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.
"The legend of Santa Claus can be traced back hundreds of years to a monk named St. Nicholas. It is believed that Nicholas was born sometime around 280 A.D. in Patara, near Myra in modern-day Turkey."
Do you think the monk named St. Nicholas knew who was being referenced by the abbreviation "A.D."?
No, because he lived before the BC/AD dating system.
But as he was at the first council of Nicea, he would have been involved in the debate between the the two versions of Jesus (Arians and Trinitarians).
You were trying to compare belief in Santa Clause with belief in God. It's an absurd analogy.
Only when you do not understand the logic behind analogies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew
Do you think the monk named St. Nicholas believed in God? I'd say it's very likely. It's also very likely that if St. Nicholas were alive today, he'd think your Santa Claus analogy was absurd, too.
That is the point of analogies, to compare similar things. But ALL analogies break down when you look at the differences, that is, you stop treating them as analogies.
You are blaming us because you do not understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew
You've implied that you are capable of demonstrating that God doesn't exist, or that Christianity isn't credible, or something similar. OK, educate me.
Again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew
I will genuinely consider whatever you have to say on the matter.
You once took offence to a comment I made about Catholicism, even though you abandoned that religion! . When you haven’t got anything of substance to respond with, you will use any excuse to react with indignation.
#scrapingthebottomofthebarrel
Except you do tell people what you think they believe.
Your indignant response is ironically lacking substance.
I don't even think you believe what you're saying.
He does and I feel the same way. A Christian apologist who even looks like arguing honestly and with a modicum of open -mindedness or at least with some idea of what they are talking about is like a breath of fresh air. Normally it's the usual evasion, trickiness and trying to evade problems by going on the attack.
Our "Casual Visitor" is an exception; he pops in to say 'Hi' and not to debate. I can have tea and Buns with him.
But those in the peanut gallery see how dishonest it must be.
That's the point. I once referred to a Tracie Harris (6th along in the atheist hall of fame) that if it was just how many people were converted in their 'phone- ins (none) she and Matt would have given up their show long ago. But it was those in their 'peanut gallery' who sent e -mails who showed how much they got from the discussions going on and how persuasive the atheist arguments were.
They aren't always done right. I have sometimes watched Atheist experience and thought 'They could have done that much better'. It's the same here; we are not perfect or superhumans. But I think that we do make some good arguments.
And i have to talk about 'winning'. This is sometimes criticised. It isn't about strutting around feeling pleased with ourselves. It is about getting through a searching peer review and feeling: 'Damn' the idiots bought it'.
nO! I mean 'Well, it looks like I must be onto something'.
But those in the peanut gallery see how dishonest it must be.
You don't think the lurkers realize that the anti-religion bias is so prevalent around here? That you guys are so utterly incapable of providing rational thought (or you just don't want to) in your arguments?
I believe that Harry and I are quite confident that those whose minds are not already totally biased against unbelief will see with crystal clarity which of the two sides argues logically, fairly and from evidence rather than bias.
I believe that Harry and I are quite confident that those whose minds are not already totally biased against unbelief will see with crystal clarity which of the two sides argues logically, fairly and from evidence rather than bias.
Exactly my point. You do a service for the Kingdom of God.
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.
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.
. When you haven’t got anything of substance to respond with, you will use any excuse to react with indignation.
nO! I mean 'Well, it looks like I must be onto something'.
