RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
January 14, 2014 at 4:12 pm
(This post was last modified: January 14, 2014 at 4:54 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(December 23, 2013 at 12:27 am)orangebox21 Wrote:(December 20, 2013 at 12:10 am)Esquilax Wrote: Things that are demonstrable, repeatable, falsifiable, and in proportion to the claim being proved.
Personally. I can't speak for everyone else, mind.
If you say you can only speak for yourself you imply that standards are relative, that they are not absolute. Do I have that correct? And if the standards for evidence/proof are relative how could a person prove anything to you? If you accept "relative" standards then you would have to accept anyone's proof/evidence so long as they fit within their own set of standards for evidence.
What are the theist standards? Not Christianity's, but theism's. Does it make sense to claim that since theists don't all hold the same standards for evidence/proof, it implies that standards are relative, not absolute? Or does it just mean that theists are a diverse bunch and just being a theist doesn't mean you hold ANY standard of evidence/proof AS a theist?
Esquilax is a rational skeptic, THAT is the context for his/her standards of evidence/proof; not his/her atheism.
(January 3, 2014 at 9:55 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Snip
In fact, these are far more analogous to being taught that God does exist because the parents believe these things are true much like they believe God exists. They do not believe that the Tooth Fairy exists. It was a totally fallacious analogy and you’re usually better than that.
Good point, maybe whether the parents believe it is true is key to whether the kids will believe it is true when they get older.
