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!
Current time: November 14, 2024, 1:58 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(July 21, 2015 at 1:31 pm)Minimalist Wrote: "God" is not an evil fucker.  God doesn't exist.  The primitive fuckheads who invented him were evil fuckers.

They may indeed be malevolent. Or incompetent.

Much like Epicurus's riddle. Similar applies to the goat herders who wrote the holy babble. Indeed.

The only real relevant difference is that Epicurus's riddle is with regards to what God is if he were to exist.

Assuming God does not exist... he is certainly not malevolent (or evil). Nor is he incompetent. I wouldn't really define non-existence as incompetent. It would be meaningless to say that God, fairies, elves and ghosts are incompetent merely because such things do not exist outside our imaginations (God is imaginary, unreal, existent only like superman is existent as a 'character').

But assuming the goat herders who wrote the holy babble, whoever they were, assuming that whoever wrote the holy babble wrote the holy babble (don't bother reading Holy Babble ™... anyone... it's full of Yahweh, Jesus and other wacky shit).................. they may have been evil (or malevolent).... but they may have been incompetent. Which includes deluded, clueless, ignorant, stupid, mad, insane, etc.

Unless by 'evil' you include the impersonal definition of evil. I.e. natural disasters 'are an evil': in the sense that they're bad.

If by 'evil', you are also including that definition. Then yes, the goat herders who wrote the holy babble were necessarily evil at least in that sense.

Thank you.
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 12, 2017 at 8:24 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:
(September 12, 2017 at 8:15 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: All that has been done is a bunch of speculation without having examined the evidence yourself. I forget which part of the scientific method that is...

Lol, Huggy.  Tell us, which part of the scientific method did you use to determine that the light in your picture is the Holy Spirit?

You didn't see the report of the scientific testing that was done to the negative?

It was the examiners own personal opinion that the light was supernatural, in other words THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE.

What you guys have is SPECULATION based on nothing other than the opinion that the supernatural cannot exist...
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 12, 2017 at 8:32 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(September 12, 2017 at 8:24 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Lol, Huggy.  Tell us, which part of the scientific method did you use to determine that the light in your picture is the Holy Spirit?

You didn't see the report of the scientific testing that was done to the negative?

It was the examiners own personal opinion that the light was supernatural, in other words THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE.

What you guys have is SPECULATION based on nothing other than the opinion that the supernatural cannot exist...

He said no such thing.  He said, and I quote (bold mine):

"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."

In other words, he said it was light.
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.”

Wiser words were never spoken. 
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
Quote:You didn't see the report of the scientific testing that was done to the negative?
Yes and it does not support you conclusion

Quote:It was the examiners own personal opinion that the light was supernatural, in other words THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE
No it was not his opinion that it was supernatural . Accept all the explanation we have presented

Quote:What you guys have is SPECULATION based on nothing other than the opinion that the supernatural cannot exist...
Nope shit we know exists and causes similar effects . And no evidence of the supernatural nature has been presented.
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 12, 2017 at 8:32 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(September 12, 2017 at 8:24 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Lol, Huggy.  Tell us, which part of the scientific method did you use to determine that the light in your picture is the Holy Spirit?

You didn't see the report of the scientific testing that was done to the negative?

It was the examiners own personal opinion that the light was supernatural, in other words THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE.

What you guys have is SPECULATION based on nothing other than the opinion that the supernatural cannot exist...

So, scientific reports demonstrate that the photo is legit. So what?

All that shows is that the photo wasn't tampered with.

As LadyOfCamus said, which part of the scientific method gets from an untampered photo, to "my god is responsible"?

Quote:It was the examiners own personal opinion that the light was supernatural, in other words THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE.

Seriously?!

Since when does, "THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE" lead to an explanation?

You are actually saying, "there is no explanation, therefore, there is an explanation. And the only possible explanation is magic".

This is classic argument from ignorance.

Why not just stop at, "there is no explanation"? Then continue with, "I wonder how we can find out the actual explanation?". That is actually the scientific method.

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
Spit Coffee
It's amazing the amount of mental gymnastics you guys perform when faced with scientific evidence that doesn't support your world view..
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 12, 2017 at 8:43 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Spit Coffee
It's amazing the amount of mental gymnastics you guys perform when faced with scientific evidence that doesn't support your world view..


Ah...

So now, critical thinking, requiring good evidence, the scientific method, and rational thinking, is mental gymnastics?

Just what do you have scientific evidence for?

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
Quote:It's amazing the amount of mental gymnastics you guys perform when faced with scientific evidence that doesn't support your world view..
No it's more amazing your still insisting science supports your nonsense. And the gymnastics you use to come to the conclusion Magic!
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 12, 2017 at 8:39 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:
(September 12, 2017 at 8:32 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: You didn't see the report of the scientific testing that was done to the negative?

It was the examiners own personal opinion that the light was supernatural, in other words THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE.

What you guys have is SPECULATION based on nothing other than the opinion that the supernatural cannot exist...

He said no such thing.  He said, and I quote (bold mine):

"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."

In other words, he said it was light.


Huggy lying?!

No! Tell me it ain't so...


No Christian has ever lied for Jesus. Dodgy

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 12, 2017 at 8:43 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Spit Coffee
It's amazing the amount of mental gymnastics you guys perform when faced with scientific evidence that doesn't support your world view..

What "world view" is that exactly?  Rational skepticism?  

I'll ask you again.  Since your own scientific source determined only that the cause of image was light, how did you reach the conclusion that the source of the light was the Holy Spirit?  I find it highly more probable that the light was caused by something natural rather than supernatural, because I know of many, many sources of natural light that actually exist.  This shouldn't be so hard, Hugz.
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.”

Wiser words were never spoken. 
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  How can a Christian reject part of the Bible and still call themselves a Christian? KUSA 371 99317 May 3, 2020 at 1:04 am
Last Post: Paleophyte
  Can someone show me the evidence of the bullshit bible articles? I believe in Harry Potter 36 5867 November 3, 2019 at 7:33 pm
Last Post: Jehanne
  If evidence for god is in abundance, why is faith necessary? Silver 181 42925 November 11, 2017 at 10:11 pm
Last Post: Cyberman
  Atheists don't realize asking for evidence of God is a strawman ErGingerbreadMandude 240 33397 November 10, 2017 at 3:11 pm
Last Post: Cyberman
Question Why do you people say there is no evidence,when you can't be bothered to look for it? Jaguar 74 23260 November 5, 2017 at 7:17 pm
Last Post: Pat Mustard
  Personal evidence Silver 19 6651 November 4, 2017 at 12:27 pm
Last Post: c152
  Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence? SteveII 643 155729 August 12, 2017 at 1:36 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  Um, should we do anything special today (Maundy Thursday) ?? vorlon13 27 5879 April 14, 2017 at 8:57 am
Last Post: Harry Nevis
  Evidence: The Gathering Randy Carson 530 101770 September 25, 2015 at 5:14 pm
Last Post: abaris
  With Science and Archaeology and Miracle's evidence for God TheThinkingCatholic 35 12134 September 20, 2015 at 11:32 am
Last Post: Fidel_Castronaut



Users browsing this thread: 16 Guest(s)