David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
Whether the arguments are "unsound" or "basically playing with words" is precisely what I am disputing. You can't just assert that it's the case, that's begging the question.
Sir you and KALAM proponents claim arrogantly that premise “everything that begins to exist has a cause to its existence” is true.
Because of Uncertainty principle you cannot know that is true. Therefore you cannot say conclusion is true because premises are true.
You would have to be omniscient.
But wait omniscience is a logically impossible because no being can really know if it really knows everything.
David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
Again, whether they are truly "bogus" or "anonymous" is precisely what I intend to dispute, and
No more begged questions, please
Even the Catholics admit the anonymity : Catholic Encyclopedia says, "The first four historical books of the New Testament are supplied with titles..., which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacred writings."
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06655b.htm
They agree that the traditional titles were a later addition.
That their 2000 years old there is no dispute.
The earlier gospel was dated to be decades after the supposed event:
“The Gospel according to Mark (Greek: Εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ Μᾶρκον, romanized: Euangélion katà Mârkon), also called the Gospel of Mark, or simply Mark, is the second of the four canonical gospels and of the three synoptic Gospels. It tells of the ministry of Jesus from his baptism by John the Baptist to his death, burial, and the discovery of his empty tomb. There is no miraculous birth or doctrine of divine pre-existence,[1] nor, in the original ending (Mark 16:1–8), any post-resurrection appearances of Jesus.”
Most scholars date Mark to c. 66–74 AD, either shortly before or after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark
David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
If He decides to work miracles through some Indian guru, that's His decision. C.S. Lewis said much the same about Vespasian.
Of course, for all I know, Sai Baba's miracle claims don't defy all cultural expectations in his immediate environment, and aren't used to fundamentally redefine key religious notions. In which case, it would be far easier to dismiss them as mere fabrications than it would be to dismiss the Christian miracle of the Resurrection.
Reincarnation is incompatible with Christian doctrine. The whole mutual exclusive thing.
Off course special pleading takes places. My miracle from my religion is special. Those other miracles from other religion are just fabrication.
The same thinks a Hindu or Muslim of your miracle. A mere fabrication.
Off course its easier to dismiss them as mere fabrications when one is already Christian.
Off course its easier to dismiss Supposed Christian miracle when one is Muslim or Hindu.
David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
And? The point of prayer is to recognize one's own reliance on God, not to convince Him to do this or that particular thing.
Off course a personal God intervention in the universe cannot be empirically proved.
The all unfalsifiable hypothesis logic.
Indeed I do.
David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
It was the "de-mythicization" of the natural world by the monotheistic religions that made science possible.
Your subjective interpretation and biased ponderings "de-mythicizate" the bible by calling problematic parts allegorical, metaphorical or whatever other nonsensical excuse. Bible as originally written like any ancient text Mesopotamian or otherwise are full of myths which writers(ancient goat herder ignorant morons) probably view them as historical. They were probably bored at fire gatherings and embellished stories were among the few means of entertainment and be popular. You’ve heard a story that was not that fantastic. What about some cute embellishment to be more popular and cool cuz’ that’s what humans most desire affirmation by peers. Also was probably a means to obtain money, a job like bards did in medieval times. Profit is always a good excuse for embellishment.
After decades of human greed, psychological weakness and oral transmission the embellishment probably transformed mere normal stories in phantasmagorical magical stories that brought profit, popularity to the users of such practices. In the way a movie embellish on scientific facts and historical facts to make the media more watchable, cinematic and therefore bring more profit.
This mechanism is what lead to the magical stories of the old testament(magical construction of a huge boat by one man ignorant ancient goat herder Noah, magical global flood, magical story of Adam and Eve(original sin and corruption of the universe), Samson magical hair or Moses magical feats or Jona magically living in a fish or Babylon magical language story or Egyptians magical plague, magical talking donkey) and magical stories of magical creatures like dragons, giants, nephilims.
David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
Science has confirmed that "de-mythicization" was a Good Idea (TM).
Off course its better to not believe witches-wiccan, gays, fortunetellers should be killed.
Off course its better to not believe its ok to have a slave and to beat him to death as long as he/she does not die the first day or two.
1.Kill Witches
“You should not let a sorceress live.”(Exodus 22:17)
2. Kill Homosexuals
“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”(Leviticus 20:13)
3. Kill Fortunetellers
“A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death.”(Leviticus 20:27)
4. Beating your slave to death
“When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.” (Exodus 21:20-21 )
David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
Science has created gaps in our knowledge that weren't there before.
And religious people have filled them with the easy answer:GOD ad nauseam since the dawn of mankind.
David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
Science has not closed all of the gaps it has created.
Q: So what? That will forever be the case maybe.
That does not gives credence to a forever argument from ignorance and god of the gaps.
David the apologist wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:15 am
Short answer? We know enough about the natural world to place limits on what it's capable of. And those limits are pretty strict.
That is probably what the ancient people thought too. That the supposed all natural world places limits on what it's capable of. When in fact natural world was beyond what they imagine and thought possible. That the natural world is capable of more that you know or can imagine. Their “all natural world” was not all natural world. Just a part. And we have been revising what is “all natural word” since our beginning.
You think that natural world cannot bring forth life and universe through process that do not involve God but maybe you are wrong as the ancient people were.
The long record of being wrong i am afraid does not look well for the newest filling of the newest hole with GOD.