I'm missing where I made all of those assumptions or "true statements"...... Your making yourself look like an ametuer, arguing that i said things I clearly did not.... You are non sensical, illogical and a very confused person. I say good day to you sir .
I guess I'll have to list your truth claims. Here you go. 1.) Life, the universe, and all of creation is relative. "In the eye of the beholder" if you will. Truth claim. (Unless you go around saying things that you don't think are true...do you do that?) 2.)Those who have a need or want for a God will find applications for it in their lives. Truth claim. (Unless you go around saying things that you don't think are true...do you do that?) 3.) Those who do nothing but question God have no time to Find him in their lives. Truth claim. (Unless you go around saying things that you don't think are true...do you do that?) 4.) The question isnt; is there a God?, The real question is; why don't you want there to be a God? Truth claim. (Unless you go around saying things that you don't think are true...do you do that?) 5.) Reality is relative. Mine isn't the same as yours otherwise we'd live the exact same life. NOBODY lives the life, love, possibilities..... Truth claim. (Unless you go around saying things that you don't think are true...do you do that?) Are you not aware of when you make a truth claim or do you not know what I mean by truth claim?
Also, how can you judge what a 'truth claim' is, if you don't know the truth yourself. Which proves my relativity theory. Lawyered
I thought you left. I can see that you didn't understand what I meant by "truth claim" A truth claim is simple; that which a person claims to be true. You would think I wouldn't have to define that but I guess I did. I know what's true. I can define it too. Truth is that which comports to reality. That's the standard definition of truth. Truth cannot be relative; something is either true, or it's not. Basic philosophy 101.
A truth claim is not even logical, because it's assuming one party knows the truth, and is a ''truth claim' itself. Trust me, you don't have to explain anything to me... i undoostood the essence of what you said, it just doesn't make sense. You are the one arguing with someone that is arguing the same original point that you were. You are TRYING to argue just for the sake of argument, which in my 'truth' is ignorance...
I can see from where you are both coming. There is a fundamental truth and that is that there is truth 'out there'. If we say either "there is truth or there is no truth" only one is internally consistent (the former). Even relativism relies on truth, in order for something to be relative to something else, both must have properties that are fixed truths. For instance, let us take color blindness. One person may see an object as red while another person sees green, both are relatively true, but the objective truth is that the color is what it is. So the objective truth of the objects color cannot be known because we are only able to experience it subjectively. So when you say everything is relative, yes it is, it is relative to the foundational/objective truth (even if we cannot know the objective truth of any given example)
I don’t classify myself as anything with a label. I don’t like being grouped in with anyone else for pretty obvious reasons. I was raised in a strict Christian household and we went to a Protestant (United Church of Christ) church EVERY Sunday since I could remember. I liked the people there - it was a small and intimate place. Singing, brotherhood blah blah blah. When I started to get older - teens I guess I started to question the Bible and it’s teachings. Don’t work on Sundays or else? Burn in Hell for Eternity?? Dammit we HAD to work Sundays when Dad has his restaurant for many years. So we were bad people? I couldn’t help but look at my neighbors hot ass wife - man I was a teenager and she was friggin HOT. More hell? Eternity again? No one had any good answers for me. Every one was hypocritical. I don’t know if I believe in God or not. I DO KNOW that I have an issue with a god that kills innocents and claims that everyone who doesn’t Bow Down is going to the Hot Place. A poor Brazilian Pygmy little girl is off to hell too - why not? But as far as this shit? “silly American. Go read your bible that justifies slavery, stoning kids, beating slaves to death, taking women as sex slaves, war etc.” Really dude? Pretty ignorant. Americans don’t have anything to do with this shit you’re saying and you sound ridiculous saying so. J
The Muslims and the Scientific Method Muslim scholars, between the 10th and 14th centuries, were the prime movers behind the development of the scientific method. They were the first to use experiment and observation as the basis of science, and many historians regard science as starting during this period. Amongst the array of great scholars, al-Haytham is regarded as the architect of the scientific method. His scientific method involved the following stages: Observation of the natural world Stating a definite problem Formulating a robust hypothesis Test the hypothesisthrough experimentation Assess and analyze the results Interpret the data and draw conclusions Publish the findings These steps are very similar to the modern scientific method and they became the basis of Western science during the Renaissance.” Cite: https://explorable.com/who-invented-the-scientific-method J
And he wasn't the only one, nor was Bacon. The point was not that "Christians did this first!" but that the whole ball of wax...the practice of science isn't possible unless God is presupposed; the God of the Bible. That was my point, I might not have made it clear.
Is that true? and how do you know? No...you don't. I can tell because you aren't making comments that even begin to show you do. When you say it doesn't make sense, I realize that you are right...to you, it doesn't make sense because you don't get the point. I said that from the beginning, that the argument was much deeper than the normal "Christian" argument and that folks weren't used to dealing with it.
So an atheist cannot be a scientist? Or a Buddhist cannot be a scientist? Only a Christian (or) someone who acknowledges the Christian God of the Bibble? J
I didn't say that..please read my statements closely. Never said that. Nope. I said that God is the necessary precondition for the practice of science (for just one example). Without the existence of God, you can't prove anything, science isn't possible, it relies on the uniformity in nature, and the laws of logic among other things and both aren't possible without God.
So the Buddhist or the Atheist couldn’t prove that, let’s say, a bucket of water will turn to ice - even though they don’t acknowledge or believe in the Christian God? With all due respect I do not believe this. You do - because you’re a Christian and believe in this god but that’s where it ends for me. J
This is saying that the Atheist or Buddhist simply cannot make logical thoughts though. People from different religions believe that it is THEIR GOD who gives them logic - and the atheist (I guess) believes that logic just happens naturally - it is you that believes in the Christian god therefore having the beliefs stated above. J
No, I'm saying just the opposite. They CAN do that in spite of the inability to justify the existence of what allows them to do that. (the laws of logic, the uniformity of nature etc) I don't blame you for not believing that...it's not true nor is it what I said.