(October 29, 2013 at 2:55 am)GodsRevolt Wrote: MindForgedManacle's original post to which I was responding claimed that the arguments made by Christians can not be taken together. The claim that there was a disconnect between the first set of arguments and the last two.
I was asking for clarification on this point. He made no case as to the fact that it was made-up and therefor irrelevant.
Actually, I thought I had. My point was is that the philosophical arguments establish a supreme being, and all the historical argument could do even in principle is establish that there was an individual whom claimed to be an emissary or incarnation of that supreme being. But worse, all that argument can do is inform one that there were people who believed said individual was from that supreme being. Even if it could be demonstrated (it can't) that said person actually performed miracles, even that wouldn't do so. Christians don't believe only God can perform miracles, and the Bible itself refutes his claim (Pharaoh's magicians, demons/angels, priests), even at one point going so far as to say that even the elect can be deceived by the miracles of false prophets.
That is the disconnect: Even if I assume the truth of both the philosophical and religious arguments (neither of which are good or work), they don't even establish Christian theism, not as more plausible than ANY other theism, in any case.
