Post Reply
Page 58 of 87  •  Prev 1 ... 56 57 58 59 60 ... 87 Next
2 years ago  ::  May 21, 2012 - 5:17PM #571
tfvespasianus
Posts: 2,074

May 20, 2012 -- 10:19AM, Adelphe wrote:


Let me repeat:  the truth of Christianity's claims does not rest on the character of the one advancing them.


Once again, in more generic terms:  the truth of B does not rest on the character of A.


To argue so is fallacious.




Not just the truth (or lack thereof) or christianity, but of any given proposition. We should all do well to remember that. The classic example is that we make the case that smoking is hazardous to one's health without taking into consideration whether the speaker smokes.

 

I would, however, put less weight behind someone's opinion on dating that had never been on a date (conceding that they could be correct in what they are saying) in the same way someone that does not know how to drive a car might not have as good advice regarding the same as a seasoned driver (while conceding that this is not necessarily true).



Ubi solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant - Tacitus
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 22, 2012 - 12:41PM #572
Adelphe
Posts: 28,707

May 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Paladinsf wrote:


"Once again, in more generic terms:  the truth of B does not rest on the character of A."


UNLESS A asserts that it has the absolute truth w/o error or possibility error and holds such Truth exclusively. Then can one can indeed question why holding such "Truth" does not produce perfect beings.



Except for the fact that A has also asserted exactly why they aren't perfect beings.




And since it OBVIOUS simply proclaiming this stuff does NOTHING to improve one's morality - a fact beyond dispute and already conceded -



I haven't conceded that.  We haven't even discussed what "improve" one's "morality" even means or what that would look like.


Moreover, you couldn't possibly (and don't) have any idea just where Christ has touched the lives of others.  There's some (relatively well-known) Catholic author (forget who) who, when accused of his supposed "belligerence" as being incompatible with Christianity said something like, "you should have seen me before."




in the face of that fact the mythology is FALLICIOUS since it clearly does NOT do what it claims to do.



We were talking about the AIDS epidemic in Africa and the Pope's remarks that condoms don't solve the problem.  They don't--they worsen it.  That has been demonstrated and there is not a thing "fallacious" about it.


 







Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 22, 2012 - 12:49PM #573
Adelphe
Posts: 28,707

May 21, 2012 -- 5:17PM, tfvespasianus wrote:


May 20, 2012 -- 10:19AM, Adelphe wrote:


Let me repeat:  the truth of Christianity's claims does not rest on the character of the one advancing them.


Once again, in more generic terms:  the truth of B does not rest on the character of A.


To argue so is fallacious.




Not just the truth (or lack thereof) or christianity, but of any given proposition. We should all do well to remember that. The classic example is that we make the case that smoking is hazardous to one's health without taking into consideration whether the speaker smokes.

 

I would, however, put less weight behind someone's opinion on dating that had never been on a date (conceding that they could be correct in what they are saying) in the same way someone that does not know how to drive a car might not have as good advice regarding the same as a seasoned driver (while conceding that this is not necessarily true).






I agree--that's why we look at the validity and soundness of the argument itself and not the character of the person making it.  One reason why I, anyway, don't read bnet profiles.  I really don't care where you're "coming from"--your argument stands or falls on its own merits or lack thereof.

Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 22, 2012 - 2:49PM #574
Paladinsf
Posts: 3,660

"You don’t actually have to say it, Paladin. "


I am glad to see you have the guts to admit you are attacking a strawman.Laughing

The World is divided into armed camps ready to commit genocide just because we can't agree on whose fairy tales to believe.
The belief in supernatural religion will kill us all if we don't outgrow it.

When I first read "End of Faith" I thought Sam went too far. The more I read and listen to these "believers" the more I wonder if maybe he wasn't right after all.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 3:44AM #575
Blü
Posts: 24,966

Adelphe


the truth of B does not rest on the character of A."


That's more or less fair enough when we're talking about reality, though as to its cred it matters who says it.


But when we're talking about the supernatural, the imaginary, the person who says it is everything.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 7:25AM #576
Adelphe
Posts: 28,707

May 23, 2012 -- 3:44AM, Blü wrote:


Adelphe


the truth of B does not rest on the character of A."


That's more or less fair enough when we're talking about reality, though as to its cred it matters who says it.


But when we're talking about the supernatural, the imaginary, the person who says it is everything.




Supernatural =/= imaginary.


Anyway, why pretend any person's view "is everything", "when we're talking about the supernatural, the imaginary, the person who says it is everything"?  There's not a person dead or alive whose credibility would matter in the least to you.

Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 8:40AM #577
jlb32168
Posts: 13,341

May 22, 2012 -- 2:49PM, Paladinsf wrote:

"You don’t actually have to say it, Paladin. "I am glad to see you have the guts to admit you are attacking a strawman.


Oh . . . but I made no such admission.  In fact, you left out essential parts of my post so as you misrepresent my point.


The quote, in context, was:


You don’t actually have to say it, Paladin.  You attempted to use guilt by association, that is, some are pedophiles; therefore, none are to be heard since all are instrinsically tainted by association with pedophilia.


You don't seem to be accustomed to people who check your facts and call you on the carpet for misrepresentation.  That's unfortunate because it gives you a false sense of security that you can misrepresent w impunity.  It is my aim to correct your perception of reality, which is clearly unrealistic.


Ex-atheists (or ex-atheist wanna-be)s can be so irritating; can't they?

Victim of this, victim of that, your mama’s too thin and your daddy’s too fat, get over it! - the Eagles
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 10:09AM #578
Blü
Posts: 24,966

Adelphe


Supernatural =/= imaginary.


Since it's never been done before, I await with enormous interest your satisfactory demonstration of the supernatural in reality.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 11:05AM #579
Paladinsf
Posts: 3,660

"Ex-atheists (or ex-atheist wanna-be)s can be so irritating; can't they?"


Not at all. You have ascribed to me a position I did not take and done so with full knowledge such action was both illogical and dishonest. As anyone reading can clearly see. My argument was and IS that taking advice on raising children from pedophiles is rather like taking business advice from the mafia. IF one listens to - and sadly many do - one or more of the pedophiles currently in good standing in the HRCC one is doing something very like listening to the mafia.


 


The larger point, not stated but implied (which for some reason you ignoreLaughing) is that the HRCC simply doesn’t CARE that such actions take place. That the actions of this institution clearly demonstrate a greater concern with the reputation and financial health of the institution than the welfare of children having the misfortune of being caught in its clutches.

The World is divided into armed camps ready to commit genocide just because we can't agree on whose fairy tales to believe.
The belief in supernatural religion will kill us all if we don't outgrow it.

When I first read "End of Faith" I thought Sam went too far. The more I read and listen to these "believers" the more I wonder if maybe he wasn't right after all.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 11:06AM #580
Paladinsf
Posts: 3,660

May 23, 2012 -- 10:09AM, Blü wrote:

Adelphe


Supernatural =/= imaginary.


Since it's never been done before, I await with enormous interest your satisfactory demonstration of the supernatural in reality.


Send me a PM when you get an valid answer.


Otherwise I will continue my nap.Laughing

The World is divided into armed camps ready to commit genocide just because we can't agree on whose fairy tales to believe.
The belief in supernatural religion will kill us all if we don't outgrow it.

When I first read "End of Faith" I thought Sam went too far. The more I read and listen to these "believers" the more I wonder if maybe he wasn't right after all.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 58 of 87  •  Prev 1 ... 56 57 58 59 60 ... 87 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook