it all the way, if they can't convince actual historians of their views, I'm not sure why you'd expect a believer to take it seriously.

Quote:Demonstrate that human morality doesn't need God to develop itself (we did that)?

You mean by demonstrating that human morality is innate to some degree? That there is a sense of right and wrong we're born with, that doesn’t require a religious book, or a belief in one, or a God? That Paul was accurate in his observation of the gentiles who had no book, but revealed that the moral law was written in their hearts?

Quote:Demonstrate that there is no soul (we did that)?

We did? How did we do that? By a series or brain scans?

Quote:Demonstrate that faith isn't a good method to acquire demonstrable knowledge (we did that)?

Which means as much as saying trust or hope isn’t a good method to acquire, or demonstrate knowledge.

Your entire post reeks of ignorance, of anything even remotely central to Christian beliefs, an ignorance of both history, and anthropology, or any sense of familiarity with the communities and cultures in which these text were composed of. And reeks of the stuff you find among popular atheists blogs, than anything insightful here.

If these and trump cards you hold so dearly, I apologize that they’re severely lacking. Composed more of bluster, than offering anything to seriousally consider one’s faith. How much do you know of the french anthropologist Rene Girard study on scapegoat mythologies in ancient religions?

Everything folks like your ever have to offer is entirely shallow, it’s perhaps a notch above whatever a fundie might offer, but that’s not saying much. Not just in regards to Christianity, but any religion in general, you haven’t the slightest clue as to what these stories were about, what they meant, or the purposes they served for the communities in which they were originally created for. When you began to propose a natural explanations for religion, the explanations themselves follow from this same ignorance. A handicap created by inability to understand anyone outside of a bourgeois upbringing. And rather than recognizing your ignorance, you naively imagine it to amount to something meaningful.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 08:11 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
@Tomasia

I like your abscence of argument and slightly ad hominen attack of my character. Do you care to give us the central tenet of your faith that is demonstrably true and that remains uncontested now?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like epronovost's post
10-09-2015, 09:21 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
Surely there are no arguments against atheism?

Atheism makes no claims. It is simply a disbelief. The theist makes the claim. Atheists just demolish the claims. As long as theists make claims they can't or won't substantiate they'll simply continue to be refuted.

So there are no tired arguments against christianity or islam or any other religion. Simply tired arguments for their positions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Silly Deity's post
10-09-2015, 09:31 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
(10-09-2015 08:11 AM)epronovost Wrote:  @Tomasia

I like your abscence of argument and slightly ad hominen attack of my character. Do you care to give us the central tenet of your faith that is demonstrably true and that remains uncontested now?

I think you punched him in the nuts and he's still smarting. Big Grin

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 09:38 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
(10-09-2015 09:31 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(10-09-2015 08:11 AM)epronovost Wrote:  @Tomasia

I like your abscence of argument and slightly ad hominen attack of my character. Do you care to give us the central tenet of your faith that is demonstrably true and that remains uncontested now?

I think you punched him in the nuts and he's still smarting. Big Grin

I trust he will make a reather lenghty reply. These kind of thing take time. I simply hope there will be a real answer to my question.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 09:46 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
(10-09-2015 08:11 AM)epronovost Wrote:  @Tomasia

I like your abscence of argument and slightly ad hominen attack of my character. Do you care to give us the central tenet of your faith that is demonstrably true and that remains uncontested now?

I don't think I'm attacking your character by claiming you're likely ignorant on a variety of topics. Because I don't doubt that you're a good person, a good friend, brother, etc.. Nor do I believe you're any less virtuous than myself.

Quote:Do you care to give us the central tenet of your faith that is demonstrably true and that remains uncontested now?

I don't think there are any central tenets of my faith can be shown to be demonstrably true, which is true for any ontological positions. None of which can be shown to be demonstrably true, such as the view that we're a product of a cosmic fluke.

None of my beliefs remain uncontested either. In fact believers tend to do a good job contesting those beliefs themselves, perhaps because we've had two thousands years, and an endless stream of adherents of all walks of life, those who hung people on trees, and those who were hung. Even among atheists, there have been some strong contentions like that of Nietzsche. My position is not that it has never been contested, but the contention so often proudly on display by your garden variety atheists, offered in works like the God Delusion are poor and trite in comparison.

It's why rather than offering any insightful or even remotely thoughtful criticism of religion, the preferred modus operandi is ridicule and mockery, the methodology of campaign ads, and the harbinger of ignorance.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 09:56 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
(10-09-2015 09:21 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  Surely there are no arguments against atheism?

Atheism makes no claims. It is simply a disbelief. The theist makes the claim. Atheists just demolish the claims. As long as theists make claims they can't or won't substantiate they'll simply continue to be refuted.

So there are no tired arguments against christianity or islam or any other religion. Simply tired arguments for their positions.

Attempts to demolish claims from a position of disbelief, is rigged for failure from the start. Either you're trying to demolish a belief, with a better supported one to takes it's place, or you're just navel gazing.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 10:05 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
(10-09-2015 09:56 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(10-09-2015 09:21 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  Surely there are no arguments against atheism?

Atheism makes no claims. It is simply a disbelief. The theist makes the claim. Atheists just demolish the claims. As long as theists make claims they can't or won't substantiate they'll simply continue to be refuted.

So there are no tired arguments against christianity or islam or any other religion. Simply tired arguments for their positions.

Attempts to demolish claims from a position of disbelief, is rigged for failure from the start. Either you're trying to demolish a belief, with a better supported one to takes it's place, or you're just navel gazing.

You seem to be either making the assumption that belief is necessary or you're saying that adopting a skeptical perspective is trivial.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Silly Deity's post
10-09-2015, 10:07 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
(10-09-2015 09:56 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Attempts to demolish claims from a position of disbelief, is rigged for failure from the start. Either you're trying to demolish a belief, with a better supported one to takes it's place, or you're just navel gazing.

This is the most nonsensical thing I've heard in a long time. Do you think that the only proper position from which you can debunk a claim is one of belief in that claim?

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Unbeliever's post
10-09-2015, 10:47 AM
RE: Why do Creationists keep using the same old arguments?
(10-09-2015 10:07 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  This is the most nonsensical thing I've heard in a long time. Do you think that the only proper position from which you can debunk a claim is one of belief in that claim?

No, not a belief in that claim, but a belief in a counter claim/belief, or a counter set of beliefs.

A belief in a few thousands year old earth, is debunked by a belief in a much older earth, and things which support that position better than it's alternative here.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: