|
Most challenging arguement you have faced?
|
 (March 13, 2010 at 9:22 pm)LukeMC Wrote: I'm with Adrian on this one. The TAG argument was definitely the toughest cookie I've ever had the displeasure of trying to chew. And if I'm openly honest about it, I still haven't concretely made up my mind about it and hope for the debate to reignite here sometime. The Matt Slick version?  (March 13, 2010 at 9:44 pm)tavarish Wrote:(March 13, 2010 at 9:22 pm)LukeMC Wrote: I'm with Adrian on this one. The TAG argument was definitely the toughest cookie I've ever had the displeasure of trying to chew. And if I'm openly honest about it, I still haven't concretely made up my mind about it and hope for the debate to reignite here sometime. I couldn't tell you. The version I heard was portrayed by a user on this forum called Jon Paul. I'll look into the Matt Slick version and confirm it for you. (March 13, 2010 at 10:36 pm)LukeMC Wrote:(March 13, 2010 at 9:44 pm)tavarish Wrote:(March 13, 2010 at 9:22 pm)LukeMC Wrote: I'm with Adrian on this one. The TAG argument was definitely the toughest cookie I've ever had the displeasure of trying to chew. And if I'm openly honest about it, I still haven't concretely made up my mind about it and hope for the debate to reignite here sometime. It has to do with the existence of logical absolutes, and how they are conceptual in nature. Anything conceptual is the product of a mind, that mind is God. Praise Jesus. That's basically it in a nutshell. 
I presume by the TAG argument you mean this, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcenden...nce_of_God
The core of it being this, 1/ Knowledge is possible (or some other statement pertaining to logic or morality) 2/ If there is no god, knowledge is not possible 3/ Therefore God exists. I have to ask though how is propostition 2 arrived at? ![[Image: mybannerglitter06eee094.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i118.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fo112%2Fpussinboots_photos%2FBikes%2Fmybannerglitter06eee094.gif) If you're not supposed to ride faster than your guardian angel can fly then mine had better get a bloody SR-71.  (March 13, 2010 at 9:22 pm)LukeMC Wrote: I'm with Adrian on this one. The TAG argument was definitely the toughest cookie I've ever had the displeasure of trying to chew. And if I'm openly honest about it, I still haven't concretely made up my mind about it and hope for the debate to reignite here sometime. Well... Arcanus is back... Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
 (March 13, 2010 at 6:14 pm)Laurens Wrote: I was wondering if any of you have ever had a particularly challenging arguement against your atheism, from a theist? Can't say as I've encountered a particularly tough argument. I always ask for hard evidence and just about every time it comes down to "You have to have faith", or "We can't comprehend God", or "You've closed your mind to the possibility of God", blah blah blah. This seems to be the fallback position for believers.
Science flies us to the moon and stars. Religion flies us into buildings.
God allowed 200,000 people to die in an earthquake. So what makes you think he cares about YOUR problems? 
Or maybe it's a hurdle too high for atheist?
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari (March 15, 2010 at 2:36 pm)tackattack Wrote: Or maybe it's a hurdle too high for atheist? Not sure what you mean here. It is believers who set an unbelievably low bar for "convincing evidence". It is atheists who hold to a high standard. Unlike many believers, unsubstantiated stories in the Bible do not convince me that a deity exists.
Science flies us to the moon and stars. Religion flies us into buildings.
God allowed 200,000 people to die in an earthquake. So what makes you think he cares about YOUR problems?
the height is not the standard of evidence, but the difficulty in accepting said evidence.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari (March 15, 2010 at 5:14 pm)tackattack Wrote: the height is not the standard of evidence, but the difficulty in accepting said evidence. Are they not related? If one has B standard for their evidence... and the evidence presented is not of B quality or higher... would it not be rational that one would have difficulty in accepting said evidence? Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
