Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (8963 total)
368 online now:
PaulK, Tangle, vimesey (3 members, 365 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume: Total: 870,871 Year: 2,619/23,288 Month: 810/1,809 Week: 242/225 Day: 2/53 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Power/Reality Of Demons And Supernatural Evil.
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 43 of 334 (70045)
11-30-2003 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Buzsaw
11-22-2003 9:33 PM


quote:
Ned, a whole lot of us consider Fox to be the most unbiased and objective newscasts of the Networks.

LOLOLOL!!!

Buz, let me tell you about how "unbiased" Fox News is.

Zhimbo and I were in Japan this past summer to attend the wedding of a very close, lifelong friend.

He is a professor at a branch of the University of Maryland there and is a subcontracor for the US military.

Because of his being employed by the US military, we were able to stay at a military hotel in Tokyo during our week-long visit.

Fox News was running 24 hours a day on one of the television channels there, and do you know what their tag line was, being viewed in the context of a US militaryhotel?

"Fox News: Part of the Team"

Tell me how considering themselves "part of the military team" is unbiased and ovjective, Buz.

Please explain that to me.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Buzsaw, posted 11-22-2003 9:33 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 44 of 334 (70046)
11-30-2003 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Buzsaw
11-23-2003 11:01 PM


quote:
You're fudging, Crashy. Where's your "weight of evidence" that demons don't exist?

Where is your positive evidence that they do exist?

Do you believe that mental illness, epilepsy, and a bunch of other diseases are caused by demons?

Why or why not?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Buzsaw, posted 11-23-2003 11:01 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Buzsaw, posted 12-26-2003 8:58 PM nator has responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 45 of 334 (70047)
11-30-2003 9:36 AM


Buz, have you heard of an organization called "Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)?

It is a nonpartisan media watchdog group which seeks to expose inaccuracy in all media.

the following is a report about the extreme right-wing bias of Fox news.

http://www.fair.org/extra/0108/fox-main.html

An excerpt:

Fox's founder and president, Roger Ailes, was for decades one of the savviest and most pugnacious Republican political operatives in Washington, a veteran of the Nixon and Reagan campaigns. Ailes is most famous for his role in crafting the elder Bush's media strategy in the bruising 1988 presidential race. With Ailes' help, Bush turned a double-digit deficit in the polls into a resounding win by targeting the GOP's base of white male voters in the South and West, using red-meat themes like Michael Dukakis' "card-carrying" membership in the ACLU, his laissez-faire attitude toward flag-burning, his alleged indifference to the pledge of allegiance--and, of course, paroled felon Willie Horton.

Described by fellow Bush aide Lee Atwater as having "two speeds--attack and destroy," Ailes once jocularly told a Time reporter (8/22/88): "The only question is whether we depict Willie Horton with a knife in his hand or without it." Later, as a producer for Rush Limbaugh's short-lived TV show, he was fond of calling Bill Clinton the "hippie president" and lashing out at "liberal bigots" (Washington Times, 5/11/93). It is these two sensibilities above all--right-wing talk radio and below-the-belt political campaigning--that Ailes brought with him to Fox, and his stamp is evident in all aspects of the network's programming.

Fox daytime anchor David Asman is formerly of the right-wing Wall Street Journal editorial page and the conservative Manhattan Institute. The host of Fox News Sunday is Tony Snow, a conservative columnist and former chief speechwriter for the first Bush administration. Eric Breindel, previously the editorial-page editor of the right-wing New York Post, was senior vice president of Fox's parent company, News Corporation, until his death in 1998; Fox News Channel's senior vice president is John Moody, a long-time journalist known for his staunch conservative views.

Fox's managing editor is Brit Hume, a veteran TV journalist and contributor to the conservative American Spectator and Weekly Standard magazines. Its top-rated talkshow is hosted by Bill O'Reilly, a columnist for the conservative WorldNetDaily.com and a registered Republican (that is, until a week before the Washington Post published an article revealing his party registration--12/13/00).

The abundance of conservatives and Republicans at Fox News Channel does not seem to be a coincidence. In 1996, Andrew Kirtzman, a respected New York City cable news reporter, was interviewed for a job with Fox and says that management wanted to know what his political affiliation was. "They were afraid I was a Democrat," he told the Village Voice (10/15/96). When Kirtzman refused to tell Fox his party ID, "all employment discussion ended," according to the Voice.


Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by nator, posted 12-14-2003 1:21 PM nator has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 59 of 334 (72847)
12-14-2003 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by nator
11-30-2003 9:36 AM


Buz, replies to 44 and 45 in this thread, please.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by nator, posted 11-30-2003 9:36 AM nator has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 65 of 334 (74727)
12-22-2003 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Dart3055
12-21-2003 2:37 AM


Re: thats cool
You are psychic?

Cool.

I hope you don't mind a little test, just so I can be sure of your ability...

Hmmm, why don't you tell me if I have a pet and what it looks like?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Dart3055, posted 12-21-2003 2:37 AM Dart3055 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by mike the wiz, posted 12-23-2003 8:44 AM nator has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 167 of 334 (77710)
01-11-2004 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Buzsaw
12-26-2003 8:58 PM


quote:
1. The Bible which proves itself to be reliable via fulfilled history coupled with history, archeological discoveries, it's effect on peoples and nations, etc.

...and yet, when we ask you for the specifics, the nitty-gritty details of this so-called "evidence" you cannot deliver and must resort to simply denying any counterevidence we present or accusations of bias.

quote:
2. Testimony of ex-spiritualists, missionaries who've witnessed the evil supernatural of the jungles, and other such sources.

We also have very impassioned testimonies of people who claim to have been abducted by aliens, who claim to have been reincarnated (past life regression), and who say that God told them to kill their wife and children.

You are engaging in the logical fallacy of Confirmation Bias again, Buz:

http://www.skepdic.com/confirmbias.html

"Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs."

You see the testimonies which you agree with, yet you ignore all evidence and testimonies which contradict your preferred belief.

So, the result for you, Buz, is that you are not a seeker of truth, but a seeker of comfort.

quote:
3. The accuracy of Biblical description of the demonic, as well as all other satanic evil and it's effects on society. For example, the Bible claims false religious doctrines to be demonically inspired. Interestingly it is often the anti-Christian/Biblical religious doctrines tend to be the violent doctrines which teach violence to compel others to be adherants or which persecute passive Christian churches and organizations.

Of course, you engage in Confirmation bias again, because you ignore the centuries of endorsed violent treatment of non-Christians by Christians.

You also ignore the terribly violent Old Testament.

You ignore the fact that both Christianity and Islam have their roots in Judaism, which the Old Testament shows us was a very, very warlike, "kill-em-if-they-don't-believe" culture.

You also ignore other completely non-violent major world religions, such as Buddhism and Hinduism, both of which take their non-violent philosophy so far as to forbid the killing of animals for food.

quote:
4. Muhammed, Joseph Smith, the Buddah, Shakyamuni and others all had visions or alleged supernatural experiences which inspired them to originate their religions. Either their experiences were of Satan's kingdom or of God's kingdom. Since all these originated doctrines contrary to the Bible, as a Biblical Christian, my opinion is that they are of the kingdom of evil, even though there is some good in all these. As with examples in the Bible, the evil laces the false and the evil with enough good so as to attract adherants and deceive.

Yet more mere personal opinion from you, Buz, not evidence.

quote:
5. People know as "cutters" are a good example of Biblical demonism. I know of a person whose daughter has this need to cut herself. A number of cults and pagan religions do/did things to draw blood in their rituals as well as ofering human sacrifices.

"Cutters" are mentally-ill people, buz.

I cannot actually believe that in this day and age that someone would still believe in demonic posession, but I suppose fear and ignorance and superstition are persistent problems in any age.

Tell me, do you agree with the pastor and family who killed an autistic child while trying to rid him of a "demon"?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/08/25/autistic.boy.death/


This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Buzsaw, posted 12-26-2003 8:58 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Buzsaw, posted 01-18-2004 9:30 PM nator has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 168 of 334 (77711)
01-11-2004 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by Buzsaw
12-31-2003 8:29 PM


quote:
I like Fox because at least they're not afraid to report stuff the others censor out for ideological reasons. They are, to a point "fair and balanced."

No, they are not "fair nor balanced".

Remember what I told you about watching Fox News in the US military hotel when I was in Japan this summer, Buz?

Their tag line was "Part of the Team".

How "fair and balanced" can they be when they are "part of the (US military) team."?

You ignored me the first time I asked you to address this.

Please respnd, and explain how a supposed "fair and balanced" news organization can call itself a "part of the military team"?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Buzsaw, posted 12-31-2003 8:29 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Phat, posted 01-11-2004 9:02 AM nator has responded
 Message 189 by Buzsaw, posted 01-18-2004 8:59 PM nator has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 171 of 334 (77941)
01-12-2004 8:19 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by Phat
01-11-2004 9:02 AM


Re: Reality: Is it absolute unprovable entities?
quote:
Ok...lemme let all ya'lls wisdom sink in....the "Moby Dick" analogy is being touted primarily to suggest that the Bible, rather than being an inerrent book, is just another storybook with some cool philosophy.

Incorrect.

The fact that we find similar messages when we do the bible code thing to Moby Dick, War and Peace, etc. means that there is nothing special about the code found in the bible.

However, this is not evidence that the Bible is "just another story book" nor is it evidence that the bible isn't inerrant.

There's other positive evidence for that.

quote:
At least for those of us who ascribe to human wisdom as the final judge of validity.(The relativist truth seekers)

It all depends upon what you are judging the valitiy of.

quote:
We think too little and stick to our Faith perhaps too much. You guys think too much, and are awaiting a "provable" measureable faith when, perhaps, you should take a leap into it.

Please do not confuse methodological naturalism with ontological naturalism.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Phat, posted 01-11-2004 9:02 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 172 of 334 (77951)
01-12-2004 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by Stephen ben Yeshua
01-11-2004 2:05 PM


Re: Moby Dick inspired writing?
quote:
And the codes are statistically improbable, unless Witztum and a dozen other statisticians/mathematicians are lying.

They are probably not lying, just wrong.

Scientists are wrong all the time.

I mean, are any of the statisticians/mathematicians who think the bible Codes are real NOT religious?

I actually don't know, which is why I'm asking.

Tell me, what evidence would you accept which would cast the validity of the Bible code in doubt for you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-11-2004 2:05 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-12-2004 1:49 PM nator has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 181 of 334 (78187)
01-13-2004 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 180 by Stephen ben Yeshua
01-13-2004 12:56 AM


Re: The Evil Power of Supernatural Inventions
quote:
The beauty of science is that supernatural inventions, or models, can be shown implausible through proper testing.

Um, no they can't.

The supernatural can't be shown to be anything at all by science.

Science copmpletely ignores the supernatural.

Science is use of naturalistic explanations for natural phenomena.

quote:
Of course, we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, especially this baby. Clearly, if there does exist ontologically a malign supernatural agent, they will be expected to work by generating distracting covers, false, "invented" versions of themselves.

Why do you assume that they would be expected to work in this way?

quote:
Inventions that only enhance their evil agenda.

Define "evil" in a scientific way, please.

IOW, what is the universal scientific definition of "evil" that is agreed upon worldwide, by all scientists?

(I am thinking that you are inappropriately ascribing the power of science to award value jusgements here.)

quote:
But, if they are smarter than we are, and more powerful, we need a very protected laboratory to research them. This we must seek God to obtain.

BING BING BING!

Science has just left the building.

quote:
Epistemologically, we will never know any more about Satan than he wants us to know, unless there is a God more powerful than he is to help us.

That's a nice theology, but is totally your personal opinion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-13-2004 12:56 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-13-2004 10:30 AM nator has responded
 Message 188 by Buzsaw, posted 01-18-2004 8:30 PM nator has responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 184 of 334 (78362)
01-14-2004 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 182 by Stephen ben Yeshua
01-13-2004 10:30 AM


Re: The Evil Power of Supernatural Inventions
quote:
Isn't there some rule here about unsupported assertions?

Um, yes.

That's why I wrote what I wrote in my last message about your unsupported assertions.

quote:
Check out the Journal of Scientific Exploration for evidence that you are simply making unsupported assertions. Or ignore that reference and stay ignorant, and lose the debate.

Um, it appears to me that this journal is a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to exploring fringe science.

Why this is relevant, I don't understand.

quote:
Believe the lie, and then you die.

You ask,

Define "evil" in a scientific way, please.

Factors that lower fitness, defined by population genetics. As :ae: as noted, evil has to be defined relative to some subject, of course. Evil, to some genome, is the set of factors that lower its long-term reproductive value. Drives it to extinction.


Really?

Since when does science make value judgements?

Isn't it true that without the mass extinction of the dinosaurs, the proliferation of mammals, and the eventual emergence of primates including humans, would likely not have happened here on Earth?

So, was the extinction of the dinosaurs "evil"?

I think you are making this up as you go along.

quote:
As I have noted, evolutionary thinking appears to lower the reproductive value of those who choose it, probably because it is not true, is a demonic lie designed to deface and destroy creatures beloved by their creator, and made in His image.

Oh-kaaaayyyy...

All the Biologists over the last 100 years are under demonic influence?

The evolution of bacteria we can observe in a petri dish is also demonic?

The amazing similarity between fossil relatedness trees and genetic trees is demonic?

quote:
The demons, for reasons of their own, hate and are at war with this Creator.

Bald religiously-based assumption.

quote:
But He is more powerful than they are, so the demons try to hurt Him by hurting His creation.

Bald, religiously-based assumption.

quote:
They appear to be doing very well with you.

LOL!!

Do you accuse everyone who disagrees with you of demonic influence, or only those who ask you questions you can't seem to answer?

I'm glad we don't live a few centuries ago, and that you don't have the power to send the Inquisitorial posse after me.

Or I'm glad we both don't live in Salem back when folks there got a little crazy.

quote:
Evil, of course, is best defined in regard to the most enlightened subject in the system.

Define "enlightened" in a scientific sense, please.

quote:
You may not define something as evil to you, but it remains evil (scientifically) if it destroys you or your species, because, being more intelligent than you, it has deceived you.

By that definition, just about everything is, or could be, evil, including God.

quote:
At least, this a minimalist approach that the science of population genetics would bring to the subject.

Please show me a population genetics study that makes any valued judgements regarding extinction.

Now, I notice that you ignored most of my previous post. I'd actually like you to address my rebuttals of your claims. That's why I wrote them.

I'll restate here for your convenience:

quote:
Stephen: The beauty of science is that supernatural inventions, or models, can be shown implausible through proper testing.

Schrafinator: Um, no they can't.

The supernatural can't be shown to be anything at all by science.
Science copmpletely ignores the supernatural.

Science is use of naturalistic explanations for natural phenomena.

quote:
Stephen: Of course, we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, especially this baby. Clearly, if there does exist ontologically a malign supernatural agent, they will be expected to work by generating distracting covers, false, "invented" versions of themselves.

Schrafinator: Why do you assume that they would be expected to work in this way?

quote:
Stephen: Epistemologically, we will never know any more about Satan than he wants us to know, unless there is a God more powerful than he is to help us.

Schrafinator: That's a nice theology, but is totally your personal opinion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-13-2004 10:30 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-27-2004 8:54 AM nator has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 195 of 334 (91936)
03-11-2004 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Buzsaw
01-18-2004 8:30 PM


Re: The Evil Power of Supernatural Inventions
[quote]Science copmpletely ignores the supernatural.[quote]

quote:
Yes, we know, like the proverbial ostridge with head securely buried in the sand.

No, as many of us have told you over and over and over again, for YEARS, yet you refuse to learn:

science ignores the supernatural in the same way that professional baseball players ignore bobsled racing.

Professional baseball players, in order to properly play the game of baseball by the rules, ignore bobsledding.

You want to call all of the baseball players, the coaches, the managers, the owners, and the comissioner a bunch of ostriches with their heads in the sand because, while they are playing, coaching, managing, and administering the sport of professional baseball, they REFUSE to apply the rules of baseball to bobsled racing!

Why should they, Buz? What possible sense does it make?


I want to date, and shop, and hang out, and go to school, and save the world from unspeakable demons. You know...girly things." -Buffy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Buzsaw, posted 01-18-2004 8:30 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020