Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 25, 2024, 7:09 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 15, 2017 at 11:22 am)Astreja Wrote:
(September 15, 2017 at 11:03 am)Huggy74 Wrote: You're conflating God with god. The capitalization differentiates the deity from an object.

I see your god as just one mental construct among thousands.  In my worldview, your pretend friend is no more real and no more important than any other deity, including deities that appear only in works of modern fiction.  (waves to Lunitari, Offler and Frith)

Discworld and Watership Down in the one post I am impressed.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli

Home
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
Riiiigggghhhttt . Dodgy

The whole scientific community is secretly worshiping satan and that's why they don't buy your bullshit . Or maybe it's the fact it's bullshit . Dodgy
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 15, 2017 at 5:21 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(September 15, 2017 at 4:13 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Undoubtedly, huh?  I wonder why it is then, that this picture has not been named by the modern scientific community as conclusive evidence of supernatural.

Because maybe the scientific community is too busy praising Satan...  Wink




You're a nut, Huggy.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”

Wiser words were never spoken. 
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 15, 2017 at 5:48 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:
(September 14, 2017 at 10:36 am)Huggy74 Wrote: He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all--how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? - Romans 8:32


Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints. - Psalm 116:15

Death cult! Death cult! Everyone join the death cult!

Jesus


I'm sure not joining any death cult which includes resurrection.
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
In view of the actual evidence for Mormonism, (and the special pleading required for all the rest) perhaps we need to have a special category for members on this site coming from a Mormon background ??

Perhaps a credential of sorts might be included in their avatar box advising their religious postings are demonstrably less specious than the rest and that their posts here will enjoy a heightened level of protection by staff in regards to challenges from other religionites ??

We specifically are not acknowledging Mormonism as "The One True Faith", but they are clearly a cut above the folderol we are seeing here from the rest of the God crowd.
 The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it. 




Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 15, 2017 at 12:45 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:
(September 15, 2017 at 6:29 am)SteveII Wrote: Several things wrong here. It does not matter how you want to characterize the information we have. The information serves to make the circumstances between Christianity and Mormonism different so therefore no special pleading can occur...

...I will say it again in case you missed it above: Even if your mischaracterizations are true, there is no special pleading. The information, mode, quantity, timeframe and context are so different, by the definition of special pleading, there could not be any.

From your OP, but the bold is mine:

Quote:For the purposes of this discussion, eyewitness testimony (from any religion) is evidence.  

Central Question: Is it true that other religions have bodies of eyewitness testimony that can be examined in the same or similar way as Christianity's is and therefore are legitimate comparisons in which special pleading can actually occur?

Is there any debate that no major religion that has a fraction of the amount of eyewitness testimony of Christianity to even examine in support of its main claims? If other religions do not have as much eyewitness testimony or there only exists one piece of eyewitness testimony then how could there be any special pleading in favor of Christianity?

What I am saying to you is this - 

1. In this is an assertion or implication that the amount of eyewitness testimony for any given religion somehow elevates it, or distinguishes it as categorically different from the others, and therefore, renders it exempt from charges of special pleading.  You have not demonstrated any reasoning or evidence for this position.  How does the number of people making the supernatural claim make your religion not comparable to others?

I mean, I'm even giving you the benefit of the doubt about witness testimony being classified as evidence.  I could just as easily argue that it doesn't count as evidence, and as such, you have none; same as every other religion's claims.

2. You have not demonstrated, nor do you or anyone else for that matter, have any way of demonstrating what, and how much of the NT is actual eyewitness testimony.   How do you propose to "examine" alleged eyewitness testimony when you can't even confirm that it IS  eyewitness testimony?  You're chopping yourself off at the legs here.

Steve, answer me this: how much of the NT is written by legitimate eyewitnesses, and how did you verify this information to your own satisfaction?  What evidence leads you to your answer?

1. The quantity of eyewitness testimony would not be a category difference. It would simply be justification to treat the two claims/information differently. So, while possible, no special pleading to dismiss one Joe's claim when on the other side you accept multiple attestations of the events for Christianity. This thread went on to start to discuss all (as compared to just eyewitness testimony) the information available on Christianity. This would includes Luke and Paul (not eyewitnesses) and the existing churches. This is information available that supports the eyewitness claims. Now that you have supporting information, the circumstances between Joe and Jesus widens considerably. Because the circumstances being considered are no longer similar, there can be no special pleading to believe one with more information and not the other. 

2. Here is an inductive line of reasoning:

a. Jesus most certainly was born, baptized, and died in the time period claimed. (other sources)
b. Pete, James and John were known eyewitnesses to both the public and private events of Jesus' three year ministry
c. They presided over the early church
d. This early church instructed Paul
e. As evidenced by Paul's letters, this early church believed the claims later outlined in the gospels (long before they where written)
f. Peter, James and John eventually wrote letters in emphasizing the themes found in the gospels
g. Luke wrote Luke and Acts with the purpose of outlining the events from the birth of Christ through his present day
h. The editors of Matthew, Mark, and John were all alive during the lifetimes of these people above (it is unknown if the actual people with the pen were eyewitnesses)
i. The editors would have been know to the recipients of the gospels. The books were name by which apostle influenced that particular book
j. The early church, who we know believed the claims of Jesus already, accepted the gospels. There is nothing in the early church writings that questioned them. 
k. The gospels dovetail nicely with Paul's writings based on his training directly from all the eyewitnesses (completing a loop)
THEREFORE it is reasonable to infer that the events of the gospels are at the very least good representations of what really happened.

Before you jump all over some of the statements above, please realize 1) you do not have proof against any of them (finding someone to agree with you is not proof) and 2) it is inductive reasoning and therefore it is not claiming the list is proof of anything--it is only claiming the inference is reasonable. To be clear, it is NOT a deductive argument which claims fact, fact, therefore fact.  So it is a matter of opinion whether you think the list supports the conclusion or not. 

Why might one believe the inference? Like I said many time, it is part of a cumulative case. There are a host of reasons not related to the NT why one might be less skeptical than you.
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 15, 2017 at 5:21 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(September 15, 2017 at 4:13 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Undoubtedly, huh?  I wonder why it is then, that this picture has not been named by the modern scientific community as conclusive evidence of supernatural.

Because maybe the scientific community is too busy praising Satan...  Wink





Shit, I just got finished praising satan.  Oh wait.  No I didn't.  He's just as phony as your fucking god.

Quote:2. Here is an inductive line of reasoning:

a. Jesus most certainly was born, baptized, and died in the time period claimed. (other sources)

You fail at "a" for lack of evidence.
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
In a thread about christian evidence and special pleading..you tell us that your religious rationalization is based on opinions.  Not fact, fact, therefore fact...........as you put it.

It's not as if every religious nutball somewhere is strongly of the opinion that his religion is true or anything.   Rolleyes
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
Quote: Here is an inductive line of reasoning:

a. Jesus most certainly was born, baptized, and died in the time period claimed. (other sources)
No 
No 
No 
And you have no good sources
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply
RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
(September 16, 2017 at 12:49 am)Khemikal Wrote: In a thread about christian evidence and special pleading..you tell us that your religious rationalization is based on opinions.  Not fact, fact, therefore fact...........as you put it.

It's not as if every religious nutball somewhere is strongly of the opinion that his religion is true or anything.   Rolleyes

Ah, but those religious nutballs don't have such a towering cumulative case of opinions! You see, if I can build a house of cards tall enough to cast a shadow over my brain, then no one can look askance at me (a grown-ass man in the 21st Century) for believing the superstitious -- and as yet un-evidenced -- claims of a small group of people in antiquity. And if you can't disprove my opinions to my satisfaction, then something, something . . . miraclecureswalkonwaterexorcismresurrectionfloatingintothesky.

Ta-Da!

Checkmate, skeptics.   Tongue
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  How can a Christian reject part of the Bible and still call themselves a Christian? KUSA 371 99518 May 3, 2020 at 1:04 am
Last Post: Paleophyte
  Can someone show me the evidence of the bullshit bible articles? I believe in Harry Potter 36 5898 November 3, 2019 at 7:33 pm
Last Post: Jehanne
  If evidence for god is in abundance, why is faith necessary? Silver 181 43456 November 11, 2017 at 10:11 pm
Last Post: Cyberman
  Atheists don't realize asking for evidence of God is a strawman ErGingerbreadMandude 240 33639 November 10, 2017 at 3:11 pm
Last Post: Cyberman
Question Why do you people say there is no evidence,when you can't be bothered to look for it? Jaguar 74 23300 November 5, 2017 at 7:17 pm
Last Post: Pat Mustard
  Personal evidence Silver 19 6660 November 4, 2017 at 12:27 pm
Last Post: c152
  Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence? SteveII 643 156444 August 12, 2017 at 1:36 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  Um, should we do anything special today (Maundy Thursday) ?? vorlon13 27 5904 April 14, 2017 at 8:57 am
Last Post: Harry Nevis
  Evidence: The Gathering Randy Carson 530 103845 September 25, 2015 at 5:14 pm
Last Post: abaris
  With Science and Archaeology and Miracle's evidence for God TheThinkingCatholic 35 12154 September 20, 2015 at 11:32 am
Last Post: Fidel_Castronaut



Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)