On The Misuse Of The Term God.

[Alien]

Why do you think Abraham was mythical

It's just a story written at some point in the 1st millennium BCE with no evidence that its sources, if any, go back to the time when Abraham is supposed to live.

"It's just a story"? Do you have evidence for that or do you just mean "We have no direct evidence that it is anything more than just a story"? What sort of evidence could we reasonably expect to have?

A DVD, god couldn't magic one up? Water into wine easy, modern electronics, too tricky!

How about creating a whole universe? Can you do that?

So your evidence for Abraham is the universe?

No. Please read my previous posts.

[Outrider]

So you would not expect any direct evidence then.

Why not?

What if you had something which was evidence? Would you then ask what evidence is there that that evidence is true?

So you're argument then is solipsism? Scientific explanations are only ever provisional, logical derivations are only what they are because they are necessarily true - we have known limitations on the information we have, and we assess evidence against those limitations.

I work the other direction. If the Son of God really did believe that Abraham existed then that's good enough for me.  The crux there then is whether Jesus was and is the Son of God and whether he did believe Abraham existed.

Whether Jesus believed Abraham existed or not is largely irrelevant unless Jesus were the Son of God, and for that there is no credible evidence.

O.

[Alien]

So you would not expect any direct evidence then.

Why not?

Sorry, I thought that was what you were saying. What sort of evidence do you think we should expect if Abraham existed?

What if you had something which was evidence? Would you then ask what evidence is there that that evidence is true?

So you're argument then is solipsism?

No, why do you think that?

Scientific explanations are only ever provisional, logical derivations are only what they are because they are necessarily true - we have known limitations on the information we have, and we assess evidence against those limitations.

And?

I work the other direction. If the Son of God really did believe that Abraham existed then that's good enough for me.  The crux there then is whether Jesus was and is the Son of God and whether he did believe Abraham existed.

Whether Jesus believed Abraham existed or not is largely irrelevant unless Jesus were the Son of God, and for that there is no credible evidence.

O.

And if Jesus is/were the Son of God and said that Abraham existed, would that count? If not, why not, please?

[Outrider]

Sorry, I thought that was what you were saying. What sort of evidence do you think we should expect if Abraham existed?

I've no idea, to be honest. I've been asked 'what sort of evidence would I accept of god, and I struggle there, it's just beyond my capacity to imagine something that's definitively only possible through god.

What if you had something which was evidence? Would you then ask what evidence is there that that evidence is true?

So you're argument then is solipsism?

No, why do you think that?

Well we could apply that argument to any 'evidence' - how do we know that's true, how do we know that we know, how do we know that we know that we know...

Whether Jesus believed Abraham existed or not is largely irrelevant unless Jesus were the Son of God, and for that there is no credible evidence.

And if Jesus is/were the Son of God and said that Abraham existed, would that count? If not, why not, please?

If it could be shown that Jesus was the Son of God everything would change.

O.

[Alien]

Sorry, I thought that was what you were saying. What sort of evidence do you think we should expect if Abraham existed?

I've no idea, to be honest. I've been asked 'what sort of evidence would I accept of god, and I struggle there, it's just beyond my capacity to imagine something that's definitively only possible through god.

But here we are talking about evidence evidence for Abraham, aren't we? At least I am.

What if you had something which was evidence? Would you then ask what evidence is there that that evidence is true?

So you're argument then is solipsism?

No, why do you think that?

Well we could apply that argument to any 'evidence' - how do we know that's true, how do we know that we know, how do we know that we know that we know...

Agreed.

Whether Jesus believed Abraham existed or not is largely irrelevant unless Jesus were the Son of God, and for that there is no credible evidence.

And if Jesus is/were the Son of God and said that Abraham existed, would that count? If not, why not, please?

If it could be shown that Jesus was the Son of God everything would change.

O.

Thanks. I agree. It hinges on that.

Anyway, must toddle.

[BeRational]

So just the small matter of showing that he was the son of god.

Why would anyone assume this was true, until there was good evidence for it.

And so it goes round.

[Outrider]

But here we are talking about evidence evidence for Abraham, aren't we? At least I am.

No, you're talking about claims of Abraham, not evidence for Abraham.

Anyway, must toddle.

Laters

O.

[jeremyp]

Why do you think Abraham was mythical

It's just a story written at some point in the 1st millennium BCE with no evidence that its sources, if any, go back to the time when Abraham is supposed to live.

"It's just a story"? Do you have evidence for that

It's self evident, Alan. Firstly, it definitely is a story. Secondly, there is no archaeological evidence or other documentary evidence in support of it and this makes it just a story.

What sort of evidence could we reasonably expect to have?

Independent documentary evidence would be useful, but then you already knew that. You are just asking to distract from the fact that you can't produce any evidence that we should treat this story as history.

[jeremyp]

Why do you think Abraham was mythical

It's just a story written at some point in the 1st millennium BCE with no evidence that its sources, if any, go back to the time when Abraham is supposed to live.

"It's just a story"? Do you have evidence for that or do you just mean "We have no direct evidence that it is anything more than just a story"? What sort of evidence could we reasonably expect to have?

A DVD, god couldn't magic one up? Water into wine easy, modern electronics, too tricky!

How about creating a whole universe? Can you do that?

How is the whole Universe evidence that the Abraham story is anything more than just a story? In your answer consider the fact that this Universe creating god saw no benefit in creating any more evidence that Abraham was the father of his chosen people than that Mohammed is his final prophet.

[Alien]

So just the small matter of showing that he was the son of god.

Why would anyone assume this was true, until there was good evidence for it.

No-one in their right mind, unless God, say, gave some separate witness which did not rely on external evidence.

And so it goes round.

Yes, agreed. To stop it going round it is best to finally recognise that there is good evidence that Jesus is the Son of God. However, in order to not get into yet another discussion about whether God exists and/or who Jesus was, I'll leave the last word to you bearing in mind all I was saying was that if Jesus is the Son of God and we have access to what he said, then we ought to believe what he said about Abraham (and anything else).

Over to you for the last word.

[Alien]

Why do you think Abraham was mythical

It's just a story written at some point in the 1st millennium BCE with no evidence that its sources, if any, go back to the time when Abraham is supposed to live.

"It's just a story"? Do you have evidence for that

It's self evident, Alan. Firstly, it definitely is a story. Secondly, there is no archaeological evidence or other documentary evidence in support of it and this makes it just a story.

Incorrect. If the Son of God said Abraham existed and we have access to the Son of God saying that then I would suggest we do not need archaeological evidence or any other documentary evidence.

What sort of evidence could we reasonably expect to have?

Independent documentary evidence would be useful, but then you already knew that. You are just asking to distract from the fact that you can't produce any evidence that we should treat this story as history.

Apart from the Son of God saying Abraham existed.

Funny how we have got onto whether Jesus was the Son of God again when we were just discussing animism and polytheism.

[Alien]

Why do you think Abraham was mythical

It's just a story written at some point in the 1st millennium BCE with no evidence that its sources, if any, go back to the time when Abraham is supposed to live.

"It's just a story"? Do you have evidence for that or do you just mean "We have no direct evidence that it is anything more than just a story"? What sort of evidence could we reasonably expect to have?

A DVD, god couldn't magic one up? Water into wine easy, modern electronics, too tricky!

How about creating a whole universe? Can you do that?

How is the whole Universe evidence that the Abraham story is anything more than just a story?

It isn't. I didn't claim that. I was responding to what I thought jakswan was saying about, I think, God not being able to create a DVD or modern electronics, which we had somehow go onto when discussing animism and polytheism.

In your answer consider the fact that this Universe creating god saw no benefit in creating any more evidence that Abraham was the father of his chosen people than that Mohammed is his final prophet.

In your opinion. If Jesus is the Son of God and we have access to what he said about Abraham existing then that is surely sufficient.

[Andy]

Yes, agreed. To stop it going round it is best to finally recognise that there is good evidence that Jesus is the Son of God.

I'd say there's more chance of you supporting Ipswich and recognising that there's none.

However, in order to not get into yet another discussion about whether God exists...

From my standpoint (and dare I say from those of the same standpoint), what other discussion is there to be had? What's the point of attempting to jump the 6th hurdle when we aren't even over the 1st? To do so is just angels and pin heads.

[jeremyp]

To stop it going round it is best to finally recognise that there is good evidence that Jesus is the Son of God.

I'd love to do that. Trouble is that it is not true.

[jeremyp]

Incorrect. If the Son of God said Abraham existed and we have access to the Son of God saying that then I would suggest we do not need archaeological evidence or any other documentary evidence.

Aren't you even the least bit ashamed of that pathetic piece of nonsense?

Apart from the Son of God saying Abraham existed.

Jesus had no better idea of whether Abraham existed than anybody else at the time. Your reliance on him being the Son of God is just laughable bollocks.

Funny how we have got onto whether Jesus was the Son of God again when we were just discussing animism and po

No, you brought it up because you don't have any evidence for your point of view. The only funny thing is that you think your  assertion carries any evidential weight.

[jeremyp]

How is the whole Universe evidence that the Abraham story is anything more than just a story?

It isn't. I didn't claim that.

Actually, read the conversation again, because it clearly shows you did.

I was responding to what I thought jakswan was saying about, I think, God not being able to create a DVD

You seem to have a remarkable ability to take things out of context. You asked Jakswan what evidence of Abraham we could expect and he responded by suggesting that God could have created a DVD meaning (as was obvious to all except you) a DVD of evidence.

In your answer consider the fact that this Universe creating god saw no benefit in creating any more evidence that Abraham was the father of his chosen people than that Mohammed is his final prophet.

In your opinion. If Jesus is the Son of God and we have access to what he said about Abraham existing then that is surely sufficient.

If if if if if if if if

Can't you see the problem with your stupid if?

If Peter the Pixie is the Mayor of the planet Wibble then Abraham was a used car salesman from Epping.

Conclusion Abraham was a used car salesman from Epping.

[Alien]

...However, in order to not get into yet another discussion about whether God exists...

From my standpoint (and dare I say from those of the same standpoint), what other discussion is there to be had? What's the point of attempting to jump the 6th hurdle when we aren't even over the 1st? To do so is just angels and pin heads.

I'm happy to discuss whether God exists, but don't want to do it on every thread I take part in. For one thing, since I am often in conversation with 4 or 5 people of a very different opinion to me on most threads and if I am taking part in 6 threads at any one time (which is about average), I find it hard to keep track of who says what when, including myself.

[Alien]

To stop it going round it is best to finally recognise that there is good evidence that Jesus is the Son of God.

I'd love to do that. Trouble is that it is not true.

In your opinion it is not true; in my opinion it is true.

Your turn.

[Alien]

Incorrect. If the Son of God said Abraham existed and we have access to the Son of God saying that then I would suggest we do not need archaeological evidence or any other documentary evidence.

Aren't you even the least bit ashamed of that pathetic piece of nonsense?

I would be if it was, but it isn't, so I'm not.

Apart from the Son of God saying Abraham existed.

Jesus had no better idea of whether Abraham existed than anybody else at the time. Your reliance on him being the Son of God is just laughable bollocks.

If he was the Son of God then he would not be a reliable guide? Really?

Funny how we have got onto whether Jesus was the Son of God again when we were just discussing animism and po

No, you brought it up because you don't have any evidence for your point of view.

IIRC, I qualified my statement saying that if Jesus is the Son of God and we had access to what he has said then that should be sufficient for us.

The only funny thing is that you think your  assertion carries any evidential weight.

Actually, my statement is not evidence for Abraham existing. What would carry evidential weight would be if Jesus is the Son of God.

[Alien]

How is the whole Universe evidence that the Abraham story is anything more than just a story?

It isn't. I didn't claim that.

Actually, read the conversation again, because it clearly shows you did.

I was responding to what I thought jakswan was saying about, I think, God not being able to create a DVD

You seem to have a remarkable ability to take things out of context. You asked Jakswan what evidence of Abraham we could expect and he responded by suggesting that God could have created a DVD meaning (as was obvious to all except you) a DVD of evidence.

In your answer consider the fact that this Universe creating god saw no benefit in creating any more evidence that Abraham was the father of his chosen people than that Mohammed is his final prophet.

In your opinion. If Jesus is the Son of God and we have access to what he said about Abraham existing then that is surely sufficient.

If if if if if if if if

Can't you see the problem with your stupid if?

If Peter the Pixie is the Mayor of the planet Wibble then Abraham was a used car salesman from Epping.

Conclusion Abraham was a used car salesman from Epping.

Here is what was said:

Alien's reply to jakswan's claim that the stuff about Abraham in the bible is just a story,

"It's just a story"? Do you have evidence for that or do you just mean "We have no direct evidence that it is anything more than just a story"? What sort of evidence could we reasonably expect to have?

A DVD, god couldn't magic one up? Water into wine easy, modern electronics, too tricky!

Are you seriously suggesting, as jakswan seemed to be suggesting, that we could reasonably expect to have a DVD from the time of Abraham as evidence that Abraham existed?

Now, if God does exist then he would clearly be able to create a DVD, him having created the universe and all that, which was my point, probably badly put. I've looked back at what jakswan wrote and he really does seem to be suggesting that a DVD actually from the time of Abraham would be something we could reasonably expect. If so then, to be honest, I've been thrown by the stupidity of the statement.

And on my "stupid 'if'", why is it stupid to say that Jesus is the Son of God? You are free to disagree with my conclusion, but is it stupid? Maybe it is, but I don't think so. If you want to take the mick, it's up to you. Are you saying that only stupid people come to that conclusion?

[BashfulAnthony]

How is the whole Universe evidence that the Abraham story is anything more than just a story?

It isn't. I didn't claim that.

Actually, read the conversation again, because it clearly shows you did.

I was responding to what I thought jakswan was saying about, I think, God not being able to create a DVD

You seem to have a remarkable ability to take things out of context. You asked Jakswan what evidence of Abraham we could expect and he responded by suggesting that God could have created a DVD meaning (as was obvious to all except you) a DVD of evidence.

In your answer consider the fact that this Universe creating god saw no benefit in creating any more evidence that Abraham was the father of his chosen people than that Mohammed is his final prophet.

In your opinion. If Jesus is the Son of God and we have access to what he said about Abraham existing then that is surely sufficient.

If if if if if if if if

Can't you see the problem with your stupid if?

If Peter the Pixie is the Mayor of the planet Wibble then Abraham was a used car salesman from Epping.

Conclusion Abraham was a used car salesman from Epping.

No need to be insulting.

[jeremyp]

To stop it going round it is best to finally recognise that there is good evidence that Jesus is the Son of God.

I'd love to do that. Trouble is that it is not true.

In your opinion it is not true; in my opinion it is true.

Your turn.

In the opinion of every rational person on the planet. You simply do not have the evidence. When you are asked to produce it, we get some nonsense about some characters in a story. If there was good evidence that Jesus is the son of God, I'd be a believer.

[jeremyp]

Are you seriously suggesting, as jakswan seemed to be suggesting, that we could reasonably expect to have a DVD from the time of Abraham as evidence that Abraham existed?

Yes we could, if your god was real. It's you who asserts your god is real without evidence, not us.

And on my "stupid 'if'", why is it stupid to say that Jesus is the Son of God?

That is not what I said is stupid in this instance. What is stupid is your construction

If A then B

Therefore B

which is obviously fallacious if you haven't established the truth of A.

Maybe it is, but I don't think so. If you want to take the mick, it's up to you. Are you saying that only stupid people come to that conclusion?

I'm taking the mick in retaliation for your micky taking. Your last few posts have been a mix of obviously fallacious logic, misrepresenting what others have said and deliberately ignoring context in order to avoid confronting arguments.

[BashfulAnthony]

To stop it going round it is best to finally recognise that there is good evidence that Jesus is the Son of God.

I'd love to do that. Trouble is that it is not true.

In your opinion it is not true; in my opinion it is true.

Your turn.

In the opinion of every rational person on the planet. You simply do not have the evidence. When you are asked to produce it, we get some nonsense about some characters in a story. If there was good evidence that Jesus is the son of God, I'd be a believer.

Slight arrogance, speaking for "every rational person on the planet."

[Alien]

To stop it going round it is best to finally recognise that there is good evidence that Jesus is the Son of God.

I'd love to do that. Trouble is that it is not true.

In your opinion it is not true; in my opinion it is true.

Your turn.

In the opinion of every rational person on the planet.

As defined by whom? You?

You simply do not have the evidence.

In your opinion.

When you are asked to produce it, we get some nonsense about some characters in a story. If there was good evidence that Jesus is the son of God, I'd be a believer.

So you claim.