Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(June 29, 2011 at 7:17 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Sure those are the mechanisms you learn by, but there are certain conditions that have to be true in order to use those mechanisms right? You have to presuppose that these are true in order to began observing and learning. I am saying that these conditions cannot be accounted for in an atheistic world. The atheist assumes they are true because he has to, but he cannot account for them given his worldview. So people could certainly learn before Christianity, but they were assuming truths that could only be explained by the existence of the God of the Bible. Does that make more sense?
No it doesn't. To make any sort of sense out of your post, first you must explain what these 'certain conditions' are because the rest of your text hinges on them and makes assumptions based upon them but does not tell you what 'they' actually are.
(June 29, 2011 at 7:17 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Sure those are the mechanisms you learn by, but there are certain conditions that have to be true in order to use those mechanisms right? You have to presuppose that these are true in order to began observing and learning. I am saying that these conditions cannot be accounted for in an atheistic world. The atheist assumes they are true because he has to, but he cannot account for them given his worldview. So people could certainly learn before Christianity, but they were assuming truths that could only be explained by the existence of the God of the Bible. Does that make more sense?
No it doesn't. To make any sort of sense out of your post, first you must explain what these 'certain conditions' are because the rest of your text hinges on them and makes assumptions based upon them but does not tell you what 'they' actually are.
I think they were posted while you were posting this. They are in the second half of post # 140.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
(June 29, 2011 at 7:17 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Absolute morality
A person's senses are generally reliable
A person's memory is generally reliable
There is an underlying uniformity to nature
The future will usually resemble the past
There are laws of logic and we should adhere to them
All of these can be accounted for in a Biblical worldview, they cannot be accounted for in an atheistic worldview even though they are assumed to be true.
Senses aren't reliable neither is memory. Have you ever read the book the invisible gorrila. if not I suggest you do(or even youtube the original experiment) Both are linked to our cognitive ability and nothing to do with God.
Why will the future resemble the past ? can you provide examples please ?
What are these Laws of logic you refer too ?
there is no such thing as absolute morality as everything is context driven.
and can you list these laws of logic.
Also these seem pretty non sequiter to your initial argument Religion and atheism are both HUMAN understanding of the universe.
I used to live in a room full of mirrors; all I could see was me. I take my spirit and I crash my mirrors, now the whole world is here for me to see. Jimi Hendrix
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not. Kurt Cobain
Senses aren't reliable neither is memory. Have you ever read the book the invisible gorrila. if not I suggest you do(or even youtube the original experiment) Both are linked to our cognitive ability and nothing to do with God.
Why will the future resemble the past ? can you provide examples please ?
What are these Laws of logic you refer too ?
there is no such thing as absolute morality as everything is context driven.
and can you list these laws of logic.
Also these seem pretty non sequiter to your initial argument Religion and atheism are both HUMAN understanding of the universe.
Well let's address your first point. Senses are not reliable? Then how do you know you read that book? Memory is not reliable either? How do you know you read that book? How do you know anything for that matter?
danger danger, approaching the border of solipsism.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
(June 29, 2011 at 8:36 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Then how do you know you read that book? Memory is not reliable either? How do you know you read that book? How do you know anything for that matter?
Our senses and memory are reliable enough to enable us to live and succeed in the environment in which we have evolved to live but are easily fooled when it comes to observing and making sense of our universe. This is why we have created many tools and techniques to aid our senses and ensure that we are not fooled.
This is why, for example, at meetings, minutes are taken rather than simply relying on peoples memory of the events.
If we simply relied on our senses to explain everything in the world then we would be prone to believe all sorts of nonsense. Oh, wait
June 29, 2011 at 8:46 pm (This post was last modified: June 29, 2011 at 8:50 pm by Statler Waldorf.)
(June 29, 2011 at 8:43 pm)Rhythm Wrote: danger danger, approaching the border of solipsism.
If you do not assume your senses and memory are generally reliable, yes solipsism is the logical conclusion. However, I assume they are reliable because they should be according to my worldview. The atheist really has no basis for this assumption, he just assumes it because he has to in oder to know anything.
(June 29, 2011 at 8:44 pm)Darwinian Wrote:
(June 29, 2011 at 8:36 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Then how do you know you read that book? Memory is not reliable either? How do you know you read that book? How do you know anything for that matter?
Our senses and memory are reliable enough to enable us to live and succeed in the environment in which we have evolved to live but are easily fooled when it comes to observing and making sense of our universe. This is why we have created many tools and techniques to aid our senses and ensure that we are not fooled.
This is why, for example, at meetings, minutes are taken rather than simply relying on peoples memory of the events.
If we simply relied on our senses to explain everything in the world then we would be prone to believe all sorts of nonsense. Oh, wait
That's why I said generally. We have to assume this though, you cannot demonstrate it without using your senses or someone else’s. This assumption has a basis in the Christian worldview, I have never seen a basis for it in an atheistic worldview though, unless you want to give me one?
![[Image: cinjin_banner_border.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=oggtheclever.com%2Fcinjin_banner_border.jpg)
