U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-22-2013, 01:45 AM
 
3,574 posts, read 4,171,618 times
Reputation: 3057

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
Nice straw man.
It's not a straw man when he uses your own logic to create an analogy which shows how your argument is provably false: Two books that say the same thing does NOT mean what they say are true. He is not "equating historical documents to racist ideology." Don't you even know what a straw man argument is? He was making an analogy to showcase your lack of logical thinking... and it certainly showcased it well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2013, 08:42 AM
 
12,130 posts, read 9,875,697 times
Reputation: 15782
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
It would be pointless to answer you (but here it goes), since you have decided to engage in dishonest dialogue. And it isn't the first time you've done it. You talk about logic, while at the same time throwing up illogical strawman arguments.

Equating historical documents to racist ideology is also a form of an equivocation fallacy. And even the content of your post above is an attempt at a semantic shift, which further shows your unwillingness to engage honestly. Your presuppositions are clouding any fruitful discussion.

I do not think you have the foggiest notion what logic is as it seems you think you are employing it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 10:21 AM
 
3,404 posts, read 2,249,612 times
Reputation: 1315
I certainly think the "No True Scotsman" fallacy does apply in the case of religion, just as it does anywhere else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
I don't believe introducing that fallacy in matters of faith is valid. There are impostors everywhere, and 1 John 2:19 is clear about it:"They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us."
Showing that the Bible engages in fallacious reasoning in no way makes it better. It just means that you believe your ad hoc justification to be divinely inspired.

On to the next piece...
This is surely not breaking the TOS. I did ask, and we are discussing something, as opposed to proselytizing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
Not sure if this is breaking the tos. I guess it isn't since you asked.

1. Repenting and placing Faith in Christ alone.

2. Acknowledging your sin problem, then repenting of those sins placing your faith in Christ alone.

3. Once the above has been done, it is a done deal. The fruit of your life will demonstrate if repentance has taken place. This manifests differently for each person.

4.The Bible tells me how I can be sure of my salvation. You should know that.
So from what you have posted, items 1 and 2 are really the same (can't really repent without acknowledging sin...). Repent and believe, fair enough, straight forward, and inconveniently unable to be directly evaluated.

So now that you have repented and believe, how do you know you have been saved? How do others know? Item 3 is a bit fuzzy, but if I understand you, there will be some unspecified thinking or behavior that will both confirm to you and to others that you have been saved.

Item 4, you declined to address at all. I know what I believed, I am interested in what you believe to be evidence of salvation. But even without this piece of the puzzle, we can move forward, I think.

So, far I met the criteria 1 through 3, but I am an atheist. You response was this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
Its obvious that the so called ex believers were just faking their faith and were only in it to try and bribe God and get something in return. It should be expected though. Us humans are selfish beings.
So, even though I have met all the criteria for knowing one is saved that you have provided, you insisted that for over 20 years, I was knowingly lying, trying to cheat God and deceive others. Let me be clear, I was as Christian as you are today. If you had known me 10 years ago, you would have agreed. Simply because I came to a place where I came to believe that I was wrong, you choose to try to retroactively invalidate my personal experience. You cannot accept that I had experienced the same belief you have, and chose something different. That is the truth, whether you want to accept it or not.

Like I said before, it is easier for you to demonize me and discount my experiences, than it is to accept that I was a believer, a really honest to goodness believer, and I chose not to be anymore. That contradicts your doctrine, so you can only choose lies and distortions about me rather than look at your own ideas.

I do stand by what I said earlier, and noted that you did not contradict the truth of my characterization of your belief, but only said that you would not wish it on anyone. That is kind of what I expected.

-NoCapo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2013, 04:34 PM
 
1,639 posts, read 1,565,585 times
Reputation: 1195
Quote:
Originally Posted by logline View Post
It's not a straw man
Yes it is. He misrepresented what I was trying to convey. The dialogue was about the writings compiled in the Bible and circular reasoning. He then tried to shift it to any kind of writings. Content does matter. Example: Comparing a book about the history of the KKK to another book of the same kind, but by a different author would have been a proper analogous statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by logline View Post
He is not "equating historical documents to racist ideology."
Read Post #121.

Quote:
Originally Posted by logline View Post
Don't you even know what a straw man argument is?
I do. You obviously don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by logline View Post
He was making an analogy to showcase your lack of logical thinking.
I've already explained why it wasn't analogous, Therefore proving your lack of critical thinking skills.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2013, 05:59 PM
 
12,130 posts, read 9,875,697 times
Reputation: 15782
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
Yes it is. He misrepresented what I was trying to convey. The dialogue was about the writings compiled in the Bible and circular reasoning. He then tried to shift it to any kind of writings. Content does matter. Example: Comparing a book about the history of the KKK to another book of the same kind, but by a different author would have been a proper analogous statement.
What makes you categorize the bible as a historic book, a "book about history"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top