(September 25, 2011 at 7:10 pm)Rhythm Wrote: More of this borrowing nonsense.
ECREE. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Christian claims are extraordinary to say the least. They offer philoso-babble as evidence.
Even if these philoso-babble arguments were sound (we've been all over why they're not convincing), they would still fail to meet their burden of proof.
Conjecture, abstract ideas and theoretical models, even if they make perfect sense, can't substitute for experimentation and hard evidence. The universe is under no obligation to conform to our concepts of what makes sense to us. It sometimes happen that the universe works in ways that we consider counter-intuitive. Simply offering a philosophical argument, even if it is based on sound reasoning (as opposed to an attempt to rationalize the sacred belief already held), at best makes it a hypothesis that is yet to be tested.
Where is the evidence for the extraordinary claims of Christianity? If all they've got is philoso-babble, they've already fallen short of the burden of proof before we even examine the soundness of their logic.
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
