Evidence Types

[WalterP]

2 hours ago, Justus said:

 

You obviously can't grasp that there is a difference between believing and having faith.

 

 

If I can't grasp this, then there's no point in my asking you to explain the difference between the two.

 

But I don't think you meant that, Justus.

 

If you did, then you'd be just as judgmental towards me as you accused me of being towards Edgarcito.

 

So what are you doing except being that same ole self righteous, judgmental, holier than thou, religious hypocrite that you were before you came to the knowledge of your new imaginary truth like you did when you ran around claiming Jesus is Lord! Jesus is Lord!. ...............yet what are you doing to help that girl?   (So do you feel like you where a sself righteous, judgmental, holier than thou, religious hypocrite when you were a Christian-if you weren't then please accept my apology and disregard this post.)

 

 

So, giving you the benefit of the doubt, please explain the difference between belief and faith, Justus.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[sdelsolray]

On 11/16/2019 at 12:36 AM, Justus said:

 

How about the physical evidence regarding the fact that only man has the ability to communicate using the spoken word?  

 

Do you think that the ability to speak evolved naturally?  If the ability to vocalize sounds into words is something that occurs naturally then obviously the first humans wouldn't have had to begin speaking in they earlier years but could have begun developing the ability to speak at any point during their lifetime. Right?

 

However, why do you think primates lack the ability to communicate using the spoken word?  Maybe because primates haven't evolve the necessary vocal anatomy to produce intelligible speech.

 

 

 

 

Hey Justus, tell us again about the talking snake and talking donkey.  Those parts are funny.

[WalterP]

3 hours ago, Justus said:

 

Actually I overlooked your comment because I never made any such statement, but of course you believe I did so there really isn't reason to discuss it.

 

 

Then I choose to believe that you did make such a statement, Justus.  

 

Of course, you and I could look at the data in this thread to see if you did or not.

 

But, since you'll believe anything, regardless of the data, why bother?

 

 

Quote

Just believe whatever you want to believe .  

 

 

 

Yes, I see.  Regardless of what the data actually says, regardless of what this thread says or what the Bible actually says.

 

Justus chooses to believe whatever he wants, regardless of what his eyes tell him.

 

.

 

 

[WalterP]

1 hour ago, sdelsolray said:

 

Hey Justus, tell us again about the talking snake and talking donkey.  Those parts are funny.

 

Revelation 8 : 13

 

As I watched, I heard an eagle that was flying in midair call out in a loud voice: "Woe! Woe! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the trumpet blasts about to be sounded by the other three angels!"

[WalterP]

23 hours ago, Justus said:

 

That is a great question.  Have you ever considered that they are describing one thing yet in three different ways. 

 

For example, if one witness saw a red car, the second witness saw a late-model automobile and the third witness saw a cadillac drive away from the bank that was robbed, then which one was true, or did they see a red late-model cadillac drive away from the bank that was robbed.

 

I believe you will find that they all three are true, however each one describes an electromagnetic sound wave, unlike the mechanical sound wave.  However, this form of sound wave is produced by the acoustic radiation produced within the  co-axial band of light that form the circuits of the electromagnetic field which created the expanse of space in which all physical matter inhabits.  

 

 

 

Justus,

 

Taking what you say about the believer being free to believe ANYTHING regardless of what they see or hear, can you see how what you've written above just falls apart?

 

One witness saw a red car, but you disregard of what they say and you choose to believe its a blue one.

 

The second witness saw a late-model auto, but you disregard their testimony and choose to believe they saw a factory-new model.

 

The third saw a cadillac, but you disregard that and choose to believe they saw a ford.

 

See what a mess you've made of the truth, by choosing to believe whatever you like regardless of the data?

 

Think about it.

 

Walter.

[Justus]

On 11/13/2019 at 6:52 PM, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Further to my post above

 

Why are you not convinced of Islam?

 

You know the Quran, Muslim testimony of miracles, or Dar al-Islam?

 

Maybe once you've answered those you'll have figured out why we don't regard your examples as evidence for God.

 

You do know that the Quran is the third Book of the Trilogy.   The one which Peter made reference of as the third tabernacle. 

 

Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. Matt 17:4
And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. Mark 9:5
 And it came to pass, as they departed from him, Peter said unto Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias: not knowing what he said .  Luke 9:33

 

 

[Justus]

52 minutes ago, WalterP said:

 

Justus,

 

Taking what you say about the believer being free to believe ANYTHING regardless of what they see or hear, can you see how what you've written above just falls apart?

 

One witness saw a red car, but you disregard of what they say and you choose to believe its a blue one.

 

The second witness saw a late-model auto, but you disregard their testimony and choose to believe they saw a factory-new model.

 

The third saw a cadillac, but you disregard that and choose to believe they saw a ford.

 

See what a mess you've made of the truth, by choosing to believe whatever you like regardless of the data?

 

Think about it.

 

Walter.

You better get backto your imaginary sciences, you miss a couple days and you won't be able  to recognize it when you get back.

[Justus]

19 hours ago, sdelsolray said:

 

Hey Justus, tell us again about the talking snake and talking donkey.  Those parts are funny.

 

It is more like ironic when a person believes that a snake can't talk, but it is funner to listen to them tell us why they don't 't believe a snake can talk, wait for it , anymore. LOL

[TruthSeeker0]

26 minutes ago, Justus said:

You better get backto your imaginary sciences, you miss a couple days and you won't be able  to recognize it when you get back.

Troll. 

[WalterP]

1 hour ago, Justus said:

You better get backto your imaginary sciences, you miss a couple days and you won't be able  to recognize it when you get back.

 

The number 574 mean anything to you, Justus?

 

No?

 

Well, that's the number of times you've used science in this forum. 

 

It's your post count. 

 

Funny how science works just fine every time you use it.   

 

And whenever you log on you recognize it and it works just the way it was designed to. 

 

And NO, there's no difference between the way science works in your computer and in cosmology.

 

We know this because it's been tested by confirmed predictions.

 

 

 

 

[WalterP]

1 hour ago, Justus said:

 

You do know that the Quran is the third Book of the Trilogy.   The one which Peter made reference of as the third tabernacle. 

 

Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. Matt 17:4
And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. Mark 9:5
 And it came to pass, as they departed from him, Peter said unto Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias: not knowing what he said .  Luke 9:33

 

 

 

If you have complete freedom to believe whatever you want, regardless of any data, Justus...

 

...why do you believe that the Quran is the third book of the trilogy?

 

There could be five books or five hundred.  The tabernacles could have been made by Pontius Pilate or Satan.  Jesus could have been joined by Brad and Angelina, not Moses and Elijah.  You could have been quoting from the gospels according to Stan Lee and Schulz.  

 

If you can believe whatever you like, how can you quote the Bible at us and expect it to mean anything?

 

 

[TEG]

5 hours ago, Justus said:

You do know that the Quran is the third Book of the Trilogy.   The one which Peter made reference of as the third tabernacle.

 

This has got to be a joke, or else someone just being stupid on purpose.  Moses and Elijah represent the law and the prophets.

 

The Matthew passage continues on:

Jesus answered and said to them, “Indeed, Elijah is coming first and will restore all things. But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands.” Then the disciples understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist.

[Not Mohammed, not the Quran.]

 

I don’t know why anyone would continue to argue with someone like this.  I don’t know why I am even posting this.

[LogicalFallacy]

55 minutes ago, TEG said:

I don’t know why anyone would continue to argue with someone like this.  I don’t know why I am even posting this.

 

Yeah I think Justus was trolling with that post. Pretty sure he knows those verses have naught to do with Islam. Barely worth a reply.

[WalterP]

3 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Yeah I think Justus was trolling with that post. Pretty sure he knows those verses have naught to do with Islam. Barely worth a reply.

 

Oh, I don't know, LogicalFallacy.

 

At least he's being consistent with his, 'I can believe anything I like, regardless of what's on the page' approach.

 

We can't fault him on that. 

 

 

[florduh]

pbuh

[LogicalFallacy]

12 hours ago, Justus said:

It is more like ironic when a person believes that a snake can't talk, but it is funner to listen to them tell us why they don't 't believe a snake can talk, wait for it , anymore. LOL

 

When one thinks that reality is a magical fairy tale I can see why they might find sound explanations of why animals can't 'speak human' funny.

 

Um lets see... why can't a snake and a donkey talk... ooh um lemme think... school biology memories coming back... something to do with vocal cords and necessary brain function to form words.

 

Of course when one believes in a god that can constantly change reality as we know it, then all things are possible - which is why its possible for people to believe in the garden of eden, noah's flood etc.

 

Ignoring the environmental factors which make it implausible, the fact that freshwater and saltwater species all managed to survive a turbid debris laden environment that we are supposed to believe is worse than anything ever experienced is enough to make one question the story. What did god do - magically change all water dwelling species to survive the conditions? What about species of animal that require both land and water? And of course apparently in eden the lion didn't eat the lamb, but afterwards magically developed a digestive tract to cope with a meat diet, but apparently in Revelations the lion will one again lay down with the lamb... so must change to a ruminants digestive system again.

 

Bollocks the lot of it.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

[★ Citsonga ★]

[TheRedneckProfessor]

On 11/15/2019 at 6:03 AM, TheRedneckProfessor said:

By the way, @Edgarcito, what evidence would you offer to our ten-year-old sex slave?

Bumped for @Edgarcito

[older]

This thread has become a real hoot. Edgarcito asked us what evidence we would accept. We answered his question. Then he argued with us about our answers and Justus jumps in and steers it off into a discussion about belief. This all reminds me of my wife. She'll ask me what I think she should do about ___ (pick your topic). I'll tell her what I think and then I'll get blasted for my opinion being a bad idea. I've learned (if I remember) to ask, "Do you want my opinion or do you want me to confirm the decision you've already made?"

 

So, Edgarcito and Justus, since we answered the original question, and the fact that we are members of this site shows that we are not going to change our answers, what are you looking for?

[LogicalFallacy]

Older made me think about something regarding not changing our answers. Obviously the evidence any Christian provides that would convince us, isn't going to be the same tired old evidence we've already been over one hundred times is it? We've pointed out why its either not evidence, or not sufficient to warrant acceptance of the claim.

 

So any evidence that is likely to convince is going to be something new that hasn't been considered that is convincing right?

 

So, Justus, Edgarcito - what have you got? Or are you coming back into the court room with the same debunked stuff from last week, and the week before, and millennia ago?

[Joshpantera]

I'd say the evidence of trolling has ramp'd up, per page 5. 

 

WTF? 

[LogicalFallacy]

6 minutes ago, Joshpantera said:

I'd say the evidence of trolling has ramp'd up, per page 5. 

 

WTF? 

 

Oh? What on earth makes you think that? Where is your evidence?  

[older]

1 hour ago, Joshpantera said:

I'd say the evidence of trolling has ramp'd up, per page 5. 

 

WTF? 

In spite of my post above, I'd say that a certain amount of polite trolling is OK as it forces one to sharpen his or her argument and debate skills. It's sort of like a chess game, and when the two players are evenly matched it can be quite fun.

[Edgarcito]

21 hours ago, older said:

This thread has become a real hoot. Edgarcito asked us what evidence we would accept. We answered his question. Then he argued with us about our answers and Justus jumps in and steers it off into a discussion about belief. This all reminds me of my wife. She'll ask me what I think she should do about ___ (pick your topic). I'll tell her what I think and then I'll get blasted for my opinion being a bad idea. I've learned (if I remember) to ask, "Do you want my opinion or do you want me to confirm the decision you've already made?"

 

So, Edgarcito and Justus, since we answered the original question, and the fact that we are members of this site shows that we are not going to change our answers, what are you looking for?

Still pondering my next reply.....have been busy at making a living.  Apologies for the delay.