Author Topic: A Basic Question  (Read 4216 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Defiance

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 663
  • Darwins +26/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Can't be mad at something that doesn't exist.
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #116 on: June 22, 2014, 09:25:58 PM »
"Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword." (Mt 26:52)

Exactly which part of that is unclear?

“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Mt 10:34)

http://biblehub.com/matthew/10-34.htm

Tough religion, that.  Once again cue apologetics.
Edit:  I already know the excuse, Jst - different sword meaning, different context - been there done that, as a Christian.  You can use the bible to excuse any and every action.
Don't forget "it's just a metaphor!" Or "it's a parable!"
"God is just and fair"
*God kills 2.5 million of people he KNEW would turn out like this in the flood*
*Humanity turns bad again, when God knew it would*
We should feel guilty for this.

Online eh!

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1330
  • Darwins +48/-30
  • Gender: Male
  • jimmy hendrix is jesus
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #117 on: June 22, 2014, 09:44:40 PM »
Fault is my fat fingers on touch phone.


for JWB ti not acknowledge the censored. edited, politically priotised way the bable was put together over hundreds of years with hundreds of current versions is plain dishonest.

Who decided what got left out, how were decisions made.
Signature goes here...

Online nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6525
  • Darwins +852/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #118 on: June 22, 2014, 09:56:21 PM »
Fault is my fat fingers on touch phone.


for JWB ti not acknowledge the censored. edited, politically priotised way the bable was put together over hundreds of years with hundreds of current versions is plain dishonest.

Who decided what got left out, how were decisions made.

Also translations from ancient languages with very different cultural meanings from what we think in the 21st century.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #119 on: June 22, 2014, 10:07:03 PM »


The Bible is very clear. 

Really? So say the people who used it to support slavery. It's as if it WASN'T clear, because it is self contradictory and open to interpretation to support every single possible position. Those quotes I used support war, you used other quote to support peace. Hence, unclear.

If you can support any position with a document, it isn't clear, it just a Rorschach test with political implications.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2014, 10:31:19 PM by Hatter23 »
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #120 on: June 22, 2014, 10:33:26 PM »

I never said there weren't similarities with other religions.  I said there are no similarities with the tooth fairy, "my favorite fairytale".  My reasons for not accepting Hinduism are not the same reasons I have for not accepting the tooth fairy.  I also would not call Hinduism a fairytale.  Hinduism is deeply steeped into spiritism.  I don't think spiritism is a fairytale.

The only demonstrable difference between a fairy tale and a religion is the number of people who currently believe in said story.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #121 on: June 23, 2014, 12:03:29 AM »
• "Historical Evidence" - What historical writing can count as "evidence" of claims to the supernatural or miraculous? Again, these are just claims of hear-say, and claims (written down or otherwise) are not evidence that a deity exists. They are evidence that someone believed stuff and made claims. Anyone can make claims by writing things down. That doesn't magically turn their claims into evidence - especially since we know that humans create religions and make up fictional and fantastical stories for various reasons.

That's true of almost all history.  Do you similarly disbelieve all other histories that you don't have concrete evidence for?  Using this reasoning I can say Christopher Colombus never existed.  Using this reasoning all sorts of historical claims should be simply dismissed.

Quote
• "Prophetic Evidence" - And again you have the same problem. This is the, "because I say so" fallacy (ad hoc). Merely claiming that some alleged person of history (far removed) was a "prophet" (or that "a prophesy was fulfilled) is not evidence. It is a CLAIM. You will need actual evidence to backup that claim. Need you be reminded that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? Mere claims are not evidence. In this case you are claiming that prophesy was fulfilled (Jews disagreeing with you) and you have not demonstrated that 1) any claim was a "prophesy" or 2) that such a prophesy was "fulfilled by Yahweh". Vague utterance which can be re-interpreted to suit confirmation bias after the fact are not evidences of fulfilled prophesy. They are evidences that someone made claims.

Here is one everyone is seeing fulfilled and there is nothing vague about it.  "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a testimony unto all the nations; and then shall the end come." (Mt 24:14)

Quote
• "Answered Prayer" IS A CLAIM!!! You need actual evidence to demonstrate the cause of a given phenomena. Did you not know that correlation does not equal causation? Anybody can SAY their prayer was "answered" but their saying so doesn't make it so. This is, again, the "because I say so" fallacy (begging the question). So too, counting the "hits" and ignoring the misses is called confirmation bias. So merely claiming that someone was "healed by Jesus" and then ignoring the counter evidence when someone dies is irrational and dishonest. Still, the claim is not evidence.

I'm afraid not.  To you it's a claim.  To me it's fact.  Because you've not had answered prayers does not mean noone has had answered prayer.

Quote
• "Personal Testimonies" are (once again) CLAIMS. You need actual evidence to demonstrate that these claims (like "Jesus healed me") are factual. But you don't have that. You just have, "Because I believe it and I say so..." Again, anyone can make claims. You need sound evidence to backup those claims.

Why do I need to show anyone evidence at all?  I don't.  I only need to be convinced myself.  If I don't reproduce results for your observation and testing that doesn't change the facts.

Quote
• "The Perfect Moral Quality of Christians" is yet another CLAIM. So you've basically made claim after claim after claim after claim, and then attempted to ASSERT that your claims are evidence. They are not. Claims are not evidence and if you actually care whether or not your beliefs are true you will begin by understanding and applying the difference. In this instance, anyone can merely CLAIM that "Christians are morally perfect" and then (when given a counter example) say that person was not a "true Christian", or use some other spin/rationalization tactic. But that just shows how much this claim is NOT "evidence of Jehovah". It is, instead, a step toward confirmation bias. Also, it is irrational because it commits the No True Scotsman fallacy. If "true Christians" can and do "sin" then they are not morally perfect. The bible itself is not morally perfect, since your own alleged Yahweh violates it's own rules throughout (slavery, genocide, infanticide, human sacrifice, rape, etc). So on two accounts this claim fails as "evidence of Jehovah".

I didn't say Christians were morally perfect.  I said the Bible teaches perfect morality.  Every moral principle in the Bible given for Christians is infallible.  If they are applied they will bring benefits.  If you don't believe that then find one biblical principle that is not infallible.  If they are infallible then they are evidence of divine authorship.

Quote
This stuff you are claiming is not even ordinary evidence (as you would require of a salesman at your door selling cheap credit cards or making extraordinary claims about magic potions and then asking for your money). So it's really disingenuous of you to merely assert these things as evidence when you yourself wouldn't accept such tactics if a salesman, or someone else from another religion, attempted to use these types of arguments on you. Anyone can SPIN and rationalize their way into the continuance of believing nonsense. Every religion does that. It's irrational when Muslims do it, when New Agers do it, and it's irrational when you do

I am not here to convince you.  I pointed out that one cannot say for a fact there is no evidence for God.  That is my argument.  I offered the above to just not be obstinate.  My actual argument here is that it's not a fact that there is no evidence for God and noone has proved it is a fact.
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: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #122 on: June 23, 2014, 12:07:01 AM »
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Mt 10:34)

So?  That doesn't in any way change the instructions given to Christians, not even little bit.  That is not even an instruction.
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: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #123 on: June 23, 2014, 12:11:06 AM »
Fault is my fat fingers on touch phone.


for JWB ti not acknowledge the censored. edited, politically priotised way the bable was put together over hundreds of years with hundreds of current versions is plain dishonest.

Who decided what got left out, how were decisions made.

To not agree with you does not make me dishonest.  Ridicule is often used in place of an actual argument.  If that's all you've got, go find someone else.  I'm done.
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: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #124 on: June 23, 2014, 12:14:40 AM »


The Bible is very clear. 

Really? So say the people who used it to support slavery. It's as if it WASN'T clear, because it is self contradictory and open to interpretation to support every single possible position. Those quotes I used support war, you used other quote to support peace. Hence, unclear.

If you can support any position with a document, it isn't clear, it just a Rorschach test with political implications.

I posted passages instructing Christians to do good things.  So I don't know what you're talking about "support every single position".  You haven't posted a single scripture instructing Christians to do anything bad.
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: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #125 on: June 23, 2014, 12:15:43 AM »

I never said there weren't similarities with other religions.  I said there are no similarities with the tooth fairy, "my favorite fairytale".  My reasons for not accepting Hinduism are not the same reasons I have for not accepting the tooth fairy.  I also would not call Hinduism a fairytale.  Hinduism is deeply steeped into spiritism.  I don't think spiritism is a fairytale.

The only demonstrable difference between a fairy tale and a religion is the number of people who currently believe in said story.

So why are you even speaking with me?  I'm not here to convince you.
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 Defiance

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 663
  • Darwins +26/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Can't be mad at something that doesn't exist.
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #126 on: June 23, 2014, 05:31:43 AM »
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Mt 10:34)

So?  That doesn't in any way change the instructions given to Christians, not even little bit.  That is not even an instruction.
I didn't say this quote.
"God is just and fair"
*God kills 2.5 million of people he KNEW would turn out like this in the flood*
*Humanity turns bad again, when God knew it would*
We should feel guilty for this.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #127 on: June 23, 2014, 08:50:02 AM »


The Bible is very clear. 

Really? So say the people who used it to support slavery. It's as if it WASN'T clear, because it is self contradictory and open to interpretation to support every single possible position. Those quotes I used support war, you used other quote to support peace. Hence, unclear.

If you can support any position with a document, it isn't clear, it just a Rorschach test with political implications.

I posted passages instructing Christians to do good things.  So I don't know what you're talking about "support every single position".  You haven't posted a single scripture instructing Christians to do anything bad.

Except for say the one I actually did. Except for the one people actually in history used to support slavery, except for the ones people used to support wars, except for the ones people actually used to support oppression. Just because it just happens to not match your interpretation is irrelevant. I'm talking actual history, not what the good angel says in you head.

As usual, you are avoiding reality in order to support the one in your head.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #128 on: June 23, 2014, 09:07:59 AM »

I never said there weren't similarities with other religions.  I said there are no similarities with the tooth fairy, "my favorite fairytale".  My reasons for not accepting Hinduism are not the same reasons I have for not accepting the tooth fairy.  I also would not call Hinduism a fairytale.  Hinduism is deeply steeped into spiritism.  I don't think spiritism is a fairytale.

The only demonstrable difference between a fairy tale and a religion is the number of people who currently believe in said story.

So why are you even speaking with me?  I'm not here to convince you.

I am speaking with you to just dance intellectual circles around you and show how superior my position is to your through you continued failures. Since it would be detrimental to do this with the deluded fools that surround me in my real life, impolite to go onto Christian forums and do it, I do it here, for those sorry saps like yourself who are asking for it. Laughing up my sleeve at your continued engaging in falsehoods, dodges, fallacies, and your utter inability to understand the difference between what is in your head and reality. Smirking at your continued inability to comprehend the difference between claims and evidence, as well as your foolish and clumsy attempt to avoid the fact the only demonstrable difference between a fairy tale and a religion is the number of people who currently(or historically) believe in said story.

And on occasion when I can mop the floor mentally with the likes of you, just like nearly every atheist vs. theist debate; some fence sitter watching realizes, "Wow, the Emperor really has no clothes." Because of the democratization of information, a higher and higher percentage of the population becomes atheists every day. Slowly but surely the concept of a trans dimensional alien space wizard named Jehovah and all the detriment to society that belief brings will be consigned to the trash heap of history along with slavery, demons causing illness, phrenology, monarchy, dogmatic Communism, and race based oppression.

The end of religion does not create a utopia by any means. However one thing that drives men to kill each other that is completely imaginary, would be eliminated. One completely imaginary thing that gives men the bullheaded courage that their way is the only way, that those the oppose them are irredeemable. One imaginary thing that puts shackles on the ankles of progress, and allows people to sanctify there indifference to the plight of others would be gone.

In essence, the world wouldn't be a perfect place, but it would be a better place.

 
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #129 on: June 23, 2014, 09:39:59 AM »

I never said there weren't similarities with other religions.  I said there are no similarities with the tooth fairy, "my favorite fairytale".  My reasons for not accepting Hinduism are not the same reasons I have for not accepting the tooth fairy.  I also would not call Hinduism a fairytale.  Hinduism is deeply steeped into spiritism.  I don't think spiritism is a fairytale.

The only demonstrable difference between a fairy tale and a religion is the number of people who currently believe in said story.

So why are you even speaking with me?  I'm not here to convince you.

I am speaking with you to just dance intellectual circles around you and show how superior my position is to your through you continued failures. Since it would be detrimental to do this with the deluded fools that surround me in my real life, impolite to go onto Christian forums and do it, I do it here, for those sorry saps like yourself who are asking for it. Laughing up my sleeve at your continued engaging in falsehoods, dodges, fallacies, and your utter inability to understand the difference between what is in your head and reality. Smirking at your continued inability to comprehend the difference between claims and evidence, as well as your foolish and clumsy attempt to avoid the fact the only demonstrable difference between a fairy tale and a religion is the number of people who currently(or historically) believe in said story.

And on occasion when I can mop the floor mentally with the likes of you, just like nearly every atheist vs. theist debate; some fence sitter watching realizes, "Wow, the Emperor really has no clothes." Because of the democratization of information, a higher and higher percentage of the population becomes atheists every day. Slowly but surely the concept of a trans dimensional alien space wizard named Jehovah and all the detriment to society that belief brings will be consigned to the trash heap of history along with slavery, demons causing illness, phrenology, monarchy, dogmatic Communism, and race based oppression.

The end of religion does not create a utopia by any means. However one thing that drives men to kill each other that is completely imaginary, would be eliminated. One completely imaginary thing that gives men the bullheaded courage that their way is the only way, that those the oppose them are irredeemable. One imaginary thing that puts shackles on the ankles of progress, and allows people to sanctify there indifference to the plight of others would be gone.

In essence, the world wouldn't be a perfect place, but it would be a better place.

Then you need to try harder.  You've yet to provide instructions from the Bible that were given to Christians to do anything bad.
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 screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +659/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #130 on: June 23, 2014, 10:05:06 AM »
Then you need to try harder.  You've yet to provide instructions from the Bible that were given to Christians to do anything bad.

Interesting that you say "xians" and not "people".  Do jews not count?  Is this a loophole for the (alleged) genocides of various Canaanite tribes by the hebrews at the behest of their god?  Or do you think genocide was a good thing?[1]

Or are you just saying the bible doesn't say people should do bad things, and all the bad things people do (and justify with the bible) is people misusing the bible?

I'm not quite clear where you stand.

 1. please note, I do not think that ever actually happened.  Archaeology does not support it.  But the fact remains, it is a claim put forth in the bible and your ilk are often quick to acquit the Hebrews and yhwh of moral wrong doing by saying they had it coming.  Which is immoral and ridiculous.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Online 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4595
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #131 on: June 23, 2014, 11:07:30 AM »


The Bible is very clear. 

Really? So say the people who used it to support slavery. It's as if it WASN'T clear, because it is self contradictory and open to interpretation to support every single possible position. Those quotes I used support war, you used other quote to support peace. Hence, unclear.

If you can support any position with a document, it isn't clear, it just a Rorschach test with political implications.

I posted passages instructing Christians to do good things.  So I don't know what you're talking about "support every single position".  You haven't posted a single scripture instructing Christians to do anything bad.
why is there passages in the Bible telling Christian/Jews to do evil things?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #132 on: June 23, 2014, 11:40:58 AM »
Then you need to try harder.  You've yet to provide instructions from the Bible that were given to Christians to do anything bad.

Interesting that you say "xians" and not "people".  Do jews not count?  Is this a loophole for the (alleged) genocides of various Canaanite tribes by the hebrews at the behest of their god?  Or do you think genocide was a good thing?[1]
 1. please note, I do not think that ever actually happened.  Archaeology does not support it.  But the fact remains, it is a claim put forth in the bible and your ilk are often quick to acquit the Hebrews and yhwh of moral wrong doing by saying they had it coming.  Which is immoral and ridiculous.

Because I don't live in ancient times.  Christians were given their own set of instructions to follow.  These are the instructions I am concerned with. 

Quote
Or are you just saying the bible doesn't say people should do bad things, and all the bad things people do (and justify with the bible) is people misusing the bible?

I'm not saying anything about how other people have used the Bible.  Make up your own mind.  I'm saying that nowhere does the Bible instruct Christians to do anything bad.  To the contrary, it instructs them to actively do good things.  And I'm saying that the moral principles given to Christians are perfect and if applied would solve most of the world's problems.  Christians are instructed to, "follow after peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no man shall see the Lord:  looking carefully lest there be any man that falleth short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you , and thereby the many be defiled" (Hebrews 12:14,15)



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: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #133 on: June 23, 2014, 11:47:42 AM »


The Bible is very clear. 

Really? So say the people who used it to support slavery. It's as if it WASN'T clear, because it is self contradictory and open to interpretation to support every single possible position. Those quotes I used support war, you used other quote to support peace. Hence, unclear.

If you can support any position with a document, it isn't clear, it just a Rorschach test with political implications.

I posted passages instructing Christians to do good things.  So I don't know what you're talking about "support every single position".  You haven't posted a single scripture instructing Christians to do anything bad.
why is there passages in the Bible telling Christian/Jews to do evil things?

I'm not talking about Jews.  I'm talking about Christians.  Where are the passages instructing Christians to do evil things?
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 median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #134 on: June 23, 2014, 12:12:07 PM »
• "Historical Evidence" - What historical writing can count as "evidence" of claims to the supernatural or miraculous? Again, these are just claims of hear-say, and claims (written down or otherwise) are not evidence that a deity exists. They are evidence that someone believed stuff and made claims. Anyone can make claims by writing things down. That doesn't magically turn their claims into evidence - especially since we know that humans create religions and make up fictional and fantastical stories for various reasons.

That's true of almost all history.  Do you similarly disbelieve all other histories that you don't have concrete evidence for?  Using this reasoning I can say Christopher Colombus never existed.  Using this reasoning all sorts of historical claims should be simply dismissed.

Once again, you are drawing a false analogy - attempting to compare claims to the supernatural/miraculous and claims which are NOT. NO textual accounts are sufficient to establish that a miracle or violation of the laws of known physics occurred, period. I don't care if hundreds of people make claims. That isn't even ordinary evidence, let alone extraordinary. Get real. You are arbitrarily (and hypocritically) attempting to lower the bar so as only to let your assumed theology through the door. Historical documents talking about the miraculous are evidence that people made claims about the miraculous. We have lots of demonstrable evidence today of people living and doing things, building stuff, and inventing. We DO NOT have any demonstrable evidence today to backup supernatural claims. What we have today are arguments from ignorance saying, "I can't possibly understand how X thing could have happened without it being God. So it must have been God." That is not "evidence of Jehovah". It is more claims with spin and it is irrational (argument from ignorance/incredulity).

Quote
• "Prophetic Evidence" - And again you have the same problem. This is the, "because I say so" fallacy (ad hoc). Merely claiming that some alleged person of history (far removed) was a "prophet" (or that "a prophesy was fulfilled) is not evidence. It is a CLAIM. You will need actual evidence to backup that claim. Need you be reminded that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? Mere claims are not evidence. In this case you are claiming that prophesy was fulfilled (Jews disagreeing with you) and you have not demonstrated that 1) any claim was a "prophesy" or 2) that such a prophesy was "fulfilled by Yahweh". Vague utterance which can be re-interpreted to suit confirmation bias after the fact are not evidences of fulfilled prophesy. They are evidences that someone made claims.

Here is one everyone is seeing fulfilled and there is nothing vague about it.  "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a testimony unto all the nations; and then shall the end come." (Mt 24:14)

If I order a hamburger and the waiter brings it to me, is that a prophesy? 1. The "gospel" is not known in the whole world by all nations. So the claim is false. But even if your beliefs were preached in all the world all this would prove is a self-fulfilling claim - not a prophesy. If I say, "I'm going to start a business and make a million dollars!", and then I make the million dollars, am I now a true prophet? You are being selectively gullible, with confirmation bias. People making predictions and calling them prophesies doesn't make them prophesies. "I prophesy there will be more wars!" Are you going to believe I'm from god if another couple wars happen? In order to have a prophesy you need a clear (not vague) foretelling of the future which CANNOT be interpreted as any other time or in any other way. It must be of only one specific moment in time and must be falsifiable. With the bible you do not have this, you have vague utterances that can (and have been) re-interpreted by every other religious sect to mean what they want it to mean. That is nowhere near actual fulfilled prophesy.

So too, you have false "prophesy" in the bible. Jesus stated (allegedly) that he would return during the lifetime of his disciples (Matt 16) and this did not happen. So, fail. Now of course you can attempt to spin, twist, rationalize or REINTERPRET the passage (in confirmation bias) so as to attempt to save your theology from refutation but all that proves is that this is not "prophetic evidence". It is a CLAIM which has not been backed up with evidence.

Quote
• "Answered Prayer" IS A CLAIM!!! You need actual evidence to demonstrate the cause of a given phenomena. Did you not know that correlation does not equal causation? Anybody can SAY their prayer was "answered" but their saying so doesn't make it so. This is, again, the "because I say so" fallacy (begging the question). So too, counting the "hits" and ignoring the misses is called confirmation bias. So merely claiming that someone was "healed by Jesus" and then ignoring the counter evidence when someone dies is irrational and dishonest. Still, the claim is not evidence.

I'm afraid not.  To you it's a claim.  To me it's fact.  Because you've not had answered prayers does not mean noone has had answered prayer.

Look what you just did. YOU MADE ANOTHER CLAIM. Your mere claim that you had answered prayer is not evidence. It is a claim (just as I have been noting the whole time). Notice too how you just attempted to shift the scope of what evidence means. Evidence is demonstrable to others. Your personal self diagnosis of "answered prayer" is not evidence. We are talking about demonstrable evidence here. Please stay on topic.

Quote
• "Personal Testimonies" are (once again) CLAIMS. You need actual evidence to demonstrate that these claims (like "Jesus healed me") are factual. But you don't have that. You just have, "Because I believe it and I say so..." Again, anyone can make claims. You need sound evidence to backup those claims.

Why do I need to show anyone evidence at all?  I don't.  I only need to be convinced myself.  If I don't reproduce results for your observation and testing that doesn't change the facts.

Then, by your own admission, a testimony is not an evidence - b/c "It's evidence for me" is not evidence. It is a mere CLAIM to having evidence. Evidences are demonstrable to others - just like you would require demonstrable evidence of evolution etc. So now you are just practicing intellectual dishonesty because you know damn well what is being talked about when we discuss evidence. Claims and personal conjecture are not evidence. So you do not have the "evidence" which at first you claimed. You have personal claims and opinion. But the investigation of evidences, so as to discover the truth or falsity of claims, is not about mere opinion. It is about independent verification and the clear ability to falsify. Remember just a second ago when you were trying to show demonstrable evidence of fulfilled "prophesy"? You keep trying to apply a double standard and it will continue to be pointed out. "Personal testimonies" are not evidence of "Jehovah". They are claims which need to be backed up with demonstrable evidence (just like you would require of common descent, the age of the earth, or abiogenesis).

Quote
• "The Perfect Moral Quality of Christians" is yet another CLAIM. So you've basically made claim after claim after claim after claim, and then attempted to ASSERT that your claims are evidence. They are not. Claims are not evidence and if you actually care whether or not your beliefs are true you will begin by understanding and applying the difference. In this instance, anyone can merely CLAIM that "Christians are morally perfect" and then (when given a counter example) say that person was not a "true Christian", or use some other spin/rationalization tactic. But that just shows how much this claim is NOT "evidence of Jehovah". It is, instead, a step toward confirmation bias. Also, it is irrational because it commits the No True Scotsman fallacy. If "true Christians" can and do "sin" then they are not morally perfect. The bible itself is not morally perfect, since your own alleged Yahweh violates it's own rules throughout (slavery, genocide, infanticide, human sacrifice, rape, etc). So on two accounts this claim fails as "evidence of Jehovah".

I didn't say Christians were morally perfect.  I said the Bible teaches perfect morality.  Every moral principle in the Bible given for Christians is infallible.  If they are applied they will bring benefits.  If you don't believe that then find one biblical principle that is not infallible.  If they are infallible then they are evidence of divine authorship.

The first problem you have here is that you are using the word "infallible" in a manner which I reject. Your use of this word implies that no matter what (regardless of what you are shown) you WILL NOT be convinced of error. That is called closed-mindedness and it is the very root of arrogance, hubris, and confirmation bias. It displays that you have started with your conclusion and are now working backwards. But that method is unreliable for separating fact from fiction. It is the opposite of honest investigation. The bible depicts an alleged "God" that violates it's own rules; committing genocide, stoning unruly children, killing homosexuals, ripping babies from the womb, threatening eternal torture (as a loving father would do to his kid, right!), and tons of other hypocritical, heinous, and immoral acts. But you simply won't allow yourself to see the hypocrisy of your own book, will you? You will just spin and rationalize away the passages because you have started with your conclusion that the bible (and your personal interpretation of it) are "infallible".

So your very starting point (that of extreme arrogance and hubris) is the problem. You began by assuming your theology is "infallible", when in fact you would not be OK with scientists doing this with evolution or abiogenesis. Your own personal hypocrisy and intellectual double standard is what needs to change.

The bible is NOT morally perfect. It is filled with your alleged Yahweh commanding and/or endorsing acts which are (by it's own standard - let alone any other standard) immoral. In the NT, Jesus himself has no objection to OT commands, and in fact endorses them saying they will not pass away until "all be fulfilled". Slavery is OK then? Genocide? Read Psalm 137:9. Your alleged Jehovah is not loving. Of course, I don't buy that any of these writings were from a "God". They were clearly from men, but you do buy them. In Ephesians 6 (and lots of other passages) Paul (at "the inspiration of the holy spirit") condones slavery and never speaks against it (just like the OT). The owning of another human being as property is immoral. And therefore, your bible is NOT morally "perfect". You have merely assumed that it is perfect because that is what someone sold you early on (just like the way Muslims assume their religion prior to critical investigation).

Quote
This stuff you are claiming is not even ordinary evidence (as you would require of a salesman at your door selling cheap credit cards or making extraordinary claims about magic potions and then asking for your money). So it's really disingenuous of you to merely assert these things as evidence when you yourself wouldn't accept such tactics if a salesman, or someone else from another religion, attempted to use these types of arguments on you. Anyone can SPIN and rationalize their way into the continuance of believing nonsense. Every religion does that. It's irrational when Muslims do it, when New Agers do it, and it's irrational when you do

I am not here to convince you.  I pointed out that one cannot say for a fact there is no evidence for God.  That is my argument.  I offered the above to just not be obstinate.  My actual argument here is that it's not a fact that there is no evidence for God and noone has proved it is a fact.

So...you are you just here to preach then?

I have no idea what you are talking about here when you attempt to use the word "fact". It is as if you are attempting to argue that we need to prove a universal negative to you - when that is just a red-herring fallacy. Also, you are committing another fallacy here called Shifting the Burden of Proof. You are the one making the claims. So the burden of proof lies upon you to demonstrate those claims - just like if you came to my door with one of your buddies. We do not accept all claims until someone proves them false. The opposite is true. We should disbelieve claims until sufficient evidence warrants beliefs. But you don't have such evidence. You have claims. 


http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl2.htm
« Last Edit: June 23, 2014, 12:23:04 PM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Online 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4595
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #135 on: June 23, 2014, 12:22:00 PM »


The Bible is very clear. 

Really? So say the people who used it to support slavery. It's as if it WASN'T clear, because it is self contradictory and open to interpretation to support every single possible position. Those quotes I used support war, you used other quote to support peace. Hence, unclear.

If you can support any position with a document, it isn't clear, it just a Rorschach test with political implications.

I posted passages instructing Christians to do good things.  So I don't know what you're talking about "support every single position".  You haven't posted a single scripture instructing Christians to do anything bad.
why is there passages in the Bible telling Christian/Jews to do evil things?

I'm not talking about Jews.  I'm talking about Christians.  Where are the passages instructing Christians to do evil things?
let me guess,any passage I present will be purely metaphorical?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10954
  • Darwins +284/-37
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #136 on: June 23, 2014, 12:37:03 PM »
let me guess,any passage I present will be purely metaphorical?

Either that, or they won't be directed at christians. I've asked Jstwebbrowsing to present me with a way to tell the two apart. Unsurprisingly, he didn't answer.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #137 on: June 23, 2014, 01:19:40 PM »
Once again, you are drawing a false analogy - attempting to compare claims to the supernatural/miraculous and claims which are NOT. NO textual accounts are sufficient to establish that a miracle or violation of the laws of known physics occurred, period. I don't care if hundreds of people make claims. That isn't even ordinary evidence, let alone extraordinary. Get real. You are arbitrarily (and hypocritically) attempting to lower the bar so as only to let your assumed theology through the door. Historical documents talking about the miraculous are evidence that people made claims about the miraculous. We have lots of demonstrable evidence today of people living and doing things, building stuff, and inventing. We DO NOT have any demonstrable evidence today to backup supernatural claims. What we have today are arguments from ignorance saying, "I can't possibly understand how X thing could have happened without it being God. So it must have been God." That is not "evidence of Jehovah". It is more claims with spin and it is irrational (argument from ignorance/incredulity).

Who said anything about evidence for miracles?  Not me.  I said evidence for the existence of Jehovah.  Evidence of miracles are unnecessary.

Quote
If I order a hamburger and the waiter brings it to me, is that a prophesy?  But even if your beliefs were preached in all the world all this would prove is a self-fulfilling claim - not a prophesy.

Hardly.  The prophecy did not fulfill itself.  This is just a way for you to rationalize it away.  It was anything but a forgone conclusion the good news would be preached to all nations.

Quote
The "gospel" is not known in the whole world by all nations.

I didn't say it was fulfilled I said you are seeing it be fulfilled.  "Jehovah's Witnesses have a presence in most countries in the world. These are the most recent statistics by nation and by continent or region, based on active members, or "publishers" as reported by the Watch Tower Society of Pennsylvania." 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_by_country

Currently the Good News is preached in 236 lands and 400 languages.

Quote
So too, you have false "prophesy" in the bible. Jesus stated (allegedly) that he would return during the lifetime of his disciples (Matt 16) and this did not happen. So, fail. Now of course you can attempt to spin, twist, rationalize or REINTERPRET the passage (in confirmation bias) so as to attempt to save your theology from refutation but all that proves is that this is not "prophetic evidence". It is a CLAIM which has not been backed up with evidence.

No he never said that.

Quote
Look what you just did. YOU MADE ANOTHER CLAIM. Your mere claim that you had answered prayer is not evidence. It is a claim (just as I have been noting the whole time). Notice too how you just attempted to shift the scope of what evidence means. Evidence is demonstrable to others. Your personal self diagnosis of "answered prayer" is not evidence. We are talking about demonstrable evidence here. Please stay on topic.

My ability or inability to prove to you my experiences doesn't change whether or not it's true or that there is evidence for answered prayers.  I experienced a headache yesterday but I can't prove it to you.  Does that mean I didn't experience a headache yesterday? 

Quote
Then, by your own admission, a testimony is not an evidence - b/c "It's evidence for me" is not evidence.

A testimony is evidence if it's true.  You are wanting scientific evidence.  A lack of scientific evidence does not mean a lack of evidence.  If God whisks you up to heaven and tells you everything you want to know, have you seen evidence for God?  If someone doesn't believe you does mean you didn't see the evidence?

Quote
The first problem you have here is that you are using the word "infallible" in a manner which I reject. Your use of this word implies that no matter what (regardless of what you are shown) you WILL NOT be convinced of error. That is called closed-mindedness and it is the very root of arrogance, hubris, and confirmation bias. It displays that you have started with your conclusion and are now working backwards.

That's not true.  I didn't start with that conclusion.  I was brought to it through research.  I am simply telling you my conclusion and challenging you to prove it wrong.

Quote
The bible depicts an alleged "God" that violates it's own rules; committing genocide, stoning unruly children, killing homosexuals, ripping babies from the womb, threatening eternal torture (as a loving father would do to his kid, right!), and tons of other hypocritical, heinous, and immoral acts. But you simply won't allow yourself to see the hypocrisy of your own book, will you? You will just spin and rationalize away the passages because you have started with your conclusion that the bible (and your personal interpretation of it) are "infallible".

You and others keep trying to introduce this red herring.  The topic is the moral principles the Bible teaches Christians.  Show me some evil instructions.

Quote
What, are you just here to preach then?

No, I'm here to have discussions with people that don't already know everything.  So you can have your last post and you can win the argument.  That is all you want to do so do it.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2014, 02:15:30 PM by Jstwebbrowsing »
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 screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +659/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #138 on: June 23, 2014, 02:02:51 PM »
I'm not saying anything about how other people have used the Bible.  Make up your own mind.  I'm saying that nowhere does the Bible instruct Christians to do anything bad. 

You seem to be missing the point and repeating your mistake.  The bible clearly tells someone to do bad things.  It told the hebrews to murder all the Midianites, including the little boys, but to take the girls as sex slaves.  It told the hebrews to stone unruly children to death.  It told the hebrews to stone to death women who had sex outside of marriage.  It explained how to create, keep and sell slaves. 

So please understand how it sounds like you are parsing your answer when you say "xians".  It sounds like you are glossing over all the evil shit because they were not xians.  Which, you know, doesn't really matter, since we are talking about the totality of the bible.

And I'm saying that the moral principles given to Christians are perfect and if applied would solve most of the world's problems. 

No.  Even the NT fails to deal with a lot of moral issues.  It ignores slavery, ignores politics altogether, ignores drugs, end of life issues and fails to anticipate the question of abortion.  You'd think jesus H would have seen that one coming and said something specific and clear one way or the other.

Christians are instructed to,

vague. ambiguous.  not really a set of morals, is it?
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7276
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #139 on: June 23, 2014, 03:51:21 PM »
I hope jst isn't arguing that there is a distinction between the OT and NT, because that would be a terrible position given that the NT can't exist without the OT.

Online nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6525
  • Darwins +852/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #140 on: June 23, 2014, 05:38:35 PM »
I want to make a prophecy. I predict that the Mormons are preaching the good news to as many people and in as many languages as the JW's and maybe more. I also predict that Jst will discount this prophecy as irrelevant.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #141 on: June 23, 2014, 08:14:02 PM »
Once again, you are drawing a false analogy - attempting to compare claims to the supernatural/miraculous and claims which are NOT. NO textual accounts are sufficient to establish that a miracle or violation of the laws of known physics occurred, period. I don't care if hundreds of people make claims. That isn't even ordinary evidence, let alone extraordinary. Get real. You are arbitrarily (and hypocritically) attempting to lower the bar so as only to let your assumed theology through the door. Historical documents talking about the miraculous are evidence that people made claims about the miraculous. We have lots of demonstrable evidence today of people living and doing things, building stuff, and inventing. We DO NOT have any demonstrable evidence today to backup supernatural claims. What we have today are arguments from ignorance saying, "I can't possibly understand how X thing could have happened without it being God. So it must have been God." That is not "evidence of Jehovah". It is more claims with spin and it is irrational (argument from ignorance/incredulity).

Who said anything about evidence for miracles?  Not me.  I said evidence for the existence of Jehovah.  Evidence of miracles are unnecessary.

Quote
If I order a hamburger and the waiter brings it to me, is that a prophesy?  But even if your beliefs were preached in all the world all this would prove is a self-fulfilling claim - not a prophesy.

Hardly.  The prophecy did not fulfill itself.  This is just a way for you to rationalize it away.  It was anything but a forgone conclusion the good news would be preached to all nations.

And you are conveniently glossing over the fact that predictions are not prophesies. Otherwise, any scientist that makes a prediction (which comes true) is a "prophet". Your reasoning doesn't follow. Anyone can claim something is going to come true (in vague fashion) and then be called a prophet by those who already have a predisposition toward confirmation bias. That doesn't solve anything, and there is no "rationalizing it away" in pointing that out. Human beings have been making predictions all the time. So what. That doesn't prove they are "true prophets" or that there claims are actual evidence of their alleged gods, anymore than yours are. Again, claims are not "evidence of Jehovah" and neither are predictions stated with religious flare. As I noted before, any business man can "prophesy" that his business will be successful. When it is he can say he is a prophet. When it's not he can use confirmation bias (like you are using) and say it wasn't a prophesy, he misread "the spirit", or some other spin. None of that is intellectually honest and none of it proves a "fulfilled prophesy".

"Let me prophesy!! The earths oceans will rise due to melting on the polar ice caps. Now worship me!"

Quote
The "gospel" is not known in the whole world by all nations.

I didn't say it was fulfilled I said you are seeing it be fulfilled.  "Jehovah's Witnesses have a presence in most countries in the world. These are the most recent statistics by nation and by continent or region, based on active members, or "publishers" as reported by the Watch Tower Society of Pennsylvania." 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_by_country

Currently the Good News is preached in 236 lands and 400 languages.

So what!! Have you not been paying attention? Just because YOU call it a "prophesy" doesn't mean that it is. You are using the fallacy of begging the question (while simultaneously just asserting more claims) because you haven't shown that these passages are "from Jehovah". You just keep claiming it (i.e. - the "because I say so" fallacy again). Secondly, your Watchtower interpretation of the text is not agreed upon by any other sect of Christendom. All of the others say you are false teachers (aka - a cult). So again, just because you SAY you are preaching "the gospel" doesn't mean that you actually are. But even if that were true it still wouldn't make it a "fulfilled prophesy" (as noted above).

Quote
So too, you have false "prophesy" in the bible. Jesus stated (allegedly) that he would return during the lifetime of his disciples (Matt 16) and this did not happen. So, fail. Now of course you can attempt to spin, twist, rationalize or REINTERPRET the passage (in confirmation bias) so as to attempt to save your theology from refutation but all that proves is that this is not "prophetic evidence". It is a CLAIM which has not been backed up with evidence.

No he never said that.

[size=0.75em]Matthew 16:27 [/size]For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds.
[size=0.75em]28 [/size]“Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”
Quote
Look what you just did. YOU MADE ANOTHER CLAIM. Your mere claim that you had answered prayer is not evidence. It is a claim (just as I have been noting the whole time). Notice too how you just attempted to shift the scope of what evidence means. Evidence is demonstrable to others. Your personal self diagnosis of "answered prayer" is not evidence. We are talking about demonstrable evidence here. Please stay on topic.

My ability or inability to prove to you my experiences doesn't change whether or not it's true or that there is evidence for answered prayers.  I experienced a headache yesterday but I can't prove it to you.  Does that mean I didn't experience a headache yesterday?

Now you're trying to change the subject (red herring fallacy). The question of demonstrable evidence doesn't have anything to do with whether or not you had, or didn't have, a headache (i.e. - personal testimony). It has to do with the nature of demonstrable evidence (which can be demonstrated to other for verification and attempts to falsify). The claim that you have a headache (just like the CLAIM that there was an "answered prayer") is not evidence of the thing being claimed. You need actual demonstrable evidence to support that claim. That is the context of this discussion.

Quote
Then, by your own admission, a testimony is not an evidence - b/c "It's evidence for me" is not evidence.

A testimony is evidence if it's true.  You are wanting scientific evidence.  A lack of scientific evidence does not mean a lack of evidence.  If God whisks you up to heaven and tells you everything you want to know, have you seen evidence for God?  If someone doesn't believe you does mean you didn't see the evidence?

Again, the context of this discussion is not "my personal subjective claim to having evidence". And you should know that since in your previous posts you attempted to show demonstrable evidence by use of the bible (i.e. - that which can be demonstrated to others). I don't care about what you can CLAIM is "evidence for me". Why even bring up such a thing on a public forum where others are asking you to demonstrate your claims? This seems to be another demonstration of your double standard. You first start bringing up things that you are attempting to demonstrate to others (such as claims to fulfilled prophesy, etc) and then, when challenged, you switch gears and revert back to subjective non-demonstrable "testimony" - claiming it is evidence. I don't care what you think is "evidence" for you. I care what you can actually demonstrate to be true. That is the point of WWGHAF. Every religion attempts your same method, and just like you, they provide no reliable method for separating fact from fiction. Is this just all about opinion for you?

Quote
The first problem you have here is that you are using the word "infallible" in a manner which I reject. Your use of this word implies that no matter what (regardless of what you are shown) you WILL NOT be convinced of error. That is called closed-mindedness and it is the very root of arrogance, hubris, and confirmation bias. It displays that you have started with your conclusion and are now working backwards.

That's not true.  I didn't start with that conclusion.  I was brought to it through research.  I am simply telling you my conclusion and challenging you to prove it wrong.

You just committed, once again, the fallacy of Shifting the Burden of Proof. Since you are making the claims the burden is on you to meet your burden of proof and we have seen no such thing by you thus far. All you have given us is, "because I say so..." and that isn't sufficient to demonstrate your claims that the bible is "infallible" or that your personal interpretation of theology is true or accurate. Over a month ago you were asked to provide this "research" and it was not forthcoming. Please present it. Present the demonstrable "research" and not just personal opinion or claims that amount to "because I say so".

Quote
The bible depicts an alleged "God" that violates it's own rules; committing genocide, stoning unruly children, killing homosexuals, ripping babies from the womb, threatening eternal torture (as a loving father would do to his kid, right!), and tons of other hypocritical, heinous, and immoral acts. But you simply won't allow yourself to see the hypocrisy of your own book, will you? You will just spin and rationalize away the passages because you have started with your conclusion that the bible (and your personal interpretation of it) are "infallible".

You and others keep trying to introduce this red herring.  The topic is the moral principles the Bible teaches Christians.  Show me some evil instructions.

It is not a red-herring whatsoever to point out the teachings of your bible. I don't care if your personal interpretation doesn't like the passages. They are still there. You can spin or ignore them all you like but your alleged "Yahweh" god commands and endorses (in both the OT and NT) slavery, genocide, infanticide, human sacrifice, killing homosexuals and unruly children, rape, and eternal torture. These are not moral. Even still, there are great moral teachings throughout almost every culture. Absolutely none of that makes those teachings divine. To demonstrate such claims you need actual extraordinary evidence (such as presenting the alleged god by which to examine/question/investigate).

So again, claiming moral superiority is just that...a claim. It is not "evidence of Jehovah" anymore than the claims of Hindu morality are evidence of Shiva or Vishnu.

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Deuteronomy-21-18_21-21/
http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm
http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm


Quote
What, are you just here to preach then?

No, I'm here to have discussions with people that don't already know everything.  So you can have your last post and you can win the argument.  That is all you want to do so do it.

Is that a retreat? Can't take the heat after making these grand claims so then you just run away? Why am I not surprised. I don't know everything, nor do I claim to. But I know enough to take you to task on these claims you keep making and for some reason you don't have any problem with continuing this "because I say so" nonsense while acting like it is actual "evidence of Jehovah". Well I'm sorry, it is not evidence. And regardless of how much you would like to think so, claims are still not evidence.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #142 on: June 24, 2014, 12:16:19 AM »
You seem to be missing the point and repeating your mistake.  The bible clearly tells someone to do bad things.  It told the hebrews to murder all the Midianites, including the little boys, but to take the girls as sex slaves.  It told the hebrews to stone unruly children to death.  It told the hebrews to stone to death women who had sex outside of marriage.  It explained how to create, keep and sell slaves. 

So please understand how it sounds like you are parsing your answer when you say "xians".  It sounds like you are glossing over all the evil shit because they were not xians.  Which, you know, doesn't really matter, since we are talking about the totality of the bible.

Whatever instructions were given to the ancient Hebrews doesn't change the instructions given to Christians.  And the topic is not the personality of God.  You want to keep the discussion in ancient culture and judge it according to modern culture.  However, when you are required to judge modern instructions you seem to have no ammo.

Quote
No.  Even the NT fails to deal with a lot of moral issues.  It ignores slavery, ignores politics altogether, ignores drugs, end of life issues and fails to anticipate the question of abortion.  You'd think jesus H would have seen that one coming and said something specific and clear one way or the other.

The same principles apply to these things as they do to any other moral issue.  Biblical principles have universal application.  There is no need to specifically mention every possible wrong or right action.  Christians were not given laws of right and wrong.  They are not given any laws at all.  They are given principles they can apply to every situation so they can determine the best course of action.

1.  Slavery - You must love your neighbor as yourself.
2.  Politics - My kingdom is not of this world. (John 18:36)
3.  Drugs - Let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit. (2 Cor 7:1)
4.  Abortion -  You shall not murder. (Mk 10:19)

I'm not sure what you mean by end of life issues.

Quote
vague. ambiguous.  not really a set of morals, is it?

It's very clear to me.


 
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: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #143 on: June 24, 2014, 12:19:39 AM »
I hope jst isn't arguing that there is a distinction between the OT and NT, because that would be a terrible position given that the NT can't exist without the OT.

No.  I'm saying there was a Covenent between God and the Jews which has concluded and there is a Covenent between God and Christians and it's still in effect.  If he is going to be judged by modern standards then his modern instructions is what should be judged.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2014, 12:58:44 AM by Jstwebbrowsing »
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: 1468
  • Darwins +27/-105
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Basic Question
« Reply #144 on: June 24, 2014, 12:52:53 AM »
And you are conveniently glossing over the fact that predictions are not prophesies. Otherwise, any scientist that makes a prediction (which comes true) is a "prophet". Your reasoning doesn't follow. Anyone can claim something is going to come true (in vague fashion) and then be called a prophet by those who already have a predisposition toward confirmation bias. That doesn't solve anything, and there is no "rationalizing it away" in pointing that out. Human beings have been making predictions all the time. So what. That doesn't prove they are "true prophets" or that there claims are actual evidence of their alleged gods, anymore than yours are. Again, claims are not "evidence of Jehovah" and neither are predictions stated with religious flare. As I noted before, any business man can "prophesy" that his business will be successful. When it is he can say he is a prophet. When it's not he can use confirmation bias (like you are using) and say it wasn't a prophesy, he misread "the spirit", or some other spin. None of that is intellectually honest and none of it proves a "fulfilled prophesy".

My statement still stands.  There's no use repeating the same thing to each other over and over.  I know you prefer to believe it was just one huge coincidence.  So believe it.

Quote
So what!! Have you not been paying attention? Just because YOU call it a "prophesy" doesn't mean that it is. You are using the fallacy of begging the question (while simultaneously just asserting more claims) because you haven't shown that these passages are "from Jehovah". You just keep claiming it (i.e. - the "because I say so" fallacy again). Secondly, your Watchtower interpretation of the text is not agreed upon by any other sect of Christendom. All of the others say you are false teachers (aka - a cult). So again, just because you SAY you are preaching "the gospel" doesn't mean that you actually are. But even if that were true it still wouldn't make it a "fulfilled prophesy" (as noted above).

The fact of the matter is that it was stated and it's coming true and very close to complete.  How someone wants to view that fact is up to them.  You believe it was just one massive lucky shot.  So believe it.

Quote
[size=0.75em]Matthew 16:27 [/size]For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds.
[size=0.75em]28 [/size]“Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”

There's no point in discussing scripture with you.  You're already stated you know what it means.  So believe it.

Quote
Now you're trying to change the subject (red herring fallacy). The question of demonstrable evidence doesn't have anything to do with whether or not you had, or didn't have, a headache (i.e. - personal testimony). It has to do with the nature of demonstrable evidence (which can be demonstrated to other for verification and attempts to falsify). The claim that you have a headache (just like the CLAIM that there was an "answered prayer") is not evidence of the thing being claimed. You need actual demonstrable evidence to support that claim. That is the context of this discussion.

You're the one that input the word demonstratable with your last post.  That's called shifting the goal post.

Quote
Again, the context of this discussion is not "my personal subjective claim to having evidence". And you should know that since in your previous posts you attempted to show demonstrable evidence by use of the bible (i.e. - that which can be demonstrated to others). I don't care about what you can CLAIM is "evidence for me". Why even bring up such a thing on a public forum where others are asking you to demonstrate your claims? This seems to be another demonstration of your double standard. You first start bringing up things that you are attempting to demonstrate to others (such as claims to fulfilled prophesy, etc) and then, when challenged, you switch gears and revert back to subjective non-demonstrable "testimony" - claiming it is evidence. I don't care what you think is "evidence" for you. I care what you can actually demonstrate to be true. That is the point of WWGHAF. Every religion attempts your same method, and just like you, they provide no reliable method for separating fact from fiction. Is this just all about opinion for you?

Same thing.  YOU'RE the one that changes "evidence" to "demonstratable evidence", shifting goal posts.

Bing Dictionary
ev·i·dence
[ évvid'nss ]

 1.sign or proof: something that gives a sign or proof of the existence or truth of something, or that helps somebody to come to a particular conclusion
2.proof of guilt: the objects or information used to prove or suggest the guilt of somebody accused of a crime
3.statements of witnesses: the oral or written statements of witnesses and other people involved in a trial or official inquiry

Quote
You just committed, once again, the fallacy of Shifting the Burden of Proof. Since you are making the claims the burden is on you to meet your burden of proof and we have seen no such thing by you thus far. All you have given us is, "because I say so..." and that isn't sufficient to demonstrate your claims that the bible is "infallible" or that your personal interpretation of theology is true or accurate. Over a month ago you were asked to provide this "research" and it was not forthcoming. Please present it. Present the demonstrable "research" and not just personal opinion or claims that amount to "because I say so".

So you want me to individually go over every Bible principle with you?  I can think of no reason why I should.  Anyone with any real concern about it will do a little looking into the matter and form good thoughts or questions.  Anyone just looking to win an argument will dodge.

Quote
It is not a red-herring whatsoever to point out the teachings of your bible. I don't care if your personal interpretation doesn't like the passages. They are still there. You can spin or ignore them all you like but your alleged "Yahweh" god commands and endorses (in both the OT and NT) slavery, genocide, infanticide, human sacrifice, killing homosexuals and unruly children, rape, and eternal torture. These are not moral. Even still, there are great moral teachings throughout almost every culture. Absolutely none of that makes those teachings divine. To demonstrate such claims you need actual extraordinary evidence (such as presenting the alleged god by which to examine/question/investigate).

It is a red herring.  The topic are principles given to Christians.  You are doing everything you can do to get away from this topic.  Why?

Quote
Is that a retreat? Can't take the heat after making these grand claims so then you just run away? Why am I not surprised. I don't know everything, nor do I claim to. But I know enough to take you to task on these claims you keep making and for some reason you don't have any problem with continuing this "because I say so" nonsense while acting like it is actual "evidence of Jehovah". Well I'm sorry, it is not evidence. And regardless of how much you would like to think so, claims are still not evidence.

No you certainly don't know everything, but you believe you do.  So believe it.  "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick." (Mt 9:12)


« Last Edit: June 24, 2014, 12:56:32 AM by Jstwebbrowsing »
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