Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists - Page 20 - Political Fever

LogicallyYours · #**191** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Southern Man

How do you explain the miracles in the Old Testament? Are those authors part of the conspiracy as well?

And there is nothing that proves those miracles ever took place...other than being written in the Bible.

Leap of Faith.

Southern Man · #**192** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

It doesn't become more credible when the things they are saying are incredible. It just makes more people. The number and diversity of people who believe something has no bearing on the truth of the belief. Millions of people believe Christ turned water to wine. That just means millions of people are delusional and gullible.

That someone says he saw something happening is worthless. People claim they see ghosts all the time, yet mysteriously, no one can provide a shred of real evidence. Anecdotes don't good evidence make.

The ancient authors were likely just making stuff up to sensationalize and promote their faith. IT wouldn't be the first time.

You've introduced a Straw Man. What a wonderful technique. However we are talking about the number and diversity of the authors.

Southern Man · #**193** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LogicallyYours

And there is nothing that proves those miracles ever took place...other than being written in the Bible.

Leap of Faith.

Again, since the Bible is not a book but a collection of books, I suppose that you could say the same thing about a technical library. Anything written in the books of that library becomes suspect, because all the books are in the same place.

That is your logic, isn’t it?

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #**194** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Southern Man

You've introduced a Straw Man. What a wonderful technique. However we are talking about the number and diversity of the authors.

The number and diversity of the authors is also irrelevant to the validity of the arguments presented. It doesn't help you either way. The number of authors makes no difference just as the number of readers makes no difference. A false belief can have dozens of authors who are quite diverse. You assume the Bible's reliable because the authors were diverse and numerous. That's nonsensical just as it is to claim validity based on how many and how diverse the people are who believe it.

LogicallyYours · #**195** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Southern Man

Again, since the Bible is not a book but a collection of books, I suppose that you could say the same thing about a technical library. Anything written in the books of that library becomes suspect, because all the books are in the same place.

That is your logic, isn’t it?

No, that is your logic. I deal in facts and evidence. Something that you choose to suspend when it comes to dealing with the Bible.

Southern Man · #**196** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

The number and diversity of the authors is also irrelevant to the validity of the arguments presented. It doesn't help you either way. The number of authors makes no difference just as the number of readers makes no difference. A false belief can have dozens of authors who are quite diverse. You assume the Bible's reliable because the authors were diverse and numerous. That's nonsensical just as it is to claim validity based on how many and how diverse the people are who believe it.

Post 99 of this thread defined the level of proof required to successfully conclude an argument in a court of law: a preponderance of evidence. I have used that as a basis to present my arguments. The more witnesses I have, the more preponderance of evidence.

Southern Man · #**197** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LogicallyYours

No, that is your logic. I deal in facts and evidence. Something that you choose to suspend when it comes to dealing with the Bible.

We are dealing with facts and evidence and I described your logic perfectly. Didn't I? :azn:

Zephyr · #**198** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Post 99 of this thread defined the level of proof required to successfully conclude an argument in a court of law: a preponderance of evidence. I have used that as a basis to present my arguments. The more witnesses I have, the more preponderance of evidence.

People who lived so long ago are not reliable witnesses.

And this is not a court of law. Proof required for a court of law is different from that required in science.

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #**199** (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Post 99 of this thread defined the level of proof required to successfully conclude an argument in a court of law: a preponderance of evidence. I have used that as a basis to present my arguments. The more witnesses I have, the more preponderance of evidence.

You can't "win" an argument by asserting that a lot of people believe something. Following your logic, magic must exist if a large group of ignorant people watched an illusionist, not knowing how he did it, thus concluding they witnessed witchcraft.

Southern Man · #**200** (**permalink**) 05-14-2008, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zephyr

People who lived so long ago are not reliable witnesses.

And this is not a court of law. Proof required for a court of law is different from that required in science.

1. Explain that logic.
2. ID was tossed out by a court of law. That established a new standard.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

User Name		Remember Me?
Password