Re: The Tower of Babel - Less Confusing

From: PASAlist@aol.com
Date: Sun May 18 2003 - 19:52:35 EDT

  • Next message: PASAlist@aol.com: "Re: addendum"

    Jim wrote,

    > I can't help but determine
    > that you are engaging in special pleading.
    >
    > Words attributed to a deity are shown to be inaccurate.
    > Instead of concluding these were merely human words, you
    > determine the deity was being compassionate (accommodating,
    > in your words).
    >
    > Personally, I think you have other reasons for believing.
    > The sad state of religion today is that religious people
    > rely on highly subjective personal experience. That's
    > not scholarship.
    >

    Of course I have other reasons for believing. I make no apology for that. I
    have met Jesus Christ. He by his Spirit changed my life. He by his Spirit
    moves in my life. But, this is not purely subjective. If I have to give a
    reason for the hope that is within me, I can point to the acts of God in
    history--both in my life and in the lives of others who have met him, seen
    most definitively in his resurrection which rests upon the testimony of eye
    witnesses. There is an objective as well as a subjective basis for my faith.
    He is there and he is there for those who surrender their lives to
    him----including you. This includes surrending your rationalism, not your
    reason, but your rationalism, your FAITH that you can know about God by
    reason alone.

    You want to be resonable? OK. Let's take your reasoning above. God spoke
    words shown to be (scientifically) inaccurate. From this premise you draw
    the conclusion that therefore these were merely human words. OK. Put this in
    a logical syllagism. You have only given us the Major premise and the
    conclusion. What is the minor premise? The validity of the conclusion is
    contingent upon the minor premise. Without a sound minor premise, you do not
    have a logical conclusion, you do not have a truly reasonable conclusion.

    Since your statements imply that your current religion demands that you not
    rest your faith on subjectivity, along with giving us the minor premise, give
    the proof that the minor premise is not just special pleading, is not just
    based upon subjectivity. Give the objective scientific basis that the minor
    premise is resting on.

    You've come a long ways, from YEC to atheism, I applaud your growth. But, so
    far all of your religions have rested upon the same minor premise. Now let's
    see what that minor premise is resting on, especially as found in atheism.
    I'm not after winning an argument. I'm after you. You want to be ABSOLUTELY
    honest? I want you to be absolutely honest too, and I have no doubt that God
    wants this too. He is light and in him is no darkness at all.

     



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun May 18 2003 - 19:56:03 EDT