|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Thiuda
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Location: Religion ist f�r Sklaven geschaffen, f�r Wesen ohne Geist.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Omkara
Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:43 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
[quote="fiveeagles"]
| Omkara wrote: |
FiveEagles Wrote:
| Quote: |
| Muslims may use the same answer, but they don't have the overwhelming evidence on their side. History, creation, sign and miracles, science all point to the existence of a all powerful and loving God. |
Muslim evidence is on a par with Christian evidence. They are absolutely equivalent epistemologically. |
It obviously isn't since one say Jesus was a prophet while the other says He was the son of God. |
Only the content of their claims differ. The support, that by which they claim knowledge, their epistemological standards, are exactly the same. They are both reliant on testimony and so-called revelation alone. Nothing is demonstrable in either case. They are epistemologically equivalent.
Moreover, they are on an equal footing with UFO sightings. At least they can offer evidence. And, their claims require less a stretch of universal laws of physics and causality.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
Secondly, what do you mean by "Science?" Tarot cards?
Show me one piece of evidence that indicates the existence on a loving God. Just one. We'll look at it in detail to see if it in fact is science |
Actually, the onus lies on you. Show me evidence that there isn't a God. |
Your logic is in principle dangerous. Imagine, just for a second, that I accuse your mother of being a witch. Prove to me that she is not.
Therefore, I make the claim: Your mother is a witch. The onus is on you.
My case against your mother:
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5ntikaU
| Quote: |
| Christians are the ones usually accused of 'blind faith', and of refusing to face facts. How ironic that many sceptical scientists demand that God show Himself to their measuring instruments before they will believe, yet they accept the unproven, unscientific idea of 'abiogenesis' without a qualm! |
We do not demand that God show himself. We only want evidence for your claims. I see no irony in this.
Also, they do not accept it without a qualm. Science uses a process called "falsification." They try to show how hypotheses, such as a-biogenisis (which is not evolution), are wrong. This works to prevent error and to correct what is misunderstood.
Watch this to understand the argument better:
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=ozbFerzjkz4&feature=related |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiveeagles
Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Nothing is demonstrable in either case. |
If this is what you believe then why have this argument? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omkara
Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Neither Christianity nor Islam have a demonstrable case.
The second argument we were having was your belief that Christianity was epistemologically superior to Islam. They are equivalently non-demonstrable.
They are both epistemologically inferior to empirical systems of knowledge, including the scientific method.
Therefore, in all matters of law, legislation, governance, social dispute, where claims of knowledge are concerned (including moral claims), empirical systems of epistemology are to be given priority and religion is to be sidelined.
In addition, we should teach our children to not trust the claims of religion, since religion can demonstrate nothing, nor can it predict anything. It is wholly unworthy of our trust where trust is needed.
We, afterall, need to see to it that your mother is treated fairly and with justice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiveeagles
Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Omkara wrote: |
Neither Christianity nor Islam have a demonstrable case.
The second argument we were having was your belief that Christianity was epistemologically superior to Islam. They are equivalently non-demonstrable.
They are both epistemologically inferior to empirical systems of knowledge, including the scientific method.
Therefore, in all matters of law, legislation, governance, social dispute, where claims of knowledge are concerned (including moral claims), empirical systems of epistemology are to be given priority and religion is to be sidelined.
In addition, we should teach our children to not trust the claims of religion, since religion can demonstrate nothing, nor can it predict anything. It is wholly unworthy of our trust where trust is needed.
We, afterall, need to see to it that your mother is treated fairly and with justice. |
Lets stick with the first argument then otherwise it will get too messy and I really don't have time to debate many points. BTW, you missed the point of my question, but that's alright a lot of good info gets missed on this board. 
The case for Christ, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMvaSAwL7_k&feature=related
The Case for Christ - The Findings
Strobel divides the case for Christ into three basic sections:
1. The Historical Record:
The eyewitness evidence (can the biographies of Jesus Christ be trusted, and do they stand up to scrutiny?) The documentary evidence (were the biographies of Jesus reliably preserved for us?) The corroborating evidence (is there credible evidence for Jesus Christ outside of His biographies?) The scientific evidence (does archaeology confirm or contradict Jesus' biographies?) The rebuttal evidence (is the Jesus of history the same as the Jesus of Christian faith?)
2. A Profile of Jesus Christ:
The identity evidence (was Jesus really convinced that He was the Son of God?) The psychological evidence (was Jesus crazy when He claimed to be the Son of God?) The profile evidence (did Jesus fulfill the attributes of God?) The fingerprint evidence (did Jesus - and Jesus alone - match the identity of the prophesied Messiah?)
3. The Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ:
The medical evidence (was the death of Jesus Christ a sham and His resurrection a hoax?) The evidence of the missing body (was Jesus' body really absent from His tomb?) The evidence of His appearances (was Jesus seen alive after His death on the cross?) The circumstantial evidence (are there any supporting facts that point to the resurrection?)
The Case for Christ - Examining the Evidence
In trying the case for Christ, Strobel cross-examined a number of experts and recognized authorities in their own fields of study. He conducted his examination with no religious bias, other than his predisposition to atheism. Remarkably, after compiling and critically examining the evidence for himself, Strobel became a Christian. Stunned by his findings, he organized the evidence into a book he entitled, The Case for Christ, which has won the Gold Medallion Book Award for excellence. Strobel asks one thing of each reader - remain unbiased in your examination of the evidence. In the end, judge the evidence for yourself, acting as the lone juror in the case for Christ.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfb_UCnZvsk&feature=related
Last edited by fiveeagles on Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:13 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fiveeagles wrote: |
...
The Case for Christ - Examining the Evidence
In trying the case for Christ, Strobel cross-examined a number of experts and recognized authorities in their own fields of study. He conducted his examination with no religious bias, other than his predisposition to atheism. Remarkably, after compiling and critically examining the evidence for himself, Strobel became a Christian. Stunned by his findings, he organized the evidence into a book he entitled, The Case for Christ, which has won the Gold Medallion Book Award for excellence. Strobel asks one thing of each reader - remain unbiased in your examination of the evidence. In the end, judge the evidence for yourself, acting as the lone juror in the case for Christ. |
OH, what do you know? The Gold Medallion Book Award is a Christian organization giving awards to Christian books.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/special/goldmedallion
Has anyone non-biased reviewed his evidence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JustJohn
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Location: Your computer screen
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think he gathered any new evidence, he just examined the known facts. I don't think you'll find atheists arguing with his facts, just his conclusions. I remember double checking the facts that surprised me in that book and they were independently verifiable, if that helps.
The book is fairly thorough and ends up resulting in an argument fairly similar to the one that I submitted earlier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
