Science of probability

  • Thread starter Thread starter univac
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here’s a crash course on historical research methods: If they can’t decide how someone died, and they can’t decide on a name of the person dying, it doesn’t constitute proof.
Seems to me they named him quite well and in history a crash course for you, most of the time they actually do not know exact things that happened… there might be two different sources stating two different things… Are you a historian? I sure hope not…
The rest of your post is the same old story of claiming that Christians wouldn’t have died if it isn’t true, and it just doesn’t hold up. All it means that you can’t think of reasons that people would martyr themselves. A lack of imagination, or wishful thinking, doesn’t make an argument.
OK, you can repeat it a thousand times, it still won’t make it true…

I have to say more i talk here the more i believe, when atheist argument is on fallacy level, “it just doesn’t hold up”… Amazing… Once upon a time i thought they where called rationalists…
 
Seems to me they named him quite well and in history a crash course for you, most of the time they actually do not know exact things that happened… there might be two different sources stating two different things… Are you a historian? I sure hope not…
You just proved my point, and you think I don’t know what I’m talking about. That’s just super.

Let’s go step by step shall we:
  1. You claim Bartholomew or Nathaniel was killed for his beliefs by either beheading (which would make sense for a roman citizen) or by being flayed and crucified upside down (a punishment that is worse that usual for traitors or slaves).
  2. These are different names, and different ways of killing people.
  3. The same person could have 2 names, but they couldn’t die two completely separate ways.
  4. Ergo, at least one of the “traditions” is wrong. Which does not exclude both being wrong.
OK, you can repeat it a thousand times, it still won’t make it true…
This doesn’t even make sense. What are you claiming I’ve said a thousand times? You are making a claim that no one would martyr themselves if they didn’t believe what you believe they did.

Your evidence for this: zero, zilch, nada.
I have to say more i talk here the more i believe, when atheist argument is on fallacy level, “it just doesn’t hold up”… Amazing… Once upon a time i thought they where called rationalists…
Being insulting isn’t the same as having a viable position.
 
I am sorry for my cheeky comments, I will return tomorrow… Sorry for you too Sideline…
 
Here’s a crash course on historical research methods: If they can’t decide how someone died, and they can’t decide on a name of the person dying, it doesn’t constitute proof.

The rest of your post is the same old story of claiming that Christians wouldn’t have died if it isn’t true, and it just doesn’t hold up. All it means that you can’t think of reasons that people would martyr themselves. A lack of imagination, or wishful thinking, doesn’t make an argument.
Hi Sideline,

I’m joining this discussion a bit late in the piece, so I’ll try not to raise points that you’ve already heard.

Long before I became a christian, I was a NON-christian, so I perhaps understand a little where you are coming from, and I can ‘relate’ to many of the questions you raise.

Firstly, let me say that believing in God is not ‘rational’, if you define human rationality as something that is completely bounded by the physical and intellectual limitations that come with being human.

I can’t ‘prove’ to you ‘scientifically’ that God exists, although it seems to me there is a lot of suggestive physical evidence in the world and universe around us ( and yes, I’ve read nearly all of Dawkins books so lets not get side-tracked into an ‘evolution’ debate). The universe is a very mysterious place and we know hardly anything about it - This article in Science Today illustrates some of the issues. :
sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/309/5731/78a

Even today, our ‘science’ can’t tell us something as basic as what the universe is made of, and that to me suggests that most likely we can’t even begin to fathom how it operates.

Now, I could suggest to you, as others have, that you simply ask God a question. along the lines of “God, if you exist, can you prove to me that you do”.

After all, if He does exist He should be able to ‘hear’ you shouldn’t He? And if He knows ‘everything’ then surely He would know what level of “proof” would be needed by you wouldn’t He?. You don’t even need to tell Him what standard of proof you would require

But whether or not YOU get an answer from HIM reaches to the very heart of the issue.

If you think that you can have an encounter with God, ask Him to explain to you why He does or does not do certain things, then say ’ Well, thanks for that - see you later, I’d rather run my own life my way thanks. Goodbye", I 'd think its very likely you won’t hear a peep out of Him.

The New Living Translation puts it this way in Hebrews 11:6

6 And it is impossible to please God without faith. Anyone who wants to come to him must believe that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him.

So you see, there are a few things needed from you before you can ‘find’ Him. You need to have an initial ‘faith’ that He does exist, you need to be sincere about finding Him, and you need to believe that He will reward you for searching sincerely.

What are your thoughts on this - is it making any sense to you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top