Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?

[Minimalist]

So huggies evidence is some light that could have come from anywhere showed up on the film . And that proves angels exist .

He's easily impressed.

[Amarok]

Steve does realize that fictional stories or legends can and do involve real, places ,people and events

[Minimalist]

No.  I don't think he does.

[Angrboda]

Mormons, are you serious? Do you think there is evidence to consider outside Joseph Smith's head?

Jospeh Smith was an eye witness to the miracle of the golden tablets, has second hand testimony from angels, and we have secondary evidence that Joseph Smith was indeed the author of the material -- that's something we don't have for any of the alleged authors of the bible, nobody can verify that 1 Peter was written by Peter. You're treating the evidence of the religion of Mormonism according to a different standard than your own. When Joseph Smith offers eye witness testimony, then it's all in his head. When an anonymous author of the bible offers second hand testimony, why then it's "paleographic gold". That's de facto an example of you special pleading the evidence of Christianity. When you dismiss other religions for reasons that you don't equally apply to your own, that sure as hell is special pleading. A similar argument could be made for Mohammed.

[Simon Moon]

Mormons, are you serious? Do you think there is evidence to consider outside Joseph Smith's head?

Jospeh Smith was an eye witness to the miracle of the golden tablets, has second hand testimony from angels, and we have secondary evidence that Joseph Smith was indeed the author of the material -- that's something we don't have for any of the alleged authors of the bible, nobody can verify that 1 Peter was written by Peter.  You're treating the evidence of the religion of Mormonism according to a different standard than your own.  When Joseph Smith offers eye witness testimony, then it's all in his head.  When an anonymous author of the bible offers second hand testimony, why then it's "paleographic gold".  That's de facto an example of you special pleading the evidence of Christianity.  When you dismiss other religions for reasons that you don't equally apply to your own, that sure as hell is special pleading.  A similar argument could be made for Mohammed.

If we played a drinking game based on taking shots every time Steve and Huggy were guilty of special pleading, we'd all be suffering from alcohol poisoning.

[Astonished]

Totally amazing that, right out of the gate, the apologist has to fudge the terms and make exceptions to definitions IN A THREAD ASKING WHETHER THEIR BULLSHIT IS CONSIDERED SPECIAL PLEADING BECAUSE IT REQUIRES UNIQUE EXCEPTIONS.

[Huggy Bear]

No, you haven't.  You uncritically put forward any delusional shit you like as long as it tells you what you want to fucking hear.  And then, you think it is evidence.

It isn't.

Lets review shall we.

I posted a video of eye witness testimony of Marilyn Hickey claiming she saw an entity in the form of a spinning light.

I also posted the audio of the aforementioned where William Branham clearly states that a supernatural light is present.

I posted a photograph of where this light is positioned just over William Branhams head. (I posted biblical scripture where the same event was recorded, showing a precedent.)

I posted the report of scientific testing done to the negative and the expert opinion stating that there had to be a source of light there to form an image on the negative (this eliminates any anomalies, not to mention lights just don't hang out over peoples heads for no apparent reason)

The Athiest response:



Your denial of the evidence is based on nothing.

Which shows your denial of the evidence is totally irrational seeing how none of you has proven God doesn't exist. Therefore if there is a possibility that God exists, then supernatural events aren't an impossibility.


"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

[Minimalist]

They are such shits.  They would not do well in Ehrman's Bible class at all.

“Before he was born, his mother had a visitor from heaven
who told her that her son would not be a mere mortal but in fact would be divine.  His birth 
was accompanied by unusual divine signs in the heaven 
As an adult he left his home to engage on an itinerant preaching ministry  . . . 
He gathered a number of followers around him who became convinced that he was no 
ordinary human, but that he was the Son of God. 
 And he did miracles
to confirm them in their beliefs:  
he could heal the sick, cast out demons, 
and raise the dead.  
At the end of his life
he aroused opposition among the ruling authorities of Rome and was put on trial.  But they could not kill his soul.  
He ascended to heaven and continues to lives there till this day.  To prove that he lived on after leaving this earthly orb, he appeared again to at least one of his doubting followers,who became convinced that in fact he remains with us even now.  Later, some of his followers wrote books about him, and we can still read about him today . . . ”


Bart Ehrman - speaking of




Apollonius of Tyana!

[Simon Moon]

No, you haven't.  You uncritically put forward any delusional shit you like as long as it tells you what you want to fucking hear.  And then, you think it is evidence.

It isn't.

Lets review shall we.

I posted a video of eye witness testimony of Marilyn Hickey claiming she saw an entity in the form of a spinning light.

I also posted the audio of the aforementioned where William Branham clearly states that a supernatural light is present.

I posted a photograph of where this light is positioned just over William Branhams head. (I posted biblical scripture where the same event was recorded, showing a precedent.)

I posted the report of scientific testing done to the negative and the expert opinion stating that there had to be a source of light there to form an image on the negative (this eliminates any anomalies, not to mention lights just don't hang out over peoples heads for no apparent reason)

The Athiest response:



Your denial of the evidence is based on nothing.

Which shows your denial of the evidence is totally irrational seeing how none of you has proven God doesn't exist. Therefore if there is a possibility that God exists, then supernatural events aren't an impossibility.


"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

No, the atheist response is, "there are way too many possible natural explanations for all those events, to accept that the only explanation is a miracle".

How did you go about ruling out all possible natural explanations?

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

This is actually a fallacious quote.

It is an almost textbook example of argument from ignorance.

[Minimalist]

Marilyn Hickey is a phony money-grubbing cunt who gets rich off of shitheads like you, Huggy.

http://www.forgottenword.org/hickey.html

Marilyn Hickey, wow, has she gotten off the path to righteousness. I am continually amazed at her tactics to raise money. She has now incorporated her daughter into the ministry and has her performing the same deceptive practices against the followers as her mother has done for years.

I mean, if you want to support charlatans go right ahead, idiot.  It's your money.  But please stop insulting everybody's intelligence with this faith-healing horseshit.

Be a moron on your own time.