Author Topic: The OTF (for JST):  (Read 4332 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #58 on: May 14, 2012, 08:38:28 PM »
This is also a rule:

Trolling other forum members, grudge matches, soap-opera dramas, and other actions that staff members deem to be designed to disrupt threads or provoke hostile emotional responses from other forum members will not be tolerated.

Wow.. this is rich.

So you have visceral reaction to being asked to support your claims, to such a degree that it provokes a hostile emotional response from you and that's bad?

Are you really arguing this?

And you are trolling rather than letting the moderator do his job.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #59 on: May 14, 2012, 08:42:22 PM »
And you are trolling rather than letting the moderator do his job.

You involved me trying to imply that I didn't support a claim and I promptly supported that claim without any of the following:

1. Whining.
2. Claiming its my opinion
3. Blaming you for my inability to support it.
4. Posting a link and claiming my answer is there without explanation.
5. Saying you're rude.
etc. etc.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #60 on: May 14, 2012, 08:44:38 PM »
No, you actually only suported one of many claims I quoted.

And now I am waiting for Tinyal to support his.

Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline kin hell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5375
  • Darwins +152/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • - .... . .-. . /.. ... / -. --- / --. --- -.. ...
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #61 on: May 14, 2012, 08:45:25 PM »
Jst

G'day 

....perhaps it would be worth thinking about why you are unable to support your position with evidence.

There is something lacking in a belief system that can only say, "I believe, but I cannot/willnot discuss in detail the reasons for my belief".

The key to real honesty is to step back and examine the fact that you actually need to plead for our permission not to have to think about the fundamental source of your beliefs.

Belief without reason can only be via emotion.
You "feel" something to be true.

Having made an emotional investment in said belief, then it follows that the emotional investment  triggers emotional defences when such a belief is questioned.
That questioning can be from a outside party, and will trigger all sorts of emotional responses (all of which carefully act to ensure that you will not bring cold rational appraisement to your beliefs >because the loss of the belief is the betrayal of the emotional investment)

Too, the questioning can come from within yourself.

And here we see the internal mechanism that is the most insidious defence of the irrational by the irrational,  .......denial.

The emotional investment will not even let you get into a clear "unemotional" position from which you might be able to inspect the "reality" of your beliefs.

Just the thought of rationally appraising everything you base your beliefs upon, creates emotion.
It causes you to lie to yourself, to dodge, to not listen to your own internal dialogue that is there,  screaming behind the muffling gag "hold on, this doesn't make any sense".

So first, recognise the emotional investment for the deceitful and manipulative vested interest that it is.

Then rationally deconstruct it every time you recognise its effect.

Then decide rationally (free of feelings) whether you actually have a rational basis for what you believe, or whether you've accepted the fairy tales that we nonbelievers know you've been infected with.


"...but on a lighter note, demons were driven from a pig today in Gloucester."  Bill Bailey

all edits are for spelling or grammar unless specified otherwise

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #62 on: May 14, 2012, 08:46:56 PM »
No, you actually only suported one of many claims I quoted.

I supported all my claims.  I have frequently cited links, sources, and included explanations on dozens of posts in response to you.  Hell, I wrote essays on the subject in the questioning evolution thread, but that was when I thought you were being sincere.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #63 on: May 14, 2012, 08:49:30 PM »
How long are you going to keep lieing?

Quote
The arguments supporting slavery in the US were biblical justifications.  As were, and still are, the arguments against women's rights, gay rights, non-christian rights, etc.  Those who opposed slavery had very little in biblical arguments against slavery, just as those who support women's rights, gays, or non-christians face an uphill battle against a culture that tries to narrowly assume value is only arrived through a belief originating from biblical extremes.

In fact, it was commonly believed in much of Christendom that african americans were a product of the curse upon caine/ham.  This commonly held notion fell out of use towards the end of the 19th century with the advent of modern biology largely supported by contributions of Darwin.

You did not support all of these claims.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #64 on: May 14, 2012, 08:53:52 PM »
Quote from: kin hell
Belief without reason can only be via emotion.

I'm afraid I'll end up like Omen.  I'd rather believe a lie.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #65 on: May 14, 2012, 08:55:37 PM »
Jst

G'day 

....perhaps it would be worth thinking about why you are unable to support your position with evidence.

There is something lacking in a belief system that can only say, "I believe, but I cannot/willnot discuss in detail the reasons for my belief".

The key to real honesty is to step back and examine the fact that you actually need to plead for our permission not to have to think about the fundamental source of your beliefs.

Belief without reason can only be via emotion.
You "feel" something to be true.

Having made an emotional investment in said belief, then it follows that the emotional investment  triggers emotional defences when such a belief is questioned.
That questioning can be from a outside party, and will trigger all sorts of emotional responses (all of which carefully act to ensure that you will not bring cold rational appraisement to your beliefs >because the loss of the belief is the betrayal of the emotional investment)

Too, the questioning can come from within yourself.

And here we see the internal mechanism that is the most insidious defence of the irrational by the irrational,  .......denial.

The emotional investment will not even let you get into a clear "unemotional" position from which you might be able to inspect the "reality" of your beliefs.

Just the thought of rationally appraising everything you base your beliefs upon, creates emotion.
It causes you to lie to yourself, to dodge, to not listen to your own internal dialogue that is there,  screaming behind the muffling gag "hold on, this doesn't make any sense".

So first, recognise the emotional investment for the deceitful and manipulative vested interest that it is.

Then rationally deconstruct it every time you recognise its effect.

Then decide rationally (free of feelings) whether you actually have a rational basis for what you believe, or whether you've accepted the fairy tales that we nonbelievers know you've been infected with.

This is good advice though.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline kin hell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5375
  • Darwins +152/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • - .... . .-. . /.. ... / -. --- / --. --- -.. ...
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #66 on: May 14, 2012, 08:55:55 PM »
Quote
Belief without reason can only be via emotion.

I'm afraid I'll end up like Omen.  I'd rather believe a lie.

....that is a remarkably dismissive reply to an honest approach from me to you.
"...but on a lighter note, demons were driven from a pig today in Gloucester."  Bill Bailey

all edits are for spelling or grammar unless specified otherwise

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #67 on: May 14, 2012, 08:56:55 PM »
I made another reply.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #68 on: May 14, 2012, 08:57:14 PM »
How long are you going to keep lieing?

Quote
In fact, it was commonly believed in much of Christendom that african americans were a product of the curse upon caine/ham.  This commonly held notion fell out of use towards the end of the 19th century with the advent of modern biology largely supported by contributions of Darwin.

You did not support all of these claims.

Easy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain#Adoption_by_Protestant_groups

The split between the Northern and Southern Baptist organizations arose over slavery and the education of slaves. At the time of the split, the Southern Baptist group used the curse of Cain as a justification for slavery. Some 19th and 20th century Baptist ministers in the southern United States taught that there were two separate heavens; one for blacks, and one for whites.[16] Baptists officially[citation needed] taught or practiced various forms of racial segregation well into the mid-to-late-20th century, though members of all races were accepted at worship services.[17] In 1995, the Southern Baptist Convention officially denounced racism and apologized for its past defense of slavery.[18]
The curse of Cain was used to support a ban on ordaining blacks to most Protestant clergies until the 1960s in both the U.S. and Europe. The majority of Christian Churches in the world, the ancient churches, including the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox churches, Anglican churches, and Oriental Orthodox churches, did not recognize these interpretations and did not participate in the religious movement to support them. Certain Catholic dioceses in the Southern United States did adopt a policy of not ordaining blacks to oversee, administer the Sacraments to, or accept confessions from white parishioners. This policy was not based on a curse of Cain teaching, but was justified by any possible perceptions of having slaves rule over their masters. However, this was not approved of by the Pope or any papal teaching.[19]
Pentecostals In the earliest years of the Pentecostal revivals, notably Azusa Street in Los Angeles, 1906-09 the mixing of the races was encouraged, and Jim Crow laws were defied. This was radical and broke new ground. It continued until 1924 when an official new Pentecostal denomination emerged, but many Pentecostal groups continued to allow mixing of the races in their services. There had been an earlier tradition of encouraging the races to mix in revival meetings going back to the Cane Ridge revival of 1801, and Methodist preachers often continued this approach.(See Robert S. Ellwood Jr. One Way: The Jesus movement and its meaning. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.) 1973, pg. 40-42).
Many Protestant groups in America had supported the notion that black slavery, oppression, and African colonization was the result of God's curse on people with black skin or people of African descent through Cain[citation needed] or through the curse of Ham, and some churches practiced racial segregation as late as the 1990s[citation needed]. Today, however, official acceptance and practice of the doctrine among "Protestant" organizations is limited almost exclusively to churches connected to white supremacy, such as the Aryan World Church and the New Christian Crusade Church.


As well as:

Historically, some Christians have interpreted the Biblical passages so that the "mark" is thought to be part of the "curse". In the 19th century Latter Day Saints (known as 'Mormons') commonly assumed that Cain's "mark" was black skin [6], and that Cain's descendants were black and still under Cain's mark.

Oh what's that?

According to scholars, early interpretations of the Bible in Syriac Christianity combined the "curse" with the "mark", and interpreted the curse of Cain as black skin.[10] Some argue that this may have originated from rabbinic texts, which interpreted a passage in the Book of Genesis ("And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell") as implying that Cain underwent a permanent change in skin color.[11]

Did you really think I couldn't do this?

Btw, what exactly does it make you that you can't be bothered to support ANY claim, yet out of the dozens of posts where I have supported my own claims.. I fail to do once.. and suddenly it becomes an issue for you...let's see.. there is a word.. :

HYPOCRITE AND A LIAR.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #69 on: May 14, 2012, 08:59:04 PM »
Quote from: kin hell
Belief without reason can only be via emotion.

I'm afraid I'll end up like Omen.  I'd rather believe a lie.

A little OCD and desire for intellectual honesty hasn't hurt anyone.  Lying, for the sake of an irrational emotional dependency has.

Why would you rather believe a lie?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline kin hell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5375
  • Darwins +152/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • - .... . .-. . /.. ... / -. --- / --. --- -.. ...
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #70 on: May 14, 2012, 09:02:05 PM »
amazing the change 18 seconds make,

but even your

Quote
This is good advice though.

doesn't address my post in any real way.

If you were to even slightly perceive any truth in my description of the emotional investment prison I believe your thoughts to be held by, then you have to realise just how much you will not want to take on board what I have said.

You will emotionally shy from it, while paying it lipservice.

You will not adopt a stringent methodological application of such appraisal, you will instead acquiese to some sort of "feelings" that "you're OK as it is".
"...but on a lighter note, demons were driven from a pig today in Gloucester."  Bill Bailey

all edits are for spelling or grammar unless specified otherwise

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #71 on: May 14, 2012, 09:02:21 PM »
Quote
HYPOCRITE AND A LIAR.

You mean because you just showed you did in fact lie when you said you had supported  everything you said and then you call me a liar.

Yes that makes you both of those.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #72 on: May 14, 2012, 09:04:03 PM »
Jehovah Witness

"The negro race is supposed to be descended from Ham, whose special degradation is mentioned in Gen. 9:22, 25. (From: Zion's Watch Tower, August 1, 1898, p. 230)

http://voices.yahoo.com/racism-jehovah-witness-watchtower-104975.html
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #73 on: May 14, 2012, 09:05:29 PM »
Quote
HYPOCRITE AND A LIAR.

You mean because you just showed you did in fact lie when you said you had supported  everything you said and then you call me a liar.

Yes that makes you both of those.

Mistakenly not seeing one paragraph is not a lie, obviously.  You have willfully refused to support your claims, I have never done so.

Clearly, you're just trying to equivocate, your behavior is transparent JST.  This isn't very 'christian' of you, well.. if you actually believe that christian ideology teaches you to be 'good', I however think this is perfectly christian of you.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #74 on: May 14, 2012, 09:09:04 PM »
amazing the change 18 seconds make,

but even your

Quote
This is good advice though.

doesn't address my post in any real way.

If you were to even slightly perceive any truth in my description of the emotional investment prison I believe your thoughts to be held by, then you have to realise just how much you will not want to take on board what I have said.

You will emotionally shy from it, while paying it lipservice.

You will not adopt a stringent methodological application of such appraisal, you will instead acquiese to some sort of "feelings" that "you're OK as it is".

No I really do mean it.  It's just hard to be nice when you're constantly being provoked.  I apologize. 

At any rate, I do do this.  Sometimes I start feeling doubt, but then when I stop and actually meditate on the things I've read and the things I've seen then the doubt is removed.  It just doesn't work for me the other way around. 

I mean when I read the Bible and it's description of the Last Days and I look around I perceive that it's description is becoming more and more accurate.  How can I deny it?
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #75 on: May 14, 2012, 09:10:45 PM »
No I really do mean it.  It's just hard to be nice when you're constantly being provoked.  I apologize. 

Why is it hard for you to be nice when you're asked to support your claims?

Why are you so insecure about your beliefs that you consider it a provocation?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #76 on: May 14, 2012, 09:14:07 PM »
Jst- I think that Grimm asked some excellent questions in the op, and I'm genuinely interested in your answer.  Kin Hell also posed some great questions.

I know Omen is pissing you off right now, but he did ask a very interesting question about JW and race.  I'd be really interested in hearing your response. 

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #77 on: May 14, 2012, 09:27:47 PM »
Jst- I think that Grimm asked some excellent questions in the op, and I'm genuinely interested in your answer.  Kin Hell also posed some great questions.

I know Omen is pissing you off right now, but he did ask a very interesting question about JW and race.  I'd be really interested in hearing your response.

I think I did address much of Grimm's post.  Is there something I missed?

Speaking of Jehovah's Witnesses and racism I don't know.  I'm currently reading "Crisis of Conscience" written by an ex member of their governing body which probably contains the most troublesome matters in their history.  Maybe it will talk about that.  My approach really isn't a one sided one.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #78 on: May 14, 2012, 09:29:41 PM »
It's just that there's not a lot going on around here but brow beating.  It seems I can't even test my beliefs because first I have to prove what they are.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #79 on: May 14, 2012, 09:29:47 PM »
I mean when I read the Bible and it's description of the Last Days and I look around I perceive that it's description is becoming more and more accurate.  How can I deny it?

When did you have a rational basis of evidence for which to conclude it?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #80 on: May 14, 2012, 09:30:37 PM »
It's just that there's not a lot going on around here but brow beating.  It seems I can't even test my beliefs because first I have to prove what they are.

Asking you to support your beliefs based on evidence isn't a satisfactory test of your beliefs?

Why do you interpret questions that request you to support your own claims as brow beating?
« Last Edit: May 14, 2012, 09:33:50 PM by Omen »
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1331
  • Darwins +21/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #81 on: May 14, 2012, 09:39:04 PM »
I mean when I read the Bible and it's description of the Last Days and I look around I perceive that it's description is becoming more and more accurate.  How can I deny it?

When did you have a rational basis of evidence for which to conclude it?

That depends on what is your definition of "rational basis".

Quote
Asking you to support your beliefs based on evidence isn't a satisfactory test of your beliefs?

Support for my beliefs comes from the Bible and this is where I keep getting brow beat.  My claim is "this is what the Bible says".  Providing evidence for the claims the Bible makes is a seperate matter.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #82 on: May 14, 2012, 09:40:55 PM »
Jst- I think that Grimm asked some excellent questions in the op, and I'm genuinely interested in your answer.  Kin Hell also posed some great questions.

I know Omen is pissing you off right now, but he did ask a very interesting question about JW and race.  I'd be really interested in hearing your response.

I think I did address much of Grimm's post.  Is there something I missed?


I think you did.  He asked you if you could "step outside of your faith" and look at it.  And maybe the answer is that you can't. 

You did share your personal experiences with people outside of your faith, and i enjoyed those stories.  And you went on to say that this forum is really your first experience with atheists. 

But would it be possible to step outside of it and look at it critically?  You have certainly heard many criticisms here of much of the Biblical content that you base your belief systems on.  And I think that you have some reflex reactions to those criticisms.  You often say that you don't know, which is an answer I respect.  I think that it takes strength to say that you don't know.  Other times, you seem to answer a somewhat different question, that falls closer to your comfort zone.

I think that many of us are genuinely curious about what goes on inside of your mind and your relationship to your belief system.  But it is almost like you have a protective layer that activates when questions are too invasive.

Could you step outside and look at your beliefs? 

Offline GodlessHeathen

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
  • Darwins +9/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Absence of evidence is not evidence of existence.
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #83 on: May 14, 2012, 09:42:11 PM »
I mean when I read the Bible and it's description of the Last Days and I look around I perceive that it's description is becoming more and more accurate.  How can I deny it?

Perhaps I can present an example of what we mean by presenting evidence. Here is an excerpt from an article I posted when I was a Christian and moderated a prophecy Bible study and discussion site:

Quote
Revelation 13:16-18:
16And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Encyclopedia of body adornment, Part 46, p. 316, Library of Congress:

The Romans sometimes marked slaves with the name of their owner. Prisoners of war and soldiers aliked were tattooed with the name of the emperor.

Hand-book of Bible manners and customs, p. 302 James F. Freeman, ,  (http://books. google.com/ books?id= EFwdAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA302&lpg=PA302&dq=%22The+Romans+ marked+their+ soldiers+ in+the+hand% 22&source=bl&ots=ZG6DnRG- h9&sig=13uZuMrWTWzo2Xw dd_WsRJIFHs0&hl=en&ei=yWqZSqXlNoviMY39 kbcF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=%22The%20Romans% 20marked% 20their%20soldie rs%20in%20the% 20hand%22&f=false):

The Romans marked their soldiers in the hand and their slaves in the forehead.

http://en.allexpert s.com/q/Seventh- Day-Adventists- 2318/2009/ 3/think-Mark- Beast.htm:

In John's day it was popular for Romans to be tattooed with a name or symbol of whom they belonged to. For example, soldiers would receive the mark on their hand of the name of their General. Slaves were marked with the name of their master. Some Romans would receive the mark (the name or symbol representation) a god to whom they were particularly devoted. So John warned Christians of his day that if they worshipped the Roman emperor, the beast, they would receive his mark and belong to him. All those so marked, John warned, would be eternally damned.

Article cited in: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apostolic_partial_preterists/message/10

Notice that I first present the Bible text for which I am arguing my point, essentially that the "Mark of the Beast" prophecy was fulfilled in first century history. I then followed it with outside sources that show the first century practice of marking Roman soldiers in their hands and slaves on their foreheads.
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" (Christopher Hitchens).

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #84 on: May 14, 2012, 09:42:43 PM »
You did not support all of these claims.

Then perhaps you should actually say which of the claims you felt he didn't support and why. As opposed to just a blanket statement that tells him nothing. As it stands this comes off as you just wanting to dismiss everything he said out of hand because you don't want to actually think about it.

And now I am waiting for Tinyal to support his.

You did not support all of these claims.

Tinyal needs to support his claims now that he's been asked as well and I'm sure he will as soon as he gets the opportunity.

However it in no way takes you off the hook. You still haven't supported one single thing you've ever said. So DO NOT start whining about others and what they aren't doing or are required to do.


It seems I can't even test my beliefs because first I have to prove what they are.

Testing your beliefs IS proving what they are. Without proof you haven't actually tested anything.

So let's test them then. This has been asked of you before.

You base your belief on biblical scripture. So where is your evidence that the scripture is telling the truth?
"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #85 on: May 14, 2012, 09:44:33 PM »
When did you have a rational basis of evidence for which to conclude it?

That depends on what is your definition of "rational basis".

In a manner that can be differentiated from make believe, a basis for distinguishing the veracity of your religious claims from the religious claims of someone else, and evidence that follows a congruent logical inference from A to B to C.

Quote
Quote
Asking you to support your beliefs based on evidence isn't a satisfactory test of your beliefs?

Support for my beliefs comes from the Bible and this is where I keep getting brow beat.  My claim is "this is what the Bible says".  Providing evidence for the claims the Bible makes is a seperate matter.

No, it is the only matter.  Plus, you also can't be bothered to support what the bible does claim, because you immediately abandon the conversation after trying to do so and you don't get the responses you want.  As what happened in objective morality.

Plus, you continuously make assertions as if they were true regarding reality, intermingling them with your religious claims.  You're just trying to insert a new pleaded ( fallacy ) qualification, constantly trying to equivocate because you can't be bothered to support any claim you do make.

Why shouldn't we expect you to honestly be able to defend your claims?

Why do you want a conversation where you can make up anything at random and never be expected to reasonably support what you're claiming?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: The OTF (for JST):
« Reply #86 on: May 14, 2012, 09:46:10 PM »
Support for my beliefs comes from the Bible and this is where I keep getting brow beat.  My claim is "this is what the Bible says".  Providing evidence for the claims the Bible makes is a seperate matter.

What you keep ignoring and people are trying to point out is that every person who believes in what the bible says goes "this is what the bible says". What you are being asked to do is prove why your version of "This is what the Bible says" is anymore valid than another persons version of "This is what the bible says".

And no, proving evidence for the claims is not a separate matter. Especially since you keep using those claims in your arguments. So where is your evidence?
"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.