Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Edgarcito

Evidence Types

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

I think we do....not sure how to get around the impasse. 

 

Perhaps you should entertain the possibility that there is no way around the impasse, Endgarcito3?

 

 

And then you might want to ask yourself three further questions.

 

Non-believers can live empathetic and moral lives without faith.

 

Yet, as a man of faith, you failed to show any empathy or moral sympathy towards that 10 year old sex slave.

 

So what's the point of having faith if it doesn't make you as moral or empathetic as a non-believer?

 

What's it for, if not to change you in to a more Christ - like person?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WalterP said:

 

Perhaps you should entertain the possibility that there is no way around the impasse, Endgarcito3?

 

 

And then you might want to ask yourself three further questions.

 

Non-believers can live empathetic and moral lives without faith.

 

Yet, as a man of faith, you failed to show any empathy or moral sympathy towards that 10 year old sex slave.

 

So what's the point of having faith if it doesn't make you as moral or empathetic as a non-believer?

 

What's it for, if not to change you in to a more Christ - like person?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's easier, when you are a person of faith, to write off the suffering of others because "God has a purpose for it" of course. It's all part of the "great plan".

It was this, more than anything else, that I recognized and despised in myself when I was a Christian. You don't need empathy when God's "got it." Youre off the hook. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, and presumably, his brother Jay, are both unique individuals, with different experiences (per your own previous post).  Thus, whatever "testimony" they share, however certain they are, however much in agreement they are,  is neither reproducible nor repeatable, by any other unique individual, as another would experience it filtered through their own senses, perceptions, perspectives, biases etc.  

 

You know this.  But, then, this whole Joe thing was just a charade to get us all back to allowing you to redefine evidence based on personal experience, wasn't it?

 

Poorly played, Edgarcito;  End3 would have done a much better job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Excuse me - dragons are mentioned in the bible all the time!

The Dragon is Satan like Jesus is the Lamb. Those are symbolic, the unicorn was an actual animal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

It's easier, when you are a person of faith, to write off the suffering of others because "God has a purpose for it" of course. It's all part of the "great plan".

It was this, more than anything else, that I recognized and despised in myself when I was a Christian. You don't need empathy when God's "got it." Youre off the hook. 

 

Good for you, TruthSeeker0!  👍

 

Well done for recognizing the selfishness of the 'God's Plan Get's You Off The Hook' kind of faith.

 

You didn't like what you saw in yourself and were honest enough to do something about it.

 

So, do you consider yourself to be a more moral and more empathetic person now, than when you were a Christian?

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, florduh said:

The Dragon is Satan like Jesus is the Lamb. Those are symbolic, the unicorn was an actual animal.

 

In revelations yes.

 

However, feast your eyes... also I want a dragon. Some even say the verse in Job about the leviathan describes a dragon. (Hard scales, breathing fire etc)

 

https://sarata.com/bible/verses/about/dragons.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Poorly played, Edgarcito;  End3 would have done a much better job.

 

Agreed.

 

When he comes back I will push for #1 per one of my posts above.

 

After all - what exactly is Ed trying to provide evidence for?

 

If his claim is Joe saw a cat I'll grant that with no question. If his claim is Joe saw a dragon I'll laugh and ask for some evidence. If the claim is Joe has revelation of a being that cannot be tested I'll be like... uh huh... so since we cannot test it why should we trust Joe?

 

So Ed... #1... what exactly are we talking about providing evidence for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Starting with a definition, of which folks in a debate agree in advance, is an appropriate, rational and expected starting point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

In revelations yes.

 

However, feast your eyes... also I want a dragon. Some even say the verse in Job about the leviathan describes a dragon. (Hard scales, breathing fire etc)

 

https://sarata.com/bible/verses/about/dragons.html

 

I refuse to take your dragons on faith. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, sdelsolray said:

Starting with a definition, of which folks in a debate agree in advance, is an appropriate, rational and expected starting point.

That's fine, but I thought this was a given....the Christian God.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

One thing I would like us to consider is the whether we are discussing truth or belief.

Well, fuck.  Now we have to define "truth;" and we still don't know which version of which interpretation of the "christian" god we're dealing with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

One thing I would like us to consider is the whether we are discussing truth or belief.

 

Evidence I require is.jpg

 

The words Truth and Belief don't occur in the guidelines LogicalFallacy asked you to follow, Endgarcito3.

 

Once again you are trying to put your spin on a thread where you asked us for what non-believers would accept.

 

It's really very simple.

 

Follow the guidelines set down for you and present evidence within that remit, or...

 

...if you can't do that, at least say that you can't.

 

That admission from you shouldn't amount to a loss of face.

 

All it would mean is that there is an unbridgeable gulf between faith and evidence, between believers and non-believers.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

That's fine, but I thought this was a given....the Christian God.

 

 

 

The first of LogicalFallacy's three point guidelines doesn't have the Christian god as a given, Endgarcito3.

 

Please remember, this thread is about what non-believers find acceptable, not what you think should be a given.

 

Once again, if you can't follow what's been set down for you, please say so.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I predict pages and pages of bullshit , resulting in End still being a Christian and the others still being unbelievers. 

 

edit: End will fight the good fight for his personal entertainment to glorify Jesus and the atheists and agnostics will fight the good fight for our personal entertainment for the lurkers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, midniterider said:

I predict pages and pages of bullshit , resulting in End still being a Christian and the others still being unbelievers. 

 

edit: End will fight the good fight for his personal entertainment to glorify Jesus and the atheists and agnostics will fight the good fight for our personal entertainment for the lurkers.

A brief review of the historical data would support your observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, End3, bring back the dragon avatar.  It was cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

One thing I would like us to consider is the whether we are discussing truth or belief.

 

Well Disillusioned has a whole thread set up in the coliseum on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

That's fine, but I thought this was a given....the Christian God.

 

 

 

And what particular characteristics do you define your God to have?

 

As everyone here knows there are many interpretations of the Christian God.

 

We don't want to be barrelling along and say well your god is supposed to be X, only for you to say that your god doesn't have X.

 

If you asked me to define my dog, I'm not going to say "we are talking about my dog", am I? That tells us nothing.

 

So we are talking about your Christian God - the characteristics of which are?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

So we are talking about your Christian God - the characteristics of which are?

 

 

 

 

His super power is invisibility. And silence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is safe enough to assume, given recent topics, that End3's god is neither all-loving nor all-powerful.  That gives us the beginning of a definition, at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

I think it is safe enough to assume, given recent topics, that End3's god is neither all-loving nor all-powerful.  That gives us the beginning of a definition, at least.

 

Not really - its just telling us what he isn't. I could describe my dog as not black and not a St Bernard but you haven't really got a good description of my dog have you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WalterP said:

 

Evidence I require is.jpg

 

The words Truth and Belief don't occur in the guidelines LogicalFallacy asked you to follow, Endgarcito3.

 

Once again you are trying to put your spin on a thread where you asked us for what non-believers would accept.

 

It's really very simple.

 

Follow the guidelines set down for you and present evidence within that remit, or...

 

...if you can't do that, at least say that you can't.

 

That admission from you shouldn't amount to a loss of face.

 

All it would mean is that there is an unbridgeable gulf between faith and evidence, between believers and non-believers.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Walter, I'm of no obligation to follow anything....thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 11/26/2019 at 5:09 PM, sdelsolray said:

Starting with a definition, of which folks in a debate agree in advance, is an appropriate, rational and expected starting point.

 

14 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

That's fine, but I thought this was a given....the Christian God.

 

 

 

Your response is not an appropriate, rational and expected starting point.

Do the work and define your God.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WalterP said:

 

The first of LogicalFallacy's three point guidelines doesn't have the Christian god as a given, Endgarcito3.

 

Please remember, this thread is about what non-believers find acceptable, not what you think should be a given.

 

Once again, if you can't follow what's been set down for you, please say so.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

Again Walter, to attempt some resonance regarding a preferred definition of God might entail would be insurmountable hurdle to clear.  I'm really sorry you don't understand why I skipped past #1.  And again, it's evident we are discussion the Christian God. Thanks again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.