Total posts: 7,093
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Then you cannot win. That happens sometimes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Yeah I probably would have taken off if I were them. So now what?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Yeah they are probably gone but better to be sure
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Winning implies a stated goal at the very least. What is your goal in this scenario?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
What does caring have to do with beliefs? I understand that you don't care but that is sidestepping my question not answering it. So I guess now the question is are you willing to put forth enough effort to participate or are we done? It's alright either way and perhaps someday we will find a subject we can both address but if you are not prepared to examine why you do or don't believe then this is as far as we are likely to go on this subject.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Is there a reason to think that superhuman senses are involved? I mean sure we can agree to disagree but I would in the end like to understand your position if that is possible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I don't know. That is the point. It's a ball in a box that we haven't opened.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
Well I do hope that you have a nice day. This is really quite simple however. Either you believe that the ball is red or you don't but whether you care if the ball is red is different than if you believe that the ball is red.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
There is no observable reason to think that anything always was or always will be true. To do so you would need an infinite observation period which we are incapable of giving/investing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
I'm not sure what you mean by disqualifying you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Hmm guess was a little behind events.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I don't reject truth and I don't recognize a difference between truth and Truth unless one can be demonstrated but thank you just the same.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
Let us say instead that there are billions of people and thousands of books each making contradictory claims about the box and that some of them kill each other over the color of the ball and some claim that if you guess the color wrong then you will be tortured for all eternity. That is strictly speaking the most accurate, if and only if we are discussing religion. Honestly however this thought experiment can be applied to any claim which has not been demonstrated not just theological claims. Bigfoot could be the red ball or space aliens or morphic fields or santa clause.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
If you wish to participate I will try again. Do you believe that the ball is red and either way why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I would vote we go to the coffin makers shop first unless one of our other goals is on the way there.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The bare bones is that pga2 has claimed that god is omnipresent god does not allow evil in his presence and that evil definitely exists and all three of these claims cannot simultaneously be true so I am trying to discern which of these claims he is actually willing to stand behind. Once the apparent contradiction is resolved (provided it can be) we may or may not discuss the viability of any claims that still remain on the table.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Mongolia is demonstrably part of the physical universe. If and only if the physical universe exists then we have far better reason to accept Mongolia as existent than we have for anything that is not a demonstrable part of the physical universe and if the physical universe is an illusion then we have equal reason (i.e. none) to believe that Mongolia exists as literally any claim at all.
So your exam0le is nonsense but that's ok you just have a nice day.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
The discussion is about whether or not we can accept that the claim of a red ball is enough on its own to justify a belief in a red ball and if belief is not justified wether rejecting the claim obligated one with a burden of proof in the way that the claim itself does.
That is the discussion. If you don't care about the ball that is fine but you can still answer those questions. If you don't intend to answer those questions then you are not actually participating in the discussion.
You may either participate or go off on a tangent but if you cannot answer those questions then you are not participating by default.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Since there are seven colors in the rainbow and that doesn't include brown black white or grey and since the ball could be dual colored or multicolored and since there could be any number of objects in the box besides a ball or the box could be empty can we at least agree that believing that a purple ball is in the box just because two people who do not know what is in the box claim that it is a red ball or a blue ball doesn't actually improve your chances of being right any more than believing that there is a prismatic cube inside the box as a random decision would?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I saw the image. If the point is not that we cannot be certain of the truth then I'm not sure what the point was.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
What's your point? You don't need to convince me that humans are incapable of objective certainty. You may need to convince me of your claims about objective reality before I am able to accept them however.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Check out post 139 and I think you will see that pga2.0 is going to have to resolve his beliefs about evil and god or there is an apparent contradiction and it doesn't matter what he considered evil to be the contradiction still exists.
Once that issue is resolved he and I may discuss whether or not the concept he thinks of as evil actually exists at all. We will see where the conversation goes.
Until then I am accepting his definition provisionally for the purposes of our conversation about that apparent contradiction. You are under no obligation to do so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
So now there isn't a problem? Did you even have a reason for posting? What did you want to discuss?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
(Sorry if you said how far the winery is I missed it. Is that achievable and still deal with the coffin makers shop today?)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Why are we splitting up? Nobody should go to the coffin makers shop alone and the smithy and coffin makers shop are our only stops right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
you can just take Him on His word and He will truly reveal these things to you
So in order to be convinced I must accept your claims ahead of time? You will forgive me but if your claims cannot convince anyone who doesn't believe before even hearing it then it can't be that convincing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
If you accept that prophecy is audience specific and accurate to that audience
Why should I accept that?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I don't accept prophecy but even if I did it does not justify a belief in god(s) as the two are not synonymous.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
It doesn't matter since his claim about what god(s) do and do not allow is contradictory regardless of his definition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Let's pretend for a moment that I accept the prophecy as being specific and accurate. In that case so What? You still have yet to demonstrate your claim that some god(s) were the source of the prophecy. You seem to be missing the point here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I am willing to accept pga2.0's subjective interpretation in this case (though probably not in all cases).
Created:
Posted in:
How could God be pure and holy if He condoned evil and allowed it in His presence?
Is it your belief that god is omnipresent omnipotent and omniscient?Yes, that is how He is described in the Bible.Follow up question. Does evil exist?Yes, most definitely.
In that case assuming you are correct about all these points then god knowingly allows evil in his presence. Which brings us back too
How could God be pure and holy if He condoned evil and allowed it in His presence?
So how can god be pure and holy?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
The language is specific as to the timeframe.
Oh, I was unaware that any biblical prophecy mentioned a specific date, or even a specific year, but as I said even if the prophecy in question is specific to the minute and 100% accurate you would still have to demonstrate some how that the source of this prophecy was god.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
Here is the full post for your convenience.I will assume that this is a comment You are neither going to explain or qualify since you find the topic uninteresting, though I've been wrong before.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
I thought I had quoted the relevant information. If you disagree then please quote what you feel is relevant. Otherwise as with any claim the claimant cannot or will not demonstrate your claim will be dismissed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Follow up question. Does evil exist?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
I can only tell you what wa said. If there is pertinent information missing then by all means post it. There is a convenient copy paste function so anything I have said can be held against me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
We are told that God gives Daniel visions
So a claim then. What is the extrabiblical evidence for this claim, because again the bible is not evidence in and of itself.
That claim a revelation from God
See there is that troublesome word claim again.
And who do you know who can predict things before they happen with 100% accuracy?
You still have not demonstrated that anything has been predicted in this fashion but depending on the circumstances a mathematician may be able to predict some things with 100% accuracy before they happen.
God would be able to do this.
That is your claim. Claims require a burden of proof from the claimant. That There was a prophecy (100% accurate or not) does not necessitate that any god(s) are the source of said prophecy. Even if some god(s) would be capable of such a feat it does not demonstrate that the hypothetical god(s) in question are actually the source of biblical prophecy.
So basically you say there is impressive 100% accurate prophecy in the bible and I say so what. Even if that is true it does not demonstrate any god(s).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
Secularmerlin: I will assume that this is a comment You are neither going to explain or qualify
As you can see I was clear about what my assumption was. It is only an assumption however and the moment you explain or qualify your statement my assumption would become wrong. That is why assumptions are a poor pathway to truth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
How could God be pure and holy if He condoned evil and allowed it in His presence?
Is it your belief that god is omnipresent omnipotent and omniscient?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
No it will not. Logic and reason do not necessarily lead to truth without accompanying evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
Is my punctuation confusing you to such a degree that you are unable to explain or qualify your statements?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
Secularmerlin: I will assume that this is a comment You are neither going to explain or qualify
Plisken: If that was supposed to be funny, you need to work on your timing. Your assumption is wrong.
It is not wrong so far although you could still render it wrong simply by explaining or qualifying your comment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
No nation lasts forever. Therefore the prediction that a nation will fall is not particularly impressive. Someday America will fall. That prediction does not make me a prophet.
Since you seem intent on discussing prophecy to the exclusion of all else however let's assume for a moment that some biblical prophecy is true and impressive. It still doesn't tell us where this prophecy originates only that predictions were made. Even if the prophets claim a source how can we ever demonstrate that the source they claim is the actual source of the prophecy? It could have been from some god(s) or it could have been some devil(s) or it could have been beamed into their mind by space aliens or they could be the source themselves without the need for an external agency. Even if biblical prophecy were impressive as prophecy it is still unimpressive as evidence of any god(s).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
It could be a list of the world's best yo momma jokes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
I will assume that this is a comment You are neither going to explain or qualify since you find the topic uninteresting, though I've been wrong before.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
Then you don't care about the discussion. The ball in this case is only a stand in for any claim which is made but not demonstrated. It's just a metaphor. Thank you anyway and perhaps someday we will find a subject we can both engage in.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
If you don't care about the discussion then clearly there is no need to continue. Perhaps we will find a subject we can both address someday.
Created: