Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
121 online now:
Phat, Stile, Tanypteryx (3 members, 118 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,063 Year: 6,175/6,534 Month: 368/650 Week: 138/278 Day: 6/30 Hour: 0/1

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Did Jesus Exist? by Bart Ehrman
Posts: 6833
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.5

Message 98 of 131 (848849)
02-16-2019 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Phat
02-16-2019 12:11 PM

Re: The Foreign Legion Of Mythos
I can see why you prefer building a case for origins that is based in what we can prove and understand. I can also see why such an approach limits the understanding and conceptualization of a Deity.

We don't need to go that far. Just a cursory glance at human history/psychology shows quite sufficiently that any such conceptions are fictitious.

In other words, if we can't understand it, it likely need not exist for all intents and purposes.

Not that we "can't understand it". We can't understand Dark Energy but we know it exists. Efficaciousness does not require understanding.

With this god thing it is more of a "no discernible effect on anything in this universe" which means no evidence whatsoever. That alone creates the case of "not exist for all intents and purposes."

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Phat, posted 02-16-2019 12:11 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Phat, posted 02-16-2019 5:05 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Posts: 6833
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.5

Message 108 of 131 (848860)
02-16-2019 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Phat
02-16-2019 5:05 PM

Re: The Foreign Legion Of Mythos
They can't find a lot of the supposed antimatter in the universe that should exist either. Does that then mean that it does not exist for ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES?

Bad example. We know that there was once lots of anti-matter and we know why there isn't so much anymore. And since we can make it in our labs we know it does exist regardless of intent or purpose.

One difference between believers and the rest of you in general seems to be that believers presuppose that God should exist.

Why? Because you were told this as an innocent trusting non-critical child?

Later, at around age 30, I became "born again" and felt subjective evidence of His reality

You got emotional. You know how emotion affects judgement.

I'm beginning to think that there is a reason for all of this disconnect in our culture, and I'm not sure how to explain it

How about this: Religion is bad for the culture, the society, the species.

It would be nothing more than my subjective belief anyway, but I am convinced that the scientific method has not neatly tied this argument up yet.

Well, actually science has already decided. Anything that can be asserted without evidence is just as easily dismissed without any concern at all.

look at how often we were wrong before about many things.

You're being a good straight man, Phat.

Having been wrong about so many things in the past is exactly why the scientific methods, all of them, were devised and are so strongly and highly regarded.

And yes, we "limit yourselves by sticking to evidence" and the other things you mention so to avoid the egregious errors of the past and their disastrous consequences.

They all sound like you guys!

Proper analysis of an issue will lead to consensus. Good for us.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Phat, posted 02-16-2019 5:05 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022