Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Message of the Bible
Rand Al'Thor
Inactive Member


Message 157 of 213 (77797)
01-11-2004 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by P e t e r
01-11-2004 2:45 PM


I am a green alien from Mars.
Peter by your standards this is evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 2:45 PM P e t e r has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 3:31 PM Rand Al'Thor has not replied

P e t e r
Inactive Member


Message 158 of 213 (77801)
01-11-2004 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by crashfrog
01-10-2004 2:03 PM


I'd say you're the one who doesn't think testimony for God is evidence for God. P e t e r
Yes, of course it isn't. Just as testimony for Santa Claus isn't evidence of Santa Claus. crashfrog
I'd have to say you don't have a complete understanding of evidence.
Earlier you made this statement;
I can present evidence that people believe in Santa Claus. That doesn't make Santa Claus exist.
I'm guessing those people are on the little side of age.
What a world of credulity you must live in! Apparently you're willing to take all testimony at face-value. Let's get rid of the criminal justice system! All we have to do is ask them if they committed a crime or not.
A world of credulity does have various subtleties such as reliability of someone's history of truthfulness.
Imagine parents actually telling their young children there is a Santa Claus without having a belief for Santa.
I suppose the criminal justice system could be considered in a way a temporary fix to an ongoing problem whose solution is yet to be ultimately settled.

Rev 21:8
But to the fearful and unbelieving, [and sinners], and those who make themselves abominable, and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, their part [is] in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone; which is the second death.
As you can see, Christians are only 33% of the world's believers. The majority of humans are non-Christian. Surely this is not a surprise to you?
Correct.
Then maybe you can explain what you meant when you said:
Statistically, in this criteria the evidence favours there is a God.
Once again you are making an inacurate statement about my position
My statement should be taken in relation to my statement immediately prior, which was;
I've yet to come across a person who believes in Jesus who professes there is no God.
To elaborate, say I came across a hundred people who believe in Jesus and none of them told me they didn't believe in God, statisically the evidence favours there is a God.
Why you would say I equate that with all people of various faiths and dispositions where the majority is correct by virtue of size, is beyond me.
Then please make an effort to communicate better. I can hardly be blamed if you're unwilling/unable to effectively communicate eactly what it is you're trying to say.
OK.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by crashfrog, posted 01-10-2004 2:03 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by crashfrog, posted 01-11-2004 3:41 PM P e t e r has replied

P e t e r
Inactive Member


Message 159 of 213 (77805)
01-11-2004 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Rand Al'Thor
01-11-2004 3:20 PM


I am a green alien from Mars.
Peter by your standards this is evidence.
Correct. On behalf of everybody, Welcome to Earth
Question:
When/how did you arrive?
[This message has been edited by P e t e r, 01-11-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Rand Al'Thor, posted 01-11-2004 3:20 PM Rand Al'Thor has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2004 3:37 PM P e t e r has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 160 of 213 (77809)
01-11-2004 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by P e t e r
01-11-2004 3:31 PM


P e t e r
Rand Al'Thor is not a green alien.
Peter by your standards this is evidence.
Which evidence is correct? Mine or Rand Al'Thors'?

"I am not young enough to know everything. "
Oscar Wilde
[This message has been edited by sidelined, 01-11-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 3:31 PM P e t e r has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 4:14 PM sidelined has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 161 of 213 (77813)
01-11-2004 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by P e t e r
01-11-2004 3:28 PM


I'd have to say you don't have a complete understanding of evidence.
And I'd have to say that your distinction between "evidence" and "proof" is disingenuous at best. By your definition of evidence I can provide evidence for literally any statement whatsoever. How useful is evidence if it can support anything, even things that are not true?
I'm guessing those people are on the little side of age.
What does age have to do with it?
A world of credulity does have various subtleties such as reliability of someone's history of truthfulness.
Someone who has never lied can still be mistaken or poorly-informed.
To elaborate, say I came across a hundred people who believe in Jesus and none of them told me they didn't believe in God, statisically the evidence favours there is a God.
How? What if you asked 100 atheists? Wouldn't then the evidence statsitically favor that there was no God? What does asking 100 people who you already know are going to say the same thing prove anything?
Do the words "response bias" mean anything to you? If not then it's clear you don't have the training to make statistical judgements.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 3:28 PM P e t e r has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 5:09 PM crashfrog has replied

P e t e r
Inactive Member


Message 162 of 213 (77823)
01-11-2004 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Asgara
01-11-2004 3:00 PM


In a court of law, if Sally said John committed the murder of Ed and the ONLY "evidence" of this is Sally's say so, it won't wash. If the court cannot find evidence of John's existence, no birth record, no ssn, noone who has ever seen John, except for Sally's assertions, then the court is not going to let be entered as evidence of John's culpability.
You're probably right.
Actually, the post you responded to was a response to WT saying that no matter how much evidence we were shown of god's existence we would still not believe. I asked for "any" evidence of god's existence. All you have given me is evidence of people's beliefs in gods existence, not the evidence that led them to this belief.
Perhaps you've have heard at one time or another someone give the reasons why they believe in God. Probably quite few different angles on that.
I been trying to think of my first evidences of why I believe God exists.
For now, the one that comes to mind is when I was in elementry school I got a Gideons bible and took it contents as true.
Luke 10:22
All things have been delivered to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is but the Father, and who the Father is but the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son is pleased to reveal [him]. 23 And having turned to the disciples privately he said, Blessed are the eyes which see the things that ye see.
[This message has been edited by P e t e r, 01-11-2004]
fixed minor formating probs - The Queen
[This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 01-11-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Asgara, posted 01-11-2004 3:00 PM Asgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by crashfrog, posted 01-11-2004 4:40 PM P e t e r has replied

P e t e r
Inactive Member


Message 163 of 213 (77824)
01-11-2004 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by sidelined
01-11-2004 3:37 PM


P e t e r
Rand Al'Thor is not a green alien.
Peter by your standards this is evidence.
Which evidence is correct? Mine or Rand Al'Thors'?
Ummm, another conflict of evidence.
Perhaps Rand Al'Thor can help us out, is sidelined lying or telling the truth?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2004 3:37 PM sidelined has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 164 of 213 (77829)
01-11-2004 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by P e t e r
01-11-2004 4:09 PM


For now, the one that comes to mind is when I was in elementry school I got a Gideons bible and took it contents as true.
Yeah, they get you at an early age. Like drug pushers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 4:09 PM P e t e r has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 5:36 PM crashfrog has replied

P e t e r
Inactive Member


Message 165 of 213 (77836)
01-11-2004 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by crashfrog
01-11-2004 3:41 PM


How useful is evidence if it can support anything, even things that are not true?
If I'm reading your statement right, evidence can support anything, proof fulfills the accuracy of the evidence.
What does age have to do with it?
Probably because youngsters tend to be trusting towards their parents.
How? What if you asked 100 atheists?
100 atheists who believe in Jesus but not God, that could be tough.
If that could happen, statistically, in this criteria the evidence favours there is no God.
What does asking 100 people who you already know are going to say the same thing prove anything?
I'd have to say it doesn't prove, but as I stated earlier it favours.
Do the words "response bias" mean anything to you? If not then it's clear you don't have the training to make statistical judgements.
Let me check on that.
Response bias — In any study in which responses of some sort (e.g., answers to set questions) are required of PARTICIPANTS, response bias exists if, independently of the effect of any experimental manipulation, the participants are more likely to respond in one way than in another (e.g., more likely, in a multiple-choice task, to choose Option A than Option B).
OK, I'm not an expert on that, but I'm of the opinion when you read something I write you have a tendency to translate it into something I don't mean to write.
Back to that communication problem again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by crashfrog, posted 01-11-2004 3:41 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by crashfrog, posted 01-11-2004 5:14 PM P e t e r has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 166 of 213 (77838)
01-11-2004 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by P e t e r
01-11-2004 5:09 PM


If I'm reading your statement right, evidence can support anything, proof fulfills the accuracy of the evidence.
Why draw the distinction? Can you imagine any situation where somebody would ask for evidence, but not proof? If evidence is useless, why would anybody ask for it?
Proof = evidence. It's just dishonest to try and make a distinction.
100 atheists who believe in Jesus but not God, that could be tough.
If that could happen, statistically, in this criteria the evidence favours there is no God.
What does belief in Jesus have to do with it? If you only ask people who already believe in Jesus, then you're going to get people who already believe in God.
That's not a statistically valid sample. It's tainted by response bias. Try a random sample of human beings from all over the world. You'll find the majority don't believe in the Christian God.
OK, I'm not an expert on that, but I'm of the opinion when you read something I write you have a tendency to translate it into something I don't mean to write.
How? Take the definition (a good one) of "response bias" you found and apply it to the idea of only asking people who already believe in Jesus.
If you think I'm changing your words, you'll have to show me how. I'm merely showing you the consequences of your position - consequences you have not apparently thought out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 5:09 PM P e t e r has not replied

P e t e r
Inactive Member


Message 167 of 213 (77842)
01-11-2004 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by crashfrog
01-11-2004 4:40 PM


Yeah, they get you at an early age. Like drug pushers.
An unfair commentary.
When I got my bible at school, drug pushers wasn't even a possibility of the mind.
Perhaps these days at school bibles are prohibited and drug pushers are a problem.
Proverbs 22:6 Train up the child according to the tenor of his way, and when he is old he will not depart from it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by crashfrog, posted 01-11-2004 4:40 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by crashfrog, posted 01-11-2004 10:50 PM P e t e r has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 168 of 213 (77862)
01-11-2004 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by crashfrog
01-10-2004 8:35 PM


What is your source of information for how God must/should be ?
Who's standard of morality are you using to explain God away ?
Is this standard a rigged litmus test ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by crashfrog, posted 01-10-2004 8:35 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by crashfrog, posted 01-11-2004 10:54 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 169 of 213 (77864)
01-11-2004 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Chiroptera
01-10-2004 8:54 PM


What other set of assumptions are you referring to ?
The Bible teaches that if a person arbitrarily rules God out from being the Creator, then this makes violator eligible, it triggers God's response of punishment, which is He incapacitates your ability to ever want, know, or desire Him.
"...does this insinuate that God controls the ability for any given person to believe in Him ??? "
Yes it does.
Regardless of what anyone may think subjectively, God stringently controls desire for Him. Any desire for God, no matter how large or small originates from Him.
" well John 3:16 says whosoever wills may come "
Dr. Scott says your "willer" won't will unless God allows it to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Chiroptera, posted 01-10-2004 8:54 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 170 of 213 (77865)
01-11-2004 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Brian
01-11-2004 6:19 AM


I am preparing a response to your post/reply. Forthcoming - Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Brian, posted 01-11-2004 6:19 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Yaro, posted 01-12-2004 1:10 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 175 by Brian, posted 01-12-2004 6:14 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 171 of 213 (77885)
01-11-2004 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by P e t e r
01-11-2004 5:36 PM


Proverbs 22:6 Train up the child according to the tenor of his way, and when he is old he will not depart from it.
In other words: "Close his mind as early as possible and it will not open when he is older."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by P e t e r, posted 01-11-2004 5:36 PM P e t e r has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024