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!
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:05 am
(September 12, 2017 at 7:44 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:
(September 11, 2017 at 4:38 pm)Hammy Wrote: I fixed that for you.
A lot of atheists say the cosmological arguments of Aquinas are fallacious but none have yet revealed any flaws in his impeccable logic. Since I am feeling generous I'll just assume you mistakenly relied on the pronouncements of some authority or were swayed by the confident tone of some YouTube video.
But really the topic is essentially whether the claims of the Christian faith are categorically different than those of other faiths and it is pretty obvious that they are.
Aquinas was a primitive shit who didn't know what the fuck he was talking about.
Quote:St. Thomas was a pretty good logician, but the unscientific and erroneous beliefs held in his time makes many of his conclusions irrelevant now that we know the universe better. St. Thomas used the knowledge of the ancients, mainly that of of Aristotle to form his worldview. He did not have the benefit of modern science. The discoveries of DesCartes, Bacon, Newton, Einstein and other modern thinkers and experimenters had not been made.
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:07 am
(September 12, 2017 at 11:04 am)Harry Nevis Wrote:
(September 12, 2017 at 10:38 am)SteveII Wrote: 1. It is not one person's account. There are 9 writers of the NT and hundreds more people referred to that the addressees know.
2. No, your concept of special pleading is off. I am not applying different standards--I am considering the evidence we have. 3. You are espousing a fringe theory. The evidence can be interpreted just as the authors claimed (which is how we interpret every other historical document). Again, I don't care if you don't believe it or believe another theory. You don't have any proof that it is not what it claims to be. It is a matter of opinion as to what the evidence indicates.
4. How in the world would you know that no document every existed that mentioned these things? The only point you have is that there are no surviving documents. Absence of additional evidence is still not evidence of absence.
5. Since you did not debunk any of my points above, we are still left with evidence to consider. Which means that your charge of special pleading is simply wrong.
So, it's a "fringe theory" to look for corroborating evidence for supernatural and historical claims?!
Or is it "fringe" to not be a christian since there are simply so many? Who gives a shit if it's fringe if it is a valid position.
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:12 am (This post was last modified: September 12, 2017 at 11:15 am by Edwardo Piet.)
(September 12, 2017 at 7:44 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: A lot of atheists say the cosmological arguments of Aquinas are fallacious but none have yet revealed any flaws in his impeccable logic.
Well if you can't see why his supposed 'impeccable logic' is a bunch of non-sequiturs then I'm hardly surprised. Your failure to spot non-sequiturs is why you're still a theist.
(September 12, 2017 at 7:44 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: But really the topic is essentially whether the claims of the Christian faith are categorically different than those of other faiths and it is pretty obvious that they are.
Actually the topic is not about whether the claims of the Christian faith are categorically different than those of other faiths. The topic is about whether the evidence in favor of the Christian faith is categorically different from those of other faiths.
The fact you can't tell the difference between mere claims and actual evidence... is yet another reason why you're still a theist.
You and Steve are both very terrible at telling the difference between such things. So it's pretty obvious that that's why you haven't lost your faith.
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:16 am
(September 12, 2017 at 7:44 am)Harry Nevis Wrote: Tested extensively?! Riiiight. BTW, the "conversation" ended when the first person asked for a believer to show some objective, testable evidence. Probably centuries ago. It hasn't changed since. You assert, we ask. You assert, we ask. You assert, we marvel at your gullibility.
Your formatting is horrible by the way.
How about this.
I'm sure many of you are familiar of an event that took place in the bible where the holy spirit took the form of what is describe as tongues of fire that appeared over the heads of the apostles gathered in Jeruselem.
Suddenly a sound like a mighty rushing wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw tongues like flames of a fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. - Acts 2:2-2
Of course you don't believe that actually happened but what if there is evidence of it?
Quote:On the night of January 24, 1950, one of the most amazing photographs of all time was taken in the Sam Houston Coliseum, Houston, Texas. As William Branham stood at the podium, a halo of fire appeared above his head. This picture was the only one that turned out on the entire film! George J. Lacy, Investigator of Questioned Documents, and often hired by the FBI in that capacity, subjected the negative to every scientific test available. At a news conference, he stated, “To my knowledge, this is the first time in all the world’s history that a supernatural being has been photographed and scientifically vindicated.” The original of this photograph is kept in the archives of the Religious Department of the Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C.
William Branham's account.
Quote:When he pulled out the one he snapped, there was the Angel of God's picture whirling around where I was at. The first time in all the world's history that a supernatural Being was ever photographed.
It was rushed to Washington, DC, copyrighted, sent back and give to George J. Lacy, J. Edgar Hoover, examiner. They kept it two days at the Shell Building in Houston.
And when he come over there, and they all set out there together to find out what it was all about, he said, "Whose name is Branham?"
I said, "Mine, sir."
He said, "Stand up." He looked, said, "Mr. Branham, you'll die like all mortals do. But as long as there's a Christian civilization, your picture will never die." He said, "Because it's the first time in all the world's history that a supernatural Being was ever photographed." He said, "The old hypocrite has always said, "They… Scientifically, you can't prove there is a God." But said, "That has to be changed now, for here's scientifically… The Angel of God was there, and the Light struck the negative." There it was. There he signed… wrote out a big document, signed his name to it. There it is right back there. You can look at it yourself. There's the Angel of the Lord.
51-0502 - The Angel Of The Lord
Rev. William Marrion Branham
This photograph was examined by George J. Lacy, (who worked for the FBI as Investigator of Questioned Documents, and would become the president of The American Society of
Questioned Document Examiners in 1956) subjected the negative to every scientific test available.
Photocopy of George J. Lacey's official report and conclusion concerning the tests run on the photograph.
His conclusion,
Quote:Based upon the above described examination and study I am of the definite opinion that the negative submitted for examination, was not retouched nor was it a composite or double exposed negative.
Further, I am of the definite opinion that the light streak appearing above the head in a halo position was caused by the light striking the negative.
Quote:George Lacy was the fifth president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners and the last of the 15 men who established the organization to be elected to that office.
Mr. Lacy's first meeting was the 1942 inaugural meeting of the society. Two years later he married Lucile Peters Lacy who would later become the tenth president of the ASQDE.
During Mr. Lacy's early work in law enforcement he arrested Charles Ponzi, the namesake of the Ponzi Scheme. He began his career in forensic science as a general criminalist and ballistics expert. As a ballistics expert, he worked on the Bonnie and Clyde case. He later specialized in questioned document examination. He was responsible for establishing the Houston Police Crime Laboratory. Mr. Lacy maintained a private practice in Houston, Texas for many years.
Quote:The American Society of Questioned Document Examiners is the world's oldest society dedicated to the forensic science of questioned document examination with 144 members worldwide. The current president is James A. Green. The society publishes the Journal of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners twice a year.
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:24 am (This post was last modified: September 12, 2017 at 11:27 am by Astreja.)
A glitch on a piece of film, and you think that's a miracle?
Heeheeheeheehee!
If that's the best the Holy Spook can do, it can get stuffed.
As for the "American Society of Questioned Document Examiners," a quick glance at the Wikipedia page of the society's founders reveals that the page itself is being questioned for lack of citations -- and all the other listed presidents' names appear in red, indicating that there is no Wikipedia information at all on them. Oh, sweet irony...
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:36 am
. . . and the Christian 'evidence' doesn't point at any one particular schism either. The Catholics say it all proves their take, so do the Lutherans, and the Assembly of God folks, and the Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Westboro Baptists, and the Nazarenes, and the Mormons, and the Church of God in Christ, and the Mennonites, and the Baneemyites, and the Seventh Day Adventists and the Eastern Orthodoxers, and the (skipping the next 70,000) and the Methodists.
How vague, diffuse, unspecific, random, uncorrelated and confusing does this 'evidence' have to be to conclude it's a pile of crapola ??
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:48 am (This post was last modified: September 12, 2017 at 11:49 am by Huggy Bear.)
(September 12, 2017 at 11:24 am)Astreja Wrote: A glitch on a piece of film, and you think that's a miracle?
Heeheeheeheehee!
If that's the best the Holy Spook can do, it can get stuffed.
If you actually took the time to read the report his conclusion is that there had to be a light there to strike the negative
Quote:Based upon the above described examination and study I am of the definite opinion that the negative submitted for examination, was not retouched nor was it a composite or double exposed negative.
Further, I am of the definite opinion that the light streak appearing above the head in a halo position was caused by the light striking the negative.
Respectfully submitted,
George J. Lacy.
*Emphasis mine*
Definite = positive; certain; sure:
so no, not a glitch...
(September 12, 2017 at 11:24 am)Astreja Wrote: As for the "American Society of Questioned Document Examiners," a quick glance at the Wikipedia page of the society's founders reveals that the page itself is being questioned for lack of citations -- and all the other listed presidents' names appear in red, indicating that there is no Wikipedia information at all on them. Oh, sweet irony...
You know you could have just gone directly to their website, all the information is there
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:55 am (This post was last modified: September 12, 2017 at 12:06 pm by LadyForCamus.)
(September 12, 2017 at 11:16 am)Huggy74 Wrote: [quote='Harry Nevis' pid='1618303' dateline='1505216666']
Tested extensively?! Riiiight. BTW, the "conversation" ended when the first person asked for a believer to show some objective, testable evidence. Probably centuries ago. It hasn't changed since. You assert, we ask. You assert, we ask. You assert, we marvel at your gullibility.
Your formatting is horrible by the way.
How about this.
I'm sure many of you are familiar of an event that took place in the bible where the holy spirit took the form of what is describe as tongues of fire that appeared over the heads of the apostles gathered in Jeruselem.
Suddenly a sound like a mighty rushing wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw tongues like flames of a fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. - Acts 2:2-2
Of course you don't believe that actually happened but what if there is evidence of it?
Quote:On the night of January 24, 1950, one of the most amazing photographs of all time was taken in the Sam Houston Coliseum, Houston, Texas. As William Branham stood at the podium, a halo of fire appeared above his head. This picture was the only one that turned out on the entire film! George J. Lacy, Investigator of Questioned Documents, and often hired by the FBI in that capacity, subjected the negative to every scientific test available. At a news conference, he stated, “To my knowledge, this is the first time in all the world’s history that a supernatural being has been photographed and scientifically vindicated.” The original of this photograph is kept in the archives of the Religious Department of the Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C.
William Branham's account.
[hide]
Quote:When he pulled out the one he snapped, there was the Angel of God's picture whirling around where I was at. The first time in all the world's history that a supernatural Being was ever photographed.
It was rushed to Washington, DC, copyrighted, sent back and give to George J. Lacy, J. Edgar Hoover, examiner. They kept it two days at the Shell Building in Houston.
And when he come over there, and they all set out there together to find out what it was all about, he said, "Whose name is Branham?"
I said, "Mine, sir."
He said, "Stand up." He looked, said, "Mr. Branham, you'll die like all mortals do. But as long as there's a Christian civilization, your picture will never die." He said, "Because it's the first time in all the world's history that a supernatural Being was ever photographed." He said, "The old hypocrite has always said, "They… Scientifically, you can't prove there is a God." But said, "That has to be changed now, for here's scientifically… The Angel of God was there, and the Light struck the negative." There it was. There he signed… wrote out a big document, signed his name to it. There it is right back there. You can look at it yourself. There's the Angel of the Lord.
51-0502 - The Angel Of The Lord
Rev. William Marrion Branham
This photograph was examined by George J. Lacy, (who worked for the FBI as Investigator of Questioned Documents, and would become the president of The American Society of
Questioned Document Examiners in 1956) subjected the negative to every scientific test available.
Photocopy of George J. Lacey's official report and conclusion concerning the tests run on the photograph.
His conclusion,
Quote:Based upon the above described examination and study I am of the definite opinion that the negative submitted for examination, was not retouched nor was it a composite or double exposed negative.
Further, I am of the definite opinion that the light streak appearing above the head in a halo position was caused by the light striking the negative.
Quote:George Lacy was the fifth president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners and the last of the 15 men who established the organization to be elected to that office.
Mr. Lacy's first meeting was the 1942 inaugural meeting of the society. Two years later he married Lucile Peters Lacy who would later become the tenth president of the ASQDE.
During Mr. Lacy's early work in law enforcement he arrested Charles Ponzi, the namesake of the Ponzi Scheme. He began his career in forensic science as a general criminalist and ballistics expert. As a ballistics expert, he worked on the Bonnie and Clyde case. He later specialized in questioned document examination. He was responsible for establishing the Houston Police Crime Laboratory. Mr. Lacy maintained a private practice in Houston, Texas for many years.
Quote:The American Society of Questioned Document Examiners is the world's oldest society dedicated to the forensic science of questioned document examination with 144 members worldwide. The current president is James A. Green. The society publishes the Journal of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners twice a year.
[/hide]
Oh, boy. Not the giant, glowing dildo again...
*facepalm*
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 11:56 am
Quote:I'm sure many of you are familiar of an event that took place in the bible where the holy spirit took the form of what is describe as tongues of fire that appeared over the heads of the apostles gathered in Jeruselem.
We are familiar with the claim of such an event. We also marvel at the gullibility of morons who think it really happened!
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 12:04 pm
(September 12, 2017 at 11:03 am)TheBeardedDude Wrote:
(September 12, 2017 at 11:01 am)SteveII Wrote: Regarding the last few posts on evidence and testimony. You are simply redefining the word. I can do a find/replace on every post and substitute 'information' for 'evidence' and it would no nothing to my point. People rationally believe things every second of every day based on testimonial information. It does not impact the topic of the OP: Is it necessary to engage in special pleading to believe Christianity is true --especially as it related to other religions -- but you can expand it to historical criticism if you like.
People believe crystals can heal them based on personal testimony (bullshit information is still information). Who gives a shit? It doesn't mean they are correct. Stories only tell us what you believe, not that what you believe is valid or true or meaningful. You assert otherwise, so back up your claims or acknowledge your logically fallacious bullshit and admit you don't believe for any logical or valid or evidence-based reason.
Or don't and just keep preaching the same drivel as if you are anything other than a simpleton who has been indoctrinated into a cult
Don't expect any more replies from me. You suck at discussion and frankly your reasoning skills, subject knowledge, and character are lacking in measures that make any more attempts futile. Congrats on finding a forum where you can get kudos for being you.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/FJovzGlbuoEXm/giphy.gif)
![[Image: 20150523_bkp504.jpg]](https://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/images/2015/05/blogs/prospero/20150523_bkp504.jpg)
![[Image: halolarge.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=williambranhamstorehouse.com%2Fimages%2Fhalolarge.jpg)
![[Image: George%20Lacy%20Doc5.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.messagequotes.8m.net%2Fimages%2FGeorge%2520Lacy%2520Doc5.jpg)
