Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
Crystal, most of the claims you'll see... the goal of those claims is to make it the atheist's fault for not believing.   We didn't read.  We didn't try hard enough.  We didn't study philosophy and apologetics enough.   We didn't get our degree in theology...

It's our fault the evidence isn't nearly enough.  It our fault the stories are evil and contradictory.   There's no point where they actually consider why we don't believe.
Bald, unsupported assertions are not very beneficial except, perhaps, for you. Could you please elaborate what you are getting at here and demonstrate that whatever you are claiming can be supported with evidence?
I think it can be assumed true that Christians generally consider themselves to be humble.  However, it has clearly been demonstrated throughout history that human beings are not humble.  Therefore, it stands to reason that most Christians are not humble.  Furthermore, the fact that the vast majority of Christian sects teach that personal belief and faith are enough to allow one to be saved, and encourage people to demonstrate their faith (through good works and the like) does not demonstrate humility.  Quite the opposite, in fact, since it amounts to bragging about the belief that one can be saved and win eternal life merely by being a Christian.

Quote from: BibleStudent
This is not my claim. This is your strawman (fallacy).
So which parts of it are untrue?  If you think he used a strawman, then you should state what you actually believe, not simply denounce him.

Quote from: BibleStudent
All of the evidence? Every Christian's mind? Each one?
To put it bluntly, yes.  Every human suffers from confirmation bias and from jumping to improper conclusions based on circumstantial evidence and from delusions based on things we believe are true.  Christianity provides no immunity to this, so therefore all Christians suffer from those things.  The same holds true for each person seeing themselves as the most important actor in their lives; ego is an unavoidable consequence of human consciousness, and Christianity provides no immunity to this either.  And finally, given how many varieties of Christian belief there are, it is far from unreasonable to conclude that Christians tend to emphasize whatever values and morality they hold when it comes to their own personal relationship with their god.

Quote from: BibleStudent
Ignoring the fallacious nature of your assertions, you have made it quite clear here that your request for evidence in post #292 lacked any genuine desire. After all, if all of the evidence is circumstantial or delusional then why are you asking for it?

What you have shown here is that your post #292 was constructed and posted with an intent to do nothing more than confirm your bias.
This sounds like you're trying to make an ad hominem excuse to avoid presenting evidence more than anything.  And I'm telling you right now that it won't cut the mustard.  You don't get to use someone else's behavior as an excuse to avoid your own responsibility to present factual evidence to support your assertions.

Quote from: BibleStudent
This is not my claim nor the claim of any Christian I know. This is your strawman.
Given that you don't even recognize your own tendency to antagonize and condescend to the people here, I don't think you can use this as a justification for dismissing his statement.

Quote from: BibleStudent
This is not something I have ever claimed was the case. This is just another strawman.
You didn't use those specific words at any time, no.  But given the Christian belief that each Christian has a personal relationship with the creator of the entire universe, that each person is special and came about as a direct result of said creator's cosmic plan, and that said creator has always existed and will always exist, and knows everything that has been, is, and will ever be...

How exactly is what YRM_DM said here wrong?  To be blunt, none of the post I quoted above actually accomplishes much but to imply that YRM_DM is lying without actually accusing him of it, and to use it as an excuse to provide evidence he requested earlier.  That doesn't exactly present you in anything resembling a good light, or even a mediocre one.  What's even worse is that this fits part and parcel with what junebug said regarding you not realizing how antagonistic and condescending you are.
Yes, the Bible definitely causes doubt.   I think I've read more than most Christians.   

The Bible doesn't just contain god ordered genocides, but god sanctioned abortions through temple priests forcing women to drink bitter water if their loyalty was questioned, god sanctioned war brides, god sanctioned slavery and beating of slaves.

The only consistent moral in the Old Testament is to blindly obey god, or to blindly obey a prophet claiming to speak for God.

Ask the folks on the Christian forum how they can tell a true prophet from a false prophet.   Usually, they'll say by their fruits, and by their accuracy in predictions.   If a prophet orders immoral things, or selfish things, then they're not in-God.

Then point out that Moses own soldiers tried to show mercy to unarmed women and children captives, and Moses became enraged and ordered all the captives put to the sword except the young virgin girls.

Is that good fruit from Moses?    How is killing unarmed women and children "legal" and not murder?   Can anyone seriously argue that these children were guilty of crimes against God at the time of their sword-putting-to?   Can anyone argue that the women had power in their household, and were responsible?

Women were basically property.   How could they be held responsible for anything when, if they didn't obey their husband, they'd just get an ass kicking?
The statement "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is directly related to Bayes' theorem[1].  Basically, the more extraordinary a claim happens to be, the lower its prior probability[2] will be.  So, to increase the posterior probability[3], you need evidence.  The lower the prior probability is, the more evidence you need to bring the posterior probability up to a level where it's worth investigating the claim further.

The point of the saying is that if a claim is extraordinary enough, you need an extraordinary amount of evidence to make it even worth considering, and even more for it to be accepted as true.  Since it is little more than a restatement of the mathematical theorem which underlies the entire field of statistics (which has been solidly supported), and more to the point, Bayes' theorem has been proven true, it is not at all reasonable for BibleStudent (or anyone else) to call it into question without doing a lot of work to show that Bayes' theorem is flawed.

So whether he likes it or not, he's stuck with the fact that a claim with an extraordinarily low prior probability will therefore also have an extraordinarily low posterior probability unless an extraordinary amount of supporting evidence is provided.  Complaining about it won't change this provable fact.
 1. which I will admit that I'm not especially conversant with, so if I get something wrong, I would appreciate being corrected by someone who is more knowledgeable about it
 2. the probability before evidence is taken into account
 3. the probability after evidence is taken into account
This reply;

"...As far as dinosaurs, the Bible records leviathan's and behemoth's with tails the size of Ceder trees. What animal would fit that description today, certainly not an elephant? ..." - Dennis1209

Repeatedly Christians get this verse wrong. The actual verse is "He moveth his tail like a cedar"-KJV Job 40:17. Now I can move my little finger like a cedar tree, doesn't mean my little finger is the size of a tree.

Christians do love to quote the bible at atheists until they realize atheists know it better than them. My Christian friends and family no longer dare quote the bible at me, thanks to all here for the info! And I think that's why we read and know the bible; to see for ourselves the nonsense in it and to quieten the claims of the religious. Because if they get one bit wrong....what else have they got wrong..?
Religion & Society / Re: The irony of Islam...
« Last post by jaimehlers on September 26, 2016, 11:42:53 AM »
An issue with that, is the SJW types getting into places of power.
You know, I can't help but be curious as to when it became acceptable to vilify the concept of social justice.  It's one thing to be opposed to a group's aims, and quite another to mockingly call them "social justice warriors", as if social justice were a bad thing. 

Quote from: ThatZenoGuy
Nowadays its 'islamophobia' to call out bloody terrorists for what they are, its 'islamophobia' to bloody state facts from the koran!

So why are you engaging in similar behavior, Zeno?  I mean, you're busy calling those people "social justice warriors", as if that's what social justice entails, and never mind that it's only a small minority of the people in the social justice movement who are engaging in such behavior.  If you're going to complain because someone else paints with a broad (and inaccurate) brush, don't you think it would behoove you to make sure you aren't doing pretty much the same thing?
Thanks for pulling that quote from Bible Student, Junebug.

I think it's very clear that Bible Student is claiming to have had personal experiences with/of God that solidified his faith.   That's not a strawman.

I think it's also very clear that Bible Student and other believers are ignoring probability.    They'll point out that, say, it's unlikely that believers will die for a lie (even though believers have done this in every religion and cult for centuries), but not consider that it's unlikely that a corpse with fatal wounds comes back to life and rolls away a boulder that weighs tons, then that resurrected corpse isn't even recognized by his friends who saw him 3 days prior.

What is more likely:

- Believers will die for a lie?   (like the Heaven's Gate cult, or the 9-11 terrorists, or the apostles, or Mormons who died trekking across the country to stay in their cult, or suicide bombers)

- A corpse with fatal wounds resurrects after 3 days with super human boulder rolling powers?

If the second bullet is more likely, can you show any other examples of corpses doing this?
I am not posing any of this to antagonize or come across as condascending.

But you manage it without even trying!

Could you please explain why you say this?

I think it's because you always sound like you're saying that we are not interested in genuinely discovering what is or is not true regarding the reality we all share.  Like your response to kcrady right here.  It is still very condescending towards some of us.  You are accusing some of us of being insincere in our questions or requests for evidence.

It's one of the reasons why kcrady references The Litany of Gendlin:
What's true is already so.  Owning up to it won't make it any worse.

With that, kcrady was trying to convey to you that, for a lot of us, we genuinely do not recognize any value, whatsoever, in engaging is disingenuous inquiry.  You claim that some of us have "no genuine desire to really consider what might be offered and what it (evidence) consists of".  Yet for a lot of us, we see absolutely no value in not genuinely considering what might be offered, and in fact, would find it detrimental to not genuinely consider it.

So are definitely being condescending, BibleStudent.  The implication that we aren't really interested in determining what is or is not true about reality is condescending.
Religion & Society / Re: The irony of Islam...
« Last post by Add Homonym on September 26, 2016, 09:43:00 AM »
An issue with that, is the SJW types getting into places of power.

Nowadays its 'islamophobia' to call out bloody terrorists for what they are, its 'islamophobia' to bloody state facts from the koran!


You are sounding like Skep. Maybe you and him should get a room, and make sweet sweet love together, like an elephant and a pig.
Religion & Society / Re: The irony of Islam...
« Last post by Add Homonym on September 26, 2016, 09:40:09 AM »
Because Islam is in the minority in western countries, it hasn't been controlled by governments. It occupies the same niche as evangelical Christian sects. The media is also fragmenting, so that white supremacists can hang out on Stormfront, and not think they are loonies. Arab migrants can keep watching Arab satellite TV, and go to the mosque and listen to a loony fanatic, talking in arabic about how sublime the noble K...ran is. Kids walk around, glued to their smartphone, and arrive in the early years of school, not able to speak sentences.

We are losing social cohesion rapidly.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10