(March 7, 2018 at 12:58 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(March 6, 2018 at 9:19 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: But the point of the thread isn't even metaphysical. It's epistemological. How the hell do you disprove Odin? -- Whether he's necessary or not, you can't do it.

Yes, from a purely episimological perspective someone cannot disprove any of the Norse gods, fantastic beasts, or cosmic teapots. These are just things within a world of things. As for the Christian God, to the extent that He is identical with the God of Classical Philosophy, He falls into a completely category. So I really don't have time for the various straw man arguments that make this dumb-ass category error. And ultimately, I really don't care whether or not any pagan god exists. Maybe they do in some Star Trek "Who Mourns for Adonais" or Q kind of way but since none are the Supreme Being, none would be worthy of worship as God.

(FWIW I didn't "bail". I'm just tapped out from working, my side-hustle, and serving as my cooperative's board secretary. I do not fault anyone for dropping threads that cease to interest them or if they go silent for long periods of time.)

I have never heard a good explanation for why the Christian god gets his own category.

(March 7, 2018 at 12:58 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(March 6, 2018 at 9:19 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: But the point of the thread isn't even metaphysical. It's epistemological. How the hell do you disprove Odin? -- Whether he's necessary or not, you can't do it.

Yes, from a purely episimological perspective someone cannot disprove any of the Norse gods, fantastic beasts, or cosmic teapots. These are just things within a world of things. As for the Christian God, to the extent that He is identical with the God of Classical Philosophy, He falls into a completely category. So I really don't have time for the various straw man arguments that make this dumb-ass category error. And ultimately, I really don't care whether or not any pagan god exists. Maybe they do in some Star Trek kind of way but since none are the Supreme Being, none would be worthy of worship as God.

The Christian God is a Trinity. He cannot be the Supreme Being. Odin is the one and only God of Classical Philosophy. He is "maximally great" in all the specific ways that Norse theologists have attributed to him (omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, etc.). It's just that, unlike Yahweh, he's not a triune God, but a strictly one and only God. Also, all the stuff you've read about Odin in books are not 100% true, so take what fallible human beings have said about him with a grain of salt, and come and join us in worshiping Odin, the one and only true God. Amen.

So we've switched goalposts now:

"Yahweh is the Supreme Being, but Odin is not."
"Why not?"
"Because I said so..... And because my other arguments would not be valid any other way."

*sigh*

(March 7, 2018 at 12:55 pm)LostLocke Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 11:39 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: In either case, some caution must be used. In observing similar concepts or characteristics; it doesn't follow that there is a connection.  Even if Y looks somewhat like X, you need to show why you think the two are connected, it's not enough to just show that they are similar. 

One might also point out, that you are just pushing the problem back further; and now would be talking about this source which the other was supposedly derived from.  Pointing to something else, certainly is an end of one's argument.

I actually agree with you, but you need to tell Huggy this.
He dismisses Odin out of hand because of those points, but Yahweh also has the same issues. So it comes down to an either/or scenario: You can dismiss ANY god that is similar to older ones, or NO god that is similar to older ones. You can't pick one and not apply the standards to another.

It was to all, I just quoted you, because you isolated that part well.

I would agree, that one needs to be consistent in their reasoning and logic.  The reasons for one thing, should apply to something similar, unless you can justify with reason, that it should not apply.

(March 7, 2018 at 1:02 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 7:40 am)Huggy74 Wrote: No, my argument is that Odin is a myth formed from older myths... The city of Babel existed... Their mythology also existed... That mythology was incorporated into Norse mythology. Therefore since Norse mythology is in no way original, it cannot be the truth, making Odin not real.

Got it?

Did you not say, “I can prove Odin does not exist’?  I’ve forgotten the thread where the original discussion took place.

The OP quoted what I said in the beginning of the thread.

(March 6, 2018 at 8:40 am)Huggy74 Wrote: I'll take you up on submitting evidence against Odin, I won't break a sweat winning that argument.

Start a thread whenever you're ready.

Victory conditions are who has more evidence for or against.

(March 7, 2018 at 1:25 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 1:02 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Did you not say, “I can prove Odin does not exist’?  I’ve forgotten the thread where the original discussion took place.

The OP quoted what I said in the beginning of the thread.

(March 6, 2018 at 8:40 am)Huggy74 Wrote: I'll take you up on submitting evidence against Odin, I won't break a sweat winning that argument.

Start a thread whenever you're ready.

Victory conditions are who has more evidence for or against.

No, victory conditions are who has more evidence corresponding better to one's position than the other. You're failing big time so far, and I note you haven't bothered to address my challenge yet.

(March 7, 2018 at 1:31 pm)Grandizer Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 1:25 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The OP quoted what I said in the beginning of the thread.


Victory conditions are who has more evidence for or against.

No, victory conditions are who has more evidence corresponding better to one's position than the other. You're failing big time so far, and I note you haven't bothered to address my challenge yet.

Who are you to say what the victory conditions are or aren't?

(March 5, 2018 at 7:33 pm)Cecelia Wrote:

(March 5, 2018 at 5:39 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: How about this... I present evidence that God exists and you present evidence that a God does not exist and we'll judge based on who has the most evidence for and against.

How about this... I present evidence that Odin exists and you present evidence that Odin does not exist and we'll judge based on who has the most evidence for and against.

Then we'll repeat that for every other god except the Christian God.  We'll see how you go about obtaining evidence against the existence of these other gods.

*emphasis mine*

Quote:How the hell do you disprove Odin?

The same way you disprove the FSM - or fucking jesus.

(March 7, 2018 at 1:35 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 1:31 pm)Grandizer Wrote: No, victory conditions are who has more evidence corresponding better to one's position than the other. You're failing big time so far, and I note you haven't bothered to address my challenge yet.

Who are you to say what the victory conditions are or aren't?

(March 5, 2018 at 7:33 pm)Cecelia Wrote: How about this... I present evidence that Odin exists and you present evidence that Odin does not exist and we'll judge based on who has the most evidence for and against.

Then we'll repeat that for every other god except the Christian God.  We'll see how you go about obtaining evidence against the existence of these other gods.

*emphasis mine*

Regardless, you've dismissed the stories about Odin, not his existence. It would be the same if I were to dismiss Christian claims because the stories have the character of myth.