ARCHIVE: I believe religion to be obsolete
- Thread starter prodigal
- Start date
No one can agree what happened to Jimmy Hoffa. There are different camps with different theories all working from the same known evidence and all coming to different conclusions. In the years following his presumed death the truth has been muddied and we may never know exactly what happened.
Oh, wait. What does this remind me of?
Clete,
(He's not trying to confuse you, on the contrary he's doing just the reverse of that! Don't you get it? It isn't about your sensory perception per se, its about how you know what you think you know. The point isn't about how good your eye's are, it's about how do you know how good your eye's are, it's an epistemological argument not a physiological one.
If you cannot know anything what is the point in having you critique the Biblical worldview? It's insane.)
Uh, that’s your quote, Clete. Line for line, it’s yours. So not only are you misquoting me, but you’re misquoting yourself. Go to page #17. It’s there. I was quoting you.
(I couldn't have said any better myself, except I would have used the word inane rather than insane)
Heh heh.
(You cannot know anything. That is to say that you, prodigal, cannot know anything, not that nothing can be known.)
Speak for yourself. I’ve heard this argument several times, Clete and it’s always been from Christians seeking to defend their beliefs. Christians use this type of thinking to justify belief in fairy tales without sufficient proof to make what they believe valid enough for it to be generally accepted. This type of self-justifying thinking is useful for Christians who have problems sleeping at night, but it’s not good enough for me.
(As far as you know, you're a figment of someone else's imagination and you cannot prove otherwise.)
It is impossible to prove hypothetic ideas that are based on nothing more than your own fear of being wrong. Fine, go ahead. Come up with more kooky ideas that can’t possibly be tested. Go ahead, try to apply your own form of belief on me, but it’s not going to be that easy. Just because you cannot prove anything you believe does not mean that I cannot either.
(You are hopelessly adrift in a vast ocean of question begging and uncertainty even about the most basic things that you think you know)
You actually couldn’t be further from the truth. In fact, I’m almost certain you’re describing yourself right now. I couldn’t be firmer in my worldview, you on the other hand must concoct fantastical claims, ideas and hypotheses in order to combat simple questions that prick at your faith. I’m not surprised that you don’t take anything I say seriously, and I’m not surprised that you’ve invented all sorts of excuses for why you won’t take me seriously.
Christian apologetics at work. Deny everything, admit nothing and make counter accusations. You can’t answer questions head on, you can’t accept challenges, all you can do is concoct crazy theories in order to discredit those brash enough to challenge you.
(To offer any thing for you to analyze concerning my worldview would be a practice in futility and would indeed be inane (or insane, which ever term you like).)
Ah, the dodge. Of course you won’t offer me anything to analyze about your worldview, Clete, Granite and I have been predicting that from the start. If you’re so right, why aren’t you as brash as I? Where’s your righteous impetuousness? Where’s your fearlessness? If you’re so darned right, why not show your four aces and put me in my place? You claimed my arms and legs were cut off, but you nor Jim ever drew your swords!
DRAW YOUR SWORDS! CUT ME TO PIECES! GIVE ME YOUR WORST, GIVE ME YOUR BEST, GIVE ME WHATEVER YOU THINK YOU HAVE!
Yours truly,
Prodigal
(He's not trying to confuse you, on the contrary he's doing just the reverse of that! Don't you get it? It isn't about your sensory perception per se, its about how you know what you think you know. The point isn't about how good your eye's are, it's about how do you know how good your eye's are, it's an epistemological argument not a physiological one.
If you cannot know anything what is the point in having you critique the Biblical worldview? It's insane.)
Uh, that’s your quote, Clete. Line for line, it’s yours. So not only are you misquoting me, but you’re misquoting yourself. Go to page #17. It’s there. I was quoting you.
(I couldn't have said any better myself, except I would have used the word inane rather than insane)
Heh heh.
(You cannot know anything. That is to say that you, prodigal, cannot know anything, not that nothing can be known.)
Speak for yourself. I’ve heard this argument several times, Clete and it’s always been from Christians seeking to defend their beliefs. Christians use this type of thinking to justify belief in fairy tales without sufficient proof to make what they believe valid enough for it to be generally accepted. This type of self-justifying thinking is useful for Christians who have problems sleeping at night, but it’s not good enough for me.
(As far as you know, you're a figment of someone else's imagination and you cannot prove otherwise.)
It is impossible to prove hypothetic ideas that are based on nothing more than your own fear of being wrong. Fine, go ahead. Come up with more kooky ideas that can’t possibly be tested. Go ahead, try to apply your own form of belief on me, but it’s not going to be that easy. Just because you cannot prove anything you believe does not mean that I cannot either.
(You are hopelessly adrift in a vast ocean of question begging and uncertainty even about the most basic things that you think you know)
You actually couldn’t be further from the truth. In fact, I’m almost certain you’re describing yourself right now. I couldn’t be firmer in my worldview, you on the other hand must concoct fantastical claims, ideas and hypotheses in order to combat simple questions that prick at your faith. I’m not surprised that you don’t take anything I say seriously, and I’m not surprised that you’ve invented all sorts of excuses for why you won’t take me seriously.
Christian apologetics at work. Deny everything, admit nothing and make counter accusations. You can’t answer questions head on, you can’t accept challenges, all you can do is concoct crazy theories in order to discredit those brash enough to challenge you.
(To offer any thing for you to analyze concerning my worldview would be a practice in futility and would indeed be inane (or insane, which ever term you like).)
Ah, the dodge. Of course you won’t offer me anything to analyze about your worldview, Clete, Granite and I have been predicting that from the start. If you’re so right, why aren’t you as brash as I? Where’s your righteous impetuousness? Where’s your fearlessness? If you’re so darned right, why not show your four aces and put me in my place? You claimed my arms and legs were cut off, but you nor Jim ever drew your swords!
DRAW YOUR SWORDS! CUT ME TO PIECES! GIVE ME YOUR WORST, GIVE ME YOUR BEST, GIVE ME WHATEVER YOU THINK YOU HAVE!
Yours truly,
Prodigal
"Christian apologetics at work. Deny everything, admit nothing and make counter accusations."
:thumb: :chuckle:
Beautifully put.
By the way...
Biblical worldview, Clete. How hard, exactly, can it be to define how you live and lead your life? Quit being a poseur and explain what constitutes a "biblical worldview."
Either you don't know; can't define it; are too lazy to do so; or are just arrogant enough to think it's some kind of tease if you don't.
:thumb: :chuckle:
Beautifully put.
By the way...
Biblical worldview, Clete. How hard, exactly, can it be to define how you live and lead your life? Quit being a poseur and explain what constitutes a "biblical worldview."
Either you don't know; can't define it; are too lazy to do so; or are just arrogant enough to think it's some kind of tease if you don't.
WHAT??? Are you on acid or something? I directly quoted your post! You quoted me and then responded just as I said you did, verbatim. I didn't even type it in, I used the [quote ] feature in the 'Reply to Topic' page. It isn't possible that I misquoted you unless you typed something you didn't mean to type.
I wrote...
You cannot know anything. That is to say that you, prodigal, cannot know anything, not that nothing can be known.
prodical responded...
Neither Jim nor I are defending anything. Instead we are pointing out and have at this point proven that your own worldview is in fact in the very condition which you claim mine is in and that you therefore have no grounds upon which to give any opinion whatsoever about the verity of the Biblical worldview.
It apparently would be because Jim has shown you a few different times now that you cannot provide support for the verity of your own worldview. Your insistence that I do so is hypocritical.
Clete wrote...
As far as you know, you're a figment of someone else's imagination and you cannot prove otherwise.
prodical responded...
Again, I am not trying to prove anything accept the fact that you cannot prove anything, which has already been done. You saw it once, for a fleeting moment but then right away shut your eyes good and tight.
Clete wrote...
You are hopelessly adrift in a vast ocean of question begging and uncertainty even about the most basic things that you think you know
prodigal responded...
Okay then answer Jim's questions about how you verify what you think you know. How can you verify that what you think you are experiencing is really happening? You claim to believe what you can see with your own eyes? How do you know that your eyes are giving you accurate information? By what means would you go about verifying visual information?
On the contrary, I have concocted nothing. I did not write the Bible nor am I responsible for its contents.
I didn't say I don't take you seriously; you really should pay closer attention. What I said was that if you cannot validate your own worldview how can I take anything you say about the verity of mine seriously? How can you insist that I validate my worldview to you when you cannot validate your own to yourself?
I've denied nothing aside from your false accusations
What is there to admit? That I believe in the truth of the Bible? I admit that readily.
If you mean by this our exposure of your hypocrisy then you've got me on this one.
And I will not answer your questions about my worldview until you can convince me that you have a basis upon which to ask those questions.
This is utter nonsense. There has been no theories presented. Jim and I have asked you to justify your own presuppositions which you use to form your worldview which you are unable to do. The point wasn't simply to show that your worldview was inadequate but that your worldview is in fact what you claim our worldview to be, that being, logically incoherent and indefensible. Our goal was to expose not only to those reading this thread but to you as well the fact that your challenge is hypocritical.
The fact that this has been so clearly shown to you and that you are unwilling to acknowledge that fact and drop your worldview in favor of something different is proof that you are not interested in finding a logically coherent worldview but are instead interested only in attempting to discredit Jesus Christ and the Body of believers who following and worship Him.
Clete wrote...
To offer any thing for you to analyze concerning my worldview would be a practice in futility and would indeed be inane (or insane, which ever term you like).
prodigal responded...
If this weren't so pathetic it would be humorous. I have dodged nothing, there is literally nothing to dodge. Surely you cannot be this stupid. You propose to analyze my worldview via logic and reason and yet you have no means whatsoever to establish that logic and reason are even real! You cannot demonstrate by any logically coherent means that your brain is functioning properly (I'm not saying it isn't, only that you don't know whether it is or not) or that you even exist outside my own imagination. You cannot say with any certainty at all that anything that you think you know is real. For all you know you are in a Matrix and everything you think you know is nothing more than computer generated sensory stimulus implanted into your mind via a connection in your backside. I urge you to take the red pill prodigal, the red pill!!!
You have been cut to pieces prodigal, cut into itty-bitty pieces. You don't know it though because you just keep knocking back those blue pills.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited by a moderator:
prodigal,
I see know that I did misunderstand that one portion of your post.
My apologies.
It happened though because of the unusual way that you format your posts. Please read the info at the link that Turbo provided. It will teach you how to post so that it will be practically impossible for such misunderstandings to happen in the future.
With that having been said, the point I made still stands. If you cannot account for the verity of your own worldview you have no grounds upon which to challenge anyone else to do so because as I did indeed say...
"If you cannot know anything what is the point in having you critique the Biblical worldview? It's insane."
Resting in Him,
Clete
I see know that I did misunderstand that one portion of your post.
My apologies.
It happened though because of the unusual way that you format your posts. Please read the info at the link that Turbo provided. It will teach you how to post so that it will be practically impossible for such misunderstandings to happen in the future.
With that having been said, the point I made still stands. If you cannot account for the verity of your own worldview you have no grounds upon which to challenge anyone else to do so because as I did indeed say...
"If you cannot know anything what is the point in having you critique the Biblical worldview? It's insane."
Resting in Him,
Clete
Yes, he did.
It is truth, plain and simple. And truth is great, plain and simple. Even if my first statement were false, my second is not. As for its visibility, nothing is visible to those who will not see. The truth is not alone in this.
It's the position you hold, whether you worded it in that same way, or not. You have said, "If god exists, then why hasn't he proven himself to me?"
I am always in communication with God.
:darwinsm: Is that how you declare victory? Rather than critique my proof, you declare it non-existent? That likes a child pulling the covers over her head and declaring her mean big brother doesn't exist anymore.
Hilston asked "What are your grounds for trusting [your senses and reason]?"
It took you only three words to invalidate your view with question-begging. You can't just "see" if your senses and reason are trustworthy, wickwoman. Your "seeing" and your "reasoning" about seeing are suspect, remember? If you use your eyes to verify your eyesight, you beg the question and commit a logical fallacy.
Didn't you yourself say the following?:
"I believe Hilston himself said that he wasn't trying to say that you can't know anything. He was saying that Prodigal nor I can verify that our senses are in working order ..."
I don't need to prove that your faculties are not accurate. I'm just saying that you cannot verify that your senses are in working order.
And despite your understanding, you still make the following silly statement:
:kookoo:
You've never asked for my requirement for objective proof. I require objective proof that you can validate your reasoning faculties. You can't provide it without begging the question. You function according to a blind faith commitment to that which you have no means of testing, proving or calibrating to reality.
There is sufficient evidence in any single post you've addressed to me. You're fallacious thinking is amply demonstrated in this very post.
What are they?
My faith is coherent. Yours is blind.
Are you a journalist, wickwoman? I didn't say I don't need to understand. I said I don't need to understand your intellect to know that you have a incoherent worldview.
I provided the proof. You have to tell me why you don't like it.
I've shown you. The God of the Bible gives grounds to the general reliability of our senses and reason. Since you and prodigal reject the God of the Bible, you want to be autonomous; to be your own lawmakers. That is the sin of Adam, and that is what will send you to hell.
Not the God of the Bible. He says that living by your own rules results in death.
No, it's quite godless.
There you go. I don't envy you.
The verse is quite assuredly about you. Based on your espoused beliefs, your hearts are quite dark.
You already know Him, but you don't want Him the way He is. That's why you push the Bible away from you. Just as the Areopagans did on Mars Hill. They knew enough about Him to know that they wanted nothing to do with Him. So they built an altar to Him, but recreated Him in their own image. They named Him "The Unknown God." Paul said, "I declare Him unto you." But they pushed Him away. Paul described them as "willfully ignoring" God. That's you, wickwoman. You know Him, but you don't like Him, so you willfully ignore Him, recreating an "unknown God" created in your own image.
I've never said that.
Your inability or unwillingness to establish coherent parameters of evidence doesn't foster a well-informed mindset for me.
How about this: Your view provides no rational foundation on which to base your reliance upon your own senses and reason. Mine does.
I'm beginning to understand why this: :granite: is granite's smilie. He can't even answer a simple question, as, "If a Christian is what the Bible says it is, then were you, or were you not a Christian?" What a coward!
SOTK
New member
I've enjoyed reading this thread! Way to go Hilston and Clete! :thumb: I love the arguments! I realize I'm biased being a believer, but I have found these arguments pretty easy to follow. I don't understand why WW and Prodigal can't see the point. :doh:
Keep up the good work!
SOTK
Keep up the good work!
SOTK
Actually, crythvn (I think that's how you spell it), an anti-semite, bought it for me. She thought I was trying to hide my "true" self, or something, when she found out I was half-Jewish.
Brandon, I've said repeatedly that our definitions of what a "Christian" are don't line up. That's all. It's impossible to have a "personal relationship" with Jesus, in my opinion. There's more to being a "Christian" than that.
wickwoman
New member
Yes, this is how this conversation typically ends. At least you're predictable!
Let me explain it to you. What I did, was provide independent verification of my senses to you in my post. I told you about numerous incidents over a period of years where I thought I had sensed something with my own faculties, and that was independently verified by another human being. I would also note that the burden of proof is on you because you made the assertion that I couldn't prove my senses. And, you have done nothing but doubt my method. That's not independent proof. That's me presenting my proof and you saying it's not good enough. Independent proof would be you presenting something that brings my senses into question. You haven't done that. Your mere assertion that my senses can't be trusted would not hold up in a court of law because you have presented no evidence to back it up.
You can't just say it. You have to present evidence. I presented evidence that others corroborate my story on the good working order of my senses. You cannot just assert that I don't know. You must present evidence of why I cannot know. Your opinion on the matter is not good enough.
I can and I did provide it. I can and I have tested them.
More vain assertions but proof is absent.
What you need to understand is what my worldview is in order to assert that it is incoherent. And, since you've not researched the matter, you have no idea what my worldview is.
This is why I question your standards for proof. It appears you don't need much to build a very shaky foundation. Remember what the Bible says about a house built on sand?
What Paul said was "I declare him (the unknown God) to you." He didn't say, "I declare another god to you." Do you understand that Paul was merely telling them what he thought God's name was? That the people were already worshipping God?
My proof was independent and verified. Yours was vain assertions. So I have no reason to trust your worldview. And I have every reason to trust mine. My senses have been independently verified by many throughout my lifetime, therefore, I have every reason to trust them. And, since I've been given no reason to mistrust them other than the ravings of a guy who read a book on apologetics and decided to use TOL as his testing ground.