Author Topic: Christian 'Mythology'.  (Read 47578 times)

Walter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4463
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #175 on: December 31, 2016, 02:45:02 PM »
Thus, you are making science a god. In your view, if science has nothing of importance to say on the matter, the idea might as well be chucked out. Science only deals with the objective and material and until the subjective and immaterial can be taken on board the complete picture cannot be whole.
its not that the idea is chucked out , as you put it , it only exists in the minds of the wishful thinker and is therefore ignored as such .
 

Gordon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18245
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #176 on: December 31, 2016, 02:51:49 PM »
Thus, you are making science a god.

Straw man.

Quote
In your view, if science has nothing of importance to say on the matter, the idea might as well be chucked out.

Another straw man.

Quote
Science only deals with the objective and material and until the subjective and immaterial can be taken on board the complete picture cannot be whole.

Assuming you mean claims of the non-natural, these claims can't be 'taken on board' until such times as the claimants (such as yourself) come up with a suitable method whereby these claims can be critically evaluated. Perhaps you can deliver here where others have failed, largely by either ignoring the problem or resorting to fallacies. 

Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3870
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #177 on: December 31, 2016, 02:55:11 PM »
Thus, you are making science a god. In your view, if science has nothing of importance to say on the matter, the idea might as well be chucked out. Science only deals with the objective and material and until the subjective and immaterial can be taken on board the complete picture cannot be whole.

Don't be silly. I am always open to any other views, as long as they are backed by some sort of verifiable evidence. If you wish to say that your approach(the subjective and the immaterial) is so important, then my subjective ideas and my approach to the immaterial (which I would probably suggest are a world away from yours) are just as important and valid as yours, or, indeed, anybody else's. Where does that get us? I suggest nowhere.
Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15639
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #178 on: December 31, 2016, 02:56:23 PM »
Thus, you are making science a god.
No - nothing is a god.

Science however can be a gatekeeper.
Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair, or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back. - Al Swearengen, Deadwood.

floo

  • Guest
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #179 on: December 31, 2016, 02:59:47 PM »
Thus, you are making science a god.

Science is a useful reality, not a mythical entity like a god.

Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3870
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #180 on: December 31, 2016, 03:20:42 PM »
I think you misunderstand here. Christians do not say that the laws individually or collectively are intelligent rather than the idea that where there is law there is a lawgiver.

I think that you misunderstand. I was replying to one particular Christian poster who was responding to Susan in order to show that he/she was showing 'primary empirical evidence for God '. My arguments were based solely upon the explanations given in that response.

The idea of a lawgiver can well be true when associated with the workings of society but in science it simply suggests causal relationships of observed phenomena. They are descriptions of widely accepted unifying concepts, they are not concerned with the idea of a lawgiver at all.
Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright

SwordOfTheSpirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #181 on: December 31, 2016, 03:36:01 PM »
Science only deals with the objective and material and until the subjective and immaterial can be taken on board the complete picture cannot be whole.
#thumbsup

Except now you'll be told that you have to demonstrate that there is such a thing as the subjective and immaterial, which only serves to illustrate at least two things.

1. The worldview for the methodology used is not falsifiable.

2. The methodology is being misused by being applied to things outside of its domain, a bit like trying to play Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance March No.1 in the style of a Viennese Waltz.
I haven't enough faith to be an atheist.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64075
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #182 on: December 31, 2016, 03:39:27 PM »
#thumbsup

Except now you'll be told that you have to demonstrate that there is such a thing as the subjective and immaterial, which only serves to illustrate at least two things.

1. The worldview for the methodology used is not falsifiable.

2. The methodology is being misused by being applied to things outside of its domain, a bit like trying to play Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance March No.1 in the style of a Viennese Waltz.

What 'worldview'? Which methodology?


SwordOfTheSpirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #183 on: December 31, 2016, 03:53:38 PM »
Quote from: Nearly Sane
What 'worldview'?
The one which assumes natural causes and explanations for the evidence or any phenomenon.

Quote from: Nearly Sane
Which methodology?
Those that seek to come up with an explanation by analysis of evidence.
I haven't enough faith to be an atheist.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64075
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #184 on: December 31, 2016, 03:57:33 PM »
The one which assumes natural causes and explanations for the evidence or any phenomenon.
Those that seek to come up with an explanation by analysis of evidence.
which is why you need a methodology to back up your claims. I am willing to listen. No one has said that such a methodology cannot exist. You have just failed to provide one. So once again ball is in your court, and kindly don't fall back in the shifting the burden of proof.

SwordOfTheSpirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #185 on: December 31, 2016, 04:34:47 PM »
which is why you need a methodology to back up your claims. I am willing to listen. No one has said that such a methodology cannot exist. You have just failed to provide one. So once again ball is in your court, and kindly don't fall back in the shifting the burden of proof.
Which you perhaps unwittingly have done by failing to state how a worldview that assumes natural causes/explanations is falsifiable, the point I made to SweetPea in #181 in anticipating objections to her #172

The net result is that there is no way to provide you with what you want because the only options are
1. Known natural explanation
2. Unknown natural explanation (how many times have you seen the terminology argument from incredulity used round here?)
I haven't enough faith to be an atheist.

Gordon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18245
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #186 on: December 31, 2016, 04:39:51 PM »
Which you perhaps unwittingly have done by failing to state how a worldview that assumes natural causes/explanations is falsifiable, the point I made to SweetPea in #181 in anticipating objections to her #172

Which is a straw man, and a flagrant misrepresentation.

Quote
The net result is that there is no way to provide you with what you want because the only options are
1. Known natural explanation
2. Unknown natural explanation (how many times have you seen the terminology argument from incredulity used round here?)

Lots, and still you keep the fallacies coming.

Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25569
    • Tools With A Mission
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #187 on: December 31, 2016, 04:40:49 PM »
which is why you need a methodology to back up your claims. I am willing to listen. No one has said that such a methodology cannot exist. You have just failed to provide one. So once again ball is in your court, and kindly don't fall back in the shifting the burden of proof.
NS, a tad rich coming from someone for whom shifting the burden of proof sometimes comes pretty easily.

More importantly though, it can be difficult to provide a methodology when the issue under debate transcends mere material naturalism, which so many of the members here seem to place all their trust in.
Are your, or your friends'/relatives', garages, lofts or sheds full of unused DIY gear, sewing/knitting machines or fabric and haberdashery stuff?

Lists of what is needed and a search engine to find your nearest collector (scroll to bottom for latter) are here:  http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64075
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #188 on: December 31, 2016, 04:44:01 PM »
Which you perhaps unwittingly have done by failing to state how a worldview that assumes natural causes/explanations is falsifiable, the point I made to SweetPea in #181 in anticipating objections to her #172

The net result is that there is no way to provide you with what you want because the only options are
1. Known natural explanation
2. Unknown natural explanation (how many times have you seen the terminology argument from incredulity used round here?)

I did ask you to not do the switching the burden if proof routine, but you couldn't resist, could you?


Let's take this slowly. You (and Sweetpea) make claims about things not being natural. I am not making any claims about things being natural. You have the burden of proof and need some way to show me that your claims have any validity.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64075
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #189 on: December 31, 2016, 04:46:54 PM »
NS, a tad rich coming from someone for whom shifting the burden of proof sometimes comes pretty easily.

More importantly though, it can be difficult to provide a methodology when the issue under debate transcends mere material naturalism, which so many of the members here seem to place all their trust in.

When have I tried to switch the burden of proof? Citation? (BTW the way will I have to wait for it like your claim elsewhere that the WHO had announced the eradication of leprosy?)

And your evasion of any attempt to provide a methodology is shockingly obvious.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2016, 04:50:41 PM by Nearly Sane »

Gordon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18245
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #190 on: December 31, 2016, 04:50:45 PM »
NS, a tad rich coming from someone for whom shifting the burden of proof sometimes comes pretty easily.

Which reminds me there is a thread still awaiting your clarification re.leprosy.

Quote
More importantly though, it can be difficult to provide a methodology when the issue under debate transcends mere material naturalism, which so many of the members here seem to place all their trust in.

You've yet to provide us with an alternative though: god knows you've been asked often enough.

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15639
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #191 on: December 31, 2016, 06:46:41 PM »
NS, a tad rich coming from someone for whom shifting the burden of proof sometimes comes pretty easily.

More importantly though, it can be difficult to provide a methodology when the issue under debate transcends mere material naturalism, which so many of the members here seem to place all their trust in.
Dodge, dodge, duck, dive, bob and weave.
Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair, or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back. - Al Swearengen, Deadwood.

SwordOfTheSpirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #192 on: December 31, 2016, 07:21:01 PM »
#189

Quote from: Hope
More importantly though, it can be difficult to provide a methodology when the issue under debate transcends mere material naturalism, which so many of the members here seem to place all their trust in.
Quote from: Nearly Sane
...And your evasion of any attempt to provide a methodology is shockingly obvious.
Quote from: Gordon
You've yet to provide us with an alternative though: god knows you've been asked often enough.

The charge against Hope is incorrect. Here was an attempt by him to address the issue:
'Cold-Case Christianity'

And in terms of the wider charge against those of religious belief failing to find any method, here's 42 pages of a thread to illustrate what happens when they do.
AN opportunity for the religious to provide their evidence

So, for the last time this year:

1. A worldview that assumes natural causes and explanations cannot be used to evaluate any claims / submission of evidence for anything that doesn't have a natural cause / explanation.

2. Those that are going to examine any claims / submission of evidence need to know for themselves what they would consider as evidence or what methodology they would use to test any claims. This would not be an issue if their worldview was falsifiable, by their own scientific standards, as they would already have some idea.

The problem that exists currently is that the worldview and methodologies used assume natural causes / explanations, so guess what the conclusion is going to be?
- Evidence: Known or unknown natural cause. Suggesting a non-natural cause is an argument from incredulity / God of the gaps
- Cause: The explanation given in support of a non-natural cause is fallacious.

Happy New Year to all.
I haven't enough faith to be an atheist.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64075
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #193 on: December 31, 2016, 07:49:29 PM »
#189

The charge against Hope is incorrect. Here was an attempt by him to address the issue:
'Cold-Case Christianity'

And in terms of the wider charge against those of religious belief failing to find any method, here's 42 pages of a thread to illustrate what happens when they do.
AN opportunity for the religious to provide their evidence

So, for the last time this year:

1. A worldview that assumes natural causes and explanations cannot be used to evaluate any claims / submission of evidence for anything that doesn't have a natural cause / explanation.

2. Those that are going to examine any claims / submission of evidence need to know for themselves what they would consider as evidence or what methodology they would use to test any claims. This would not be an issue if their worldview was falsifiable, by their own scientific standards, as they would already have some idea.

The problem that exists currently is that the worldview and methodologies used assume natural causes / explanations, so guess what the conclusion is going to be?
- Evidence: Known or unknown natural cause. Suggesting a non-natural cause is an argument from incredulity / God of the gaps
- Cause: The explanation given in support of a non-natural cause is fallacious.

Happy New Year to all.

And none of that actually has a methodology. It has a lot of repetiton saying induction but no  worked example. Ooh and by the way, stop lying about people's worldviews. I pointed out you were wrong about my worldview and position earlier. Kindly retract your lie.

Oh and in addition your first numbers point is a complete misrepresentation of all of those peopke who have asked for a methododoligy for your claims. Why lie so often?
« Last Edit: December 31, 2016, 08:03:26 PM by Nearly Sane »

Gordon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18245
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #194 on: December 31, 2016, 08:03:59 PM »
#189

The charge against Hope is incorrect. Here was an attempt by him to address the issue:
'Cold-Case Christianity'

Try reading my #4 that followed: this attempt by Hope was derisory (and that is being kind).

Quote
1. A worldview that assumes natural causes and explanations cannot be used to evaluate any claims / submission of evidence for anything that doesn't have a natural cause / explanation.

So you assert - thing is, your assertion is a straw man since none of us nasty atheists are that naive.

Quote
2. Those that are going to examine any claims / submission of evidence need to know for themselves what they would consider as evidence or what methodology they would use to test any claims. This would not be an issue if their worldview was falsifiable, by their own scientific standards, as they would already have some idea.

Utter nonsense: but you've been told this before when you first tried this argument.

Quote
The problem that exists currently is that the worldview and methodologies used assume natural causes / explanations, so guess what the conclusion is going to be?
- Evidence: Known or unknown natural cause. Suggesting a non-natural cause is an argument from incredulity / God of the gaps
- Cause: The explanation given in support of a non-natural cause is fallacious.

Methodological naturalism is the only game in town at present but you're perfectly free to propose and detail a credible alternative. Instead though your arguments are exposed as being fallacious, and moreover they wander through the whole gamut of the most commonly used fallacies.

By the way without this other method 'non-natural cause' is no more than an oxymoron being used within fallacious arguments.

2Corrie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5636
  • Not to us, O Lord, But to Your name give glory
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #195 on: December 31, 2016, 08:12:46 PM »
Regarding evidence, with Paul on this one.

16For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile.
17For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last,fn just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Pray that God would bring people to their knees this side of eternity 😯 Happy New Year.
"It is finished."

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33158
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #196 on: December 31, 2016, 08:45:21 PM »


Methodological naturalism is the only game in town at present
Unfortunately for you on a different playing field from the one your trying to play on.


trippymonkey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4550
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #197 on: December 31, 2016, 09:10:10 PM »
A Happy New Year to ALL here !!!!!
It's just after 9pm here in north east Lancashire ie Nelson near Burnley & have already heard fireworks ?!!?!??

Nick XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Walter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4463
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #198 on: December 31, 2016, 09:20:26 PM »
A Happy New Year to ALL here !!!!!
It's just after 9pm here in north east Lancashire ie Nelson near Burnley & have already heard fireworks ?!!?!??

Nick XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
I know that area very well,  are you sure its fireworks? ;)

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15639
Re: Christian 'Mythology'.
« Reply #199 on: December 31, 2016, 09:33:09 PM »
1. A worldview that assumes natural causes and explanations cannot be used to evaluate any claims / submission of evidence for anything that doesn't have a natural cause / explanation.
Monumental question-begging (in the true sense of that phrase)/circular non-reasoning at its finest.

We're trying to establish if there's such a thing as anything that doesn't have a natural cause or explanation. This is not achieved by simply assuming - as you have here - that there already is such a thing but is out of reach.

You will call this a prior commitment to naturalism. You would be absolutely correct. My prior commitment to naturalism is based partly on my own experience of the world (the world has always and in every case - with no exceptions at all in any way whatever - been a material world of matter and energy) and partly on its prior success in explaining and understanding the world. Your commitment to supernaturalism is based as far as I can see on no more than emotional need that there ought to be such a thing.
Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair, or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back. - Al Swearengen, Deadwood.