(September 17, 2011 at 6:57 am)Ryft Wrote: Still clinging to argumentum ex silentio, despite its fallacious nature. You are nothing if not consistently irrational.
When someone refuses to answer a question despite numerous requests, it's more than fair to assume that the person doesn't have an answer to offer.
Quote:(September 10, 2011 at 9:44 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: ... because if there was any proof that your God existed, we'd have no need for either faith or apologetics.
And non-sequitur. You are compounding fallacies upon fallacies—and without even blushing.
Actually, it does follow and is a relevant point. And while I know you are an apologist, can I ask you to be honest at least about things that are not in dispute?
Christian beliefs are based on faith. This shouldn't be a disputed point. You may argue that there are some shreds of evidence to bolster your faith (which is where apologetist comes in) but that Christianity relies heavily on a leap of faith is an obvious point. Faith, as your Bible says, is the "substance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen" (or proven to exist) (Hebrews 11:1). Jesus supposedly admonished the virtues of believing without reason, saying "blessed are those who have not seen and still believed" (John 20:29).
The authors of the Bible, even in their superstitious day, seemed aware that there was no hard evidence for their beliefs, else they would have simply offered evidence. Then as now, there would be no need for faith if there was hard evidence. To believe the sun exists or that water is wet requires no faith. If God were to appear and address the UN as Yahweh supposedly did to the Jewish people in Judges chapter 1, it would require no faith to believe God exists.
Hence, I'm well aware you can't answer my demands for evidence that your god exists. If you could, it would be an accomplishment only dreamed of by theologians through the ages. You'd be interviewed on international television right now instead of posting on this forum.
Christian apologetics is not the science of studying and presenting known facts about God. You have no yet unseen treasure trove of magical artifacts nor can you produce any faith healers ready to submit their trade to peer reviewed medical examination (despite the Bible's assertion that such healers should exist, Mark 16:17-18). Your god has proven far more shy any mysterious than in the days of the OT when he often spoke "face to face" with his prophets (Ex 33:11).
Christian apologetics is the art of fabricating rationalizations to believe in something that is by admission of the very believers, a matter of faith. Because you have no evidence, you rely on mental slight of hand working toward a preconceived notion and selectively finding reasons to believe it. Mental gymnastics, fallacious reasoning and occasional lies (perhaps more than occasional) are all tricks of the trade. Your clownish knockabout might be funny for the stark realization that this is as rational as Christianity can be.
Hence, my assertion that the whole field of apologetics would be unnecessary if hard evidence existed.
Quote:(September 10, 2011 at 9:44 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Step 1: Start with a belief in your God and realize you need to invent some kind of proof or justification to support that belief.
Since this first step is an illegitimate straw man caricature
Oh please, Ryft, who do you think you're fooling?
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
