Is Bible inerrant

Quote from Hansel H:

Good point. Some might accuse you of semantic nit-picking but not I; if we're sloppy with the application of language our thinking is compromised. Generally excellent response. I'll get back to the balance of it when I have time (soon). Good thinking. I'll have to step up a notch (or two).
More...

I agree about the application of language, and in fact you hit the nail on the head. It is the muddying of language that is one of the hallmarks (as I see it) of the true believer. After all, language is the living codification of the logical process, isn't it? The absolute King of the Hill in this area is the Disgusting Troll, ZZZzzzzzzz. If we needed a license to use English, he would be banned for life as a serial abuser.

Hansel, I may not be able to continue this with you, although you are clearly worth debating. I have spent too much time here in the past on these questions, and I have said basically all I have to say. If I get a chance to participate I will, but please know that even if I don't respond personally, I do welcome your comments and will follow along when I can.
 
Quote from traderNik:

What gives you that idea? I see no logical basis for that statement. Nor am I bothered by the fact that people believe in ghosts and goblins. As I have said here, the majority of people are actively fooling themselves about many thing, choosing to believe that which causes them the least cognitive dissonance. I believe there have been quite a few controlled studies that show that this is the case - most people will tend to believe whatever causes them the least grief. So it's no surprise to me that people believe in fairly tales. I have no need to ask why they do.

(The whole idea that belief in God is 'genetic' is pure assertion at this point - there is no evidence to support it in any way).
More...

What gives me that idea? Studies that dive right in trying to answer the question. The logic is simple. The grand majority of humans and human history demonstrates an innate capacity for dreaming up and believing in supernatural things. Therefore, there must be something to it since it's so widespread. So far it appears that it's an evolutionary adaptation to believe in the supernatural. Did you happen to have a chance to glance over the links I gave you a few pages back?

In any event, you proved my point. You wondered why and answered it as "people tend to believe whatever causes them the least grief. So it's no surprise to me that people believe in fairly tales." But your answer is unsupported by studies in so far as where and why this came about. You just stopped at what causes you the least amount of grief. Or so it seems. I don't know. But it seems as if you are shying away from dealing with the evolutionary aspects of this subject in favor of superficial reasoning. Not sure why. Do you feel that such evolutionary conclusions might excuse the religious and their often malevolent behavior and views?
 
Quote from traderNik:

I agree about the application of language, and in fact you hit the nail on the head. It is the muddying of language that is one of the hallmarks (as I see it) of the true believer. After all, language is the living codification of the logical process, isn't it? The absolute King of the Hill in this area is the Disgusting Troll, ZZZzzzzzzz. If we needed a license to use English, he would be banned for life as a serial abuser.

Hansel, I may not be able to continue this with you, although you are clearly worth debating. I have spent too much time here in the past on these questions, and I have said basically all I have to say. If I get a chance to participate I will, but please know that even if I don't respond personally, I do welcome your comments and will follow along when I can.
More...

Sure thing, Nik. It's been a slice. Sorry I didn't get around (yet) to fully responding to your last post, but I will. You can respond if/when you respond. I trade full-time and have a busy home life so I'm able to understand that these debating commitments can be inconvenient.

Good luck,
Hans
 
"So without evidence for God can we say that the possibility of its existence is extremely remote? Like with fairies?"

I see the technique frequently used by atheists to bring up fairies, unicorns, Santa Claus, and host of other concepts in their arguments. It is a flawed methodology.

The possibility of God is quite different than the former concepts of limited entities.

God alone by definition is not simply some limited entity, not simply one among a pantheon of various entities.

God alone by definition is supreme, without end, without cause, without partial values, without limits of any kind. God is eternal, beyond material restraints.

I have never seen or read of anyone promoting a belief that Santa Claus is the creator and maintainer of the entire universe. Fairies, unicorns, etc. are not matching the definition of God in an manner.

Fairies, unicorns, etc. are also not thought of as a first cause of all subsequent causes.

God is understood to be the first cause, and the possibility of a first cause is anything but remote.

Quote from DerekD:

Ok, granted. So without evidence for God can we say that the possibility of its existence is extremely remote? Like with fairies? I don't think those that believe in God would be willing to state that. Where as an atheist would be more likely to state that given that atheists are atheists because of a lack of evidence other than the fact that most people believe in the supernatural. What I'm saying is, the atheist has to be bothered by that fact and should attempt to address why that's the case. So far it seems that thoughts of the supernatural are a part of our evolutionary development as intelligent and creative species. But there could be more to it than that. The other problem is that Gods appear to be self contradictory as described by the books or stories that detail them.
More...
 
"Justifying religious beliefs is no different."

Simply false.

Belief in an existing God would not be a justification just as belief in any truth would not be a justification.

Now, belief in non God...there's a justification for ya...



Quote from Thunderdog:

Chris Angel (Mindfreak) shows how "psychics" defraud people by getting them to believe their bullshit. People go out of their way to connect the dots to make it work for them. Justifying religious beliefs is no different.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-stKNkR2c0
More...
 
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

"Justifying religious beliefs is no different."

Simply false.

Belief in an existing God would not be a justification just as belief in any truth would not be a justification.

Now, belief in non God...there's a justification for ya...
More...
Spoken like a true believer.

Your presumptive belief precludes you from seeing the very dots that you are straining to connect. Because you never question your belief, you don't know that you are doing it. Just like Chris Angel's tarot reading clients.
 
Quote from DerekD:

What gives me that idea? Studies that dive right in trying to answer the question. The logic is simple. The grand majority of humans and human history demonstrates an innate capacity for dreaming up and believing in supernatural things. Therefore, there must be something to it since it's so widespread. So far it appears that it's an evolutionary adaptation to believe in the supernatural. Did you happen to have a chance to glance over the links I gave you a few pages back?

In any event, you proved my point. You wondered why and answered it as "people tend to believe whatever causes them the least grief. So it's no surprise to me that people believe in fairly tales." But your answer is unsupported by studies in so far as where and why this came about. You just stopped at what causes you the least amount of grief. Or so it seems. I don't know. But it seems as if you are shying away from dealing with the evolutionary aspects of this subject in favor of superficial reasoning. Not sure why.
More...

It may seem that way to you. In my opinion, it seems that way to you because you view the issue through the filter of your faith.

Everything you said above about humans believing in the supernatural, etc etc can be distilled down to one word - faith. Why did humans believe in God for millennia? Faith in God is no surprise. Just because people have believed in the supernatural, doesn't mean there's some 'genetic basis' for it. I see the phrase 'it appears' a lot coming from the faithful. In fact it does not appear to be an evolutionary adaptation to me, not in the least. The faithful also use the 'it appears to be so' argument to incite ID. 'The earth appears to me to be designed, so it must be designed'. That's pure, unadulterated assertion. In any case, as I told Hansel, I have had these debates with the faithful here on ET already. We can agree to disagree. At least you are civil, unlike the Disgusting alcoholic Troll ZZZzzzzzzz who you see polluting these threads once again with his inimitable brand of hypocrisy.
 
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

You certainly are a true believer in your own practice of non God...
More...
Only a true believer sees the absence of practice as the practice of "non." Only true practitioners cannot imagine the absence of practice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top