RE: Theists: What is the most compelling argument you have heard for Atheism?
March 20, 2017 at 5:41 pm
(This post was last modified: March 20, 2017 at 5:46 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
(March 20, 2017 at 5:24 pm)Whateverist Wrote: Sure, you can document an actual flesh and blood individual. Maybe there was a rabbi named Jesus who is credited with starting the xtian cult. You could document that much, though I don't know and don't care how well that has been done. What you can't do is document the supernatural, wooey claims made for that individual whether actual or not. A documented natural human being doesn't get you to god or any of those extraordinary claims.
By what criteria do you decide which parts of the narrative to accept and which to reject? Is there any objective standard for what makes something extraordinary? A peasant girl named Joan leading the French army to victory. That sounds extraordinary too.
(March 20, 2017 at 5:28 pm)Whateverist Wrote: *Ninja kudos to Mr Agenda. Hadn't read beyond the post I quoted in my last post before I echoed your take.
(March 20, 2017 at 5:25 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Sounds like you've already decided that miracles cannot happen so you edit out those parts. Isn't that kind of like the file-drawer effect?
I assume we'd both expect a high degree of vetting to accept such claims. We're not just talking about whether or not somebody did something we all understand how to do ourselves. It is hard to imagine how one would begin to show conclusively that so-and-so accomplished a 'miracle' by completely non-natural means.
So people ask for evidence of a miracle, I present presumably historical materials attesting to a miracle, and they will not accept it because it describes a miracle. Sounds like special pleading and the original request was disingenuous.
