quote: The entire Bible is about God. God, throughout its pages, is portrayed as the Ultimate authority.
As you told Crashfrog, assertions aren't evidence.
quote: How can you read the Bible and also not agree that according to it, God is the ultimate authority? That's like asking if there is water in an ocean while standing on the beach and looking at it. That's plain unbelief. Do you not understand that God rules this universe when He claims to have created it? That He forgives sins? That He heals diseases? That He give prophecies that come true? That He fights battles for His people? That He performs miracles? That His character is like none other? That His wisdom is beyond human understanding? How can one ignore these, and many like them, and ask for more evidence?
Assertions, assertions, assertions. I asked for evidence, not assertions.
I've never understood the circular reasoning thing and was interested in gaining some understanding in this thread. In Message 1 you stated that God self confesses to be the ultimate authority. To me that means that God claims to be the ultimate authority. But you say that Crashfrog claiming to be the ultimate authority doesn't make him the ultimate authority.
I've been waiting for you to show me the difference. Where does God claim to be the ultimate authority?
If others are claiming he is the ultimate authority, then that isn't God making the claim. You stated in Message 8 you stated:
If we believe X to be the ultimate authority, it CANNOT be on the basis of Y saying that X is the ultimate authority. I think it is obvious why not. I will say it anyway. If Y is the supposed evidence for X being the ultimate authority, then X no longer is a candidate for ultimate authority, Y takes its place.
In Message 35, you don't accept Crashfrog's claim of being an ultimate authority. You ask for proof, but when it comes to God; you don't ask for proof.
I believe that God is always right and perfect, just as He says in His Word. My faith in god's character is my basis for counting God as the ultimate authority.
1. Where does God say he is always right and perfect? 2. If your faith is your basis for counting God as the ultimate authority, then God is no longer the ultimate authority by your own standards.
Remember, this is a science forum and evidence is necessary to back up your argument.
Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motion—for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it. -- Carlene Cross in “The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion”
Are you saying you don't understand the similarities that Crashfrog is trying to show you?
The entire Bible is about God. God, throughout its pages, is portrayed as the Ultimate authority.
Crashfrog's entire posts are about Crashfrog. Crashfrog, throughout his posts, is portrayed as the Ultimate authority.
How can you read the Bible and also not agree that according to it, God is the ultimate authority?
How can you read Crashfrog's posts and also not agree that according to them, Crashfrog is the ultimate authority?
Do you not understand that God rules this universe when He claims to have created it?
No, I do not understand this. Why would it be true? Would you understand that Crashfrog rules the universe if he claimed to have created it? I don't think you would. So why does such a thing work for God?
That He forgives sins? That He heals diseases? That He gives prophecies that come true? That He fights battles for His people? That He performs miracles? That His character is like none other? That His wisdom is beyond human understanding?
But none of this has been demonstrated. It's only written on some paper like many other stories. Like Jumped Up Chimpanzee's claims. Like Crashfrog's claims. Why do you demand that Crashfrog must demonstrate himself outside of his writings, while God does not have to demonstrate himself outside of His writings?
How can one ignore these, and many like them, and ask for more evidence?
"One" is simply asking for the same demonstrations from God that you are demanding from Crashfrog. That is all.
Let here be recorded those exploits and endeavours of The 'Tard of the Hun, and how through his dealings with The Ultimate Authority The Lord Chimp, Great is His anger, he went and conquered a little patch of land known as the Jenssen's place.
For 'twas upon a day that was sunny and warm, with the golden sun, set in the sky by the greatest of authorities, The Lord Chimp, short is His fuse, I, 'Tard of the Hun, was upon the green meadow before my estate. And yonder did I look, and behold such a sight that I had not seen in days. 'Twas the neighbours daughter, known as Violet to some, and pumpkin to others, who, upon this hot and heavy day, did frolic to and fro. Her robes of colourful flowers did a-flutter in the wind. Ah yes, the wind, blown around the Earth by none other than that most authoritative figures of all, The Lord Chimp, his temper be terrible, and doubtless, it blew to reveal to mine eyes the wonderful stilts that did bear aloft this creature of wonderful visage. For this I gave praise to Him, and hoped he would bless me more, for one thing was clear to, as cleasr as the purest water, giving praise to some being so much elevated above us as to be Ultimate in authority, must be pleasing to Him. And He, being pleased, would shower me with the most radiant of blessings, for He is a just authority, though he angers swiftly, 'tis always righteous fury. For a few days did the sun burn my features, and red did I become. Red be the favourite colour of The Lord Chimp, for why else turn his devoted follower so? I undertook on oath to him, saying, "Lord Chimp, If I forswear the use of water as drink for three more days, wouldst thou grant me my desires?" And 'lo! So did he answer with an evaporating puddle, for did not the puddle represent my sin, being taken by his glorious authority? Then one cooling night, when the inner fire of His blessing burned so much I could not sleep, 'twas as if my skin was alight like a thousand candles, I had a vision. A vision of flowers turning red, of flame consuming wood, of love finally recognized and of respect finally won! I knew what The Lord Chimp, his rage be consuming, wanted me to do! I did waste not a drop of sand from my hourglass and did hurry as the wind towards the land I was to conquer. With a ferocious shout I broke down their most foul barrier, it had protected them for long, but against the blessings of an authority such as The Lord Chimp, furious is his mood, there is no safe haven. Upwards my feet carried me ever higher, I was being held aloft by His great want. For wanting this he did, he told me so in every fiber of my body, and I did tingle with excitement. Shouts, the man looked surprised, and that look forever holds his visage, for he liveth no longer, the axe was too sharp. His wife did a-shriek, but silence soon filled this dark cool house, already, the great rage The Lord Chimp had filled me with was subsiding, I was ever closer to what he wished me to do. Entering the final room, my goal lay in sight, I took her up in my arms, still dripping with the life of her captors, and set her free, to be my wife. Now, she lives in m basement, and is happy and content that the great authority did select her to be the start of his new commune of most loyal followers.
So I say unto thee all, do not doubt that there is but one authority, the ultimate authority, The Lord Chimp, berserking ever on.
Well, that should settle this debate over who is the ultimate authority once and for all. And don't criticize this, it only took me about ten minutes to write, so no quality is guaranteed. Oh, and The Lord Chimp will curse you if you speak ill of his followers.
It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon.
There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot.
Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Message 150
I argue that it is impossible to ascribe ultimate authority to someone/something without said someone/something declaring itself the ultimate authority... No matter what the object may be, one cannot ascribe ultimate authority to it unless the object itself categorically declares itself 'I am the ultimate authority'.
quote:Assertion is not equivalent to demonstration.
We are not talking about any and all authorities, only THE ultimate authority, assuming there is one for argument's purposes. If we believe X to be the ultimate authority, it CANNOT be on the basis of Y saying that X is the ultimate authority. I think it is obvious why not.
quote:Self-authentication is not calling yourself something. You think it is, but its not. I don't care if you call yourself the ultimate authority without showing me how you are.
Either you are highly ignorant, or doing your best to dodge the discussion. What is so hard to understand?? I was talking about the process of self-authentication in the paragraph you quoted me. What we count as ultimate authority, if we do, is what *we* believe to be so. In light of this, I did not contradict myself. Think about it... If I say God is the ultimate authority, I will give you the Bible (God) as my basis.
quote: There is no value to your self-authentication when you have provided nothing to authenticate in the first place. All you provided were two claims on paper. Nothing real or substantiate there.
If you're trying to say that there are no sources that corroborate the authenticity of God (the bible), you obviously are wrong.
quote:Well, evidently, your witlessness is preventing you from making any sound judgment. Do you even understand what self-authentication involves? If you want to pronounce yourself ultimate authority, you might as well type "iefgeirznviuzkyrgaldui", it would make no difference to anybody around here, UNLESS, you also substantiated your claim. That is self authentication. Like I said earlier, calling yourself a teapot doesn't make you one.
I can't believe we have gotten down to this nonsense. You do realize that God does things to show how He is the ultimate authority after claiming it , right?
quote:Thank you, you admitted your proposal to be nonsense. Let's talk about what makes a candidate suitable for being the ultimate authority. Proving yourself without authentication is useless and authenticating yourself without proving who you are is arrogant and empty. Let me ask you, what exactly have you authenticated? Nothing. What kind of a moron would isolate the burden of proof from the claim of self-authentication?
If Y is the supposed evidence for X being the ultimate authority, then X no longer is a candidate for ultimate authority, Y takes its place. Do you not understand that God rules this universe when He claims to have created it? That He forgives sins? That He heals diseases? That He give prophecies that come true? That He fights battles for His people? That He performs miracles? That His character is like none other? That His wisdom is beyond human understanding?
quote:You must have missed the part where I acknowledged this fact in my OP.
Sorry. You should've mentioned to me at the beginning that we were talking about *your* version of Christianity. Which, I have no incentive to talk about that.
quote: Perhaps this sums up your attitude towards Christian beliefs. Why do you care? You have your worldview and if you're sticking to it, why should you care about what God says if not to distract the topic...
If I told you that God's character, and self-authentication, and works, and external sources all collectively contributed to my belief, would you then keep quiet?
Perhaps the majority of you here have different beliefs from me. I believe in God on the basis on faith, not evidence. Digital computations based on physical evidence are easy and often wrong. Faith, on the other hand, rests entirely on the credibility of the object being trusted in. If that object proves to be worthy of trust, praise, and authority- then faith becomes valuable and necessary. It is with this appraoch that Christians build the authority of God argument. When God, in and through His Word, proves to be worthy of all authority - then He must be the ultimate Authority. There is no polysemy for the believer. The unbeliever on the other hand is a digital machine that computes and calculates. Is that the right way to approach someone who is intangible and of a completely higher status? You decide. The consensus is to deal in terms of faith and non-faith. For you those of you here whose minds fervidly scan the pages for convincing evidence, there will be none. For those who trust with blind belief, the ultimate evidence is yet to come. But our faith sees it even inspite of its current non-existence. If and when Jesus returns to the earth, like the Bible says, the equivocacy will vanish and even then, the issue will remain a predominantly faith vs non-faith issue like it has always been. Both the existence vs. non-existence issue and faith vs. non-faith issue have been settled for believers. Neither is settled for unbelievers, unless they hold a "I don't know yet" position which in that case, they voluntarily avoid interactions with faith and assume they hold a rationally 'safe' position. A rationally safe position might not be a spiritually safe one. It is with this philosophy that I have proposed to you that God, I believe, is the Ultimate Authority just as He portrays Himself in the Holy Scriptures. You might ask which Holy Scripture? Which canon is authentic? The rational answer invariably is to look for evidence for the canon that conforms best to the orthodox doctrine. That issue can be easily resolved through vigorous scrutiny of evidence. Regardless of the issue of 'which Canon', God, we will all agree is portrayed as supremely authoritative in the Scriptures. There is no need to look for evidence for this. The pages flood with God's display of His authority. Again, taken by faith - this is firm doctrine. For those of us that do choose to have faith in God, this is big deal - that we resolve the issue of whether or not there exists the ultimate authority and if it is Him. God has always self-authenticated everything He is. This is not to say that there lack external sources of verification. Ultimately, a Christian doesn't care what th external sources say. For while there is external evidence that supports God's self-authentication, there are plenty of sources of that have the counter-evidence. The Christian is not playing a "weigh both sides and decide" game. His belief is firmly based on the self-authentication of God. This is the heart of th issue. All of you show strong signs of missing the hwole point of this thread. I'll show you how.
Crashfrog claims that he is the ultimate authority in his own words and wants me to counter that claim in a logical basis. It is simple. I said, prove it. He didn't. Case resolved. (It is surprising that all of you agree with him and bolster his argument). I need no further look into his vacuous claims any further. However, this is not the what God does. The evidence for God being the ultimate authority is on an uncomparably higher level than for crashfrog being the ultimate authority for all that crashfrog has are his own words -which he calls self authentication. But those of us who are familiar with the conept know that that is not self-authentication at all. Self authentication of ultimate authority is when you prove your character in a way that is discernable to all, and THEN, claim all authority. Yes, no claim, including self-authentication, can break its ties with the strong need for proof. Even God's claim to ultimate authority. The only difference is, some accept the claim because their worldview is primed with faith and some don't because their eyes are agog for physical evidence and tangibility.
Despite the smarmy attempts of mockery by some at the topic in discussion, those of you who are as broad-minded as you would like to claim, will see the difference between what I am proposing and what crashfrog and co have been proposing. Both parties agree that proof is necessary for any claim. Yet, when I ask crashfrog to prove his character, he refuses it. Asking God to prove His authority is a matter of one's faith and worldview. Regardless, the point still remains - ultimate authorities become ultimate authorities on the basis of self-authentication of their visibly, and unequivocally proved character.