Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 105 of 105

Thread: Is Religious Faith just another Religious Myth

  1. Top | #101
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Port Clinton, Ohio
    Posts
    2,695
    Archived
    591
    Total Posts
    3,286
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by remez View Post
    You guys have so much faith in your own hype.
    Yeah, I guess that distinguishes us from the followers of the Great Religions of Man.

  2. Top | #102
    Senior Member remez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    834
    Archived
    920
    Total Posts
    1,754
    Rep Power
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by remez View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post


    Oh, dear.
    Have I been providing evidence and reasoning?

    Not when I made the comment 'Oh, dear.'' Prior to that you appeared to be denying the given definition of faith, a conviction held without the support of evidence.

    Which is fundamentally the definition of faith given in the Gospels;

    ''Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen'' - Hebrews 11:1
    parsed below.......
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Not when I made the comment 'Oh, dear.'' Prior to that you appeared to be denying the given definition
    NOT WHEN???????

    ABSOLUTELY WHEN.....I provided several scientific evidences.....you just ignored them all to play your get out of reason card. All the while (for years) you have been ignoring all the evidence and reasoning I was providing so that you could so faithfully hold to your faith in faith as a defeater. Like wow already. Didn’t Dawkins say that faith was a belief in something against the evidence? Hence my comment to your persistent ignore of my evidence. …great example. Get it now?
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Which is fundamentally the definition of faith given in the Gospels;
    So you and some other atheists believe…. in this limited understanding of faith. Ignores the obvious distinction between faith “that” and faith “in” throughout the gospels. Ignorance is your weapon against the actual evidence I keep presenting. It’s your get out of reason card. DBT doesn't have to reason with remez because remez has “faith”.
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    ''Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen'' - Hebrews 11:1
    You just stepped in it. BIG TIME. First Hebrews is not a gospel. But more importantly…. What is assurance? What is CONVICTION?
    Try this
    Hebrews 11:1 King James Version (KJV)
    11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
    EVIDENCE?

    So at this point.... the real question is......

    Have I challenged your faith in faith yet?
    Serious question.

  3. Top | #103
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    6,234
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    11,273
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by remez View Post
    What a dodge…….

    You took acceptation to some insignificant adjective (insulting) to avoid the reasoning. So simply drop it. It had absolutely no bearing on the reasoning I addressed.

    Another dodge.
    All arguments need to be semantically correct. So what?
    Is the clever argument reasonable?
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    It's nothing different than a first cause argument that is self-contradictory and begs the question.
    Simple assertion. Try something new and provide your reasoning as to why it begs the question? Or is self-contradictory? You won’t be able to.
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    If you don't agree for reasons of personal or religious truth that's okay with me.
    I don’t agree because you are dodging your burden to present reason for your groundless assertions that you magically believe are true.
    A few posts back (post 85) I gave you a way out after destroying your reasoning in post 83, because it seemed like you waved the white flag in post 84. Since you have continued on with the debate it has now become apparent that you dodged post 83. If you are going to continue then be fair and address post 83 rather than continuing to repeat your same bad reasoning.
    So you chose not to deal with the gist of my post and instead wish to peddle some emotional twaddle?

    Here's the relevant part of my last reply to which you did not respond.
    Are you aware that science is a branch of philosophy? It is called Natural Philosophy. And there are different philosophical truths, science deals with objective truth as opposed to personal truth or political truth or religious truth of whatever other truth you want to discuss.
    You had stated that truth should be determined based on philosophy so I thought you might have some thoughts here.

  4. Top | #104
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    6,234
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    11,273
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by ideologyhunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by remez View Post
    You guys have so much faith in your own hype.
    Yeah, I guess that distinguishes us from the followers of the Great Religions of Man.
    I haven't given up on remez. Anyone who claims absolute certainty only does so because they have doubts. If they weren't so conflicted they would be dealing in reasonable certainty. But dealing in reasonable certainty threatens their religious foundation so they avoid it.

  5. Top | #105
    Elder Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    10,168
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    28,074
    Rep Power
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by remez View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post


    Not when I made the comment 'Oh, dear.'' Prior to that you appeared to be denying the given definition of faith, a conviction held without the support of evidence.

    Which is fundamentally the definition of faith given in the Gospels;

    ''Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen'' - Hebrews 11:1
    parsed below.......
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Not when I made the comment 'Oh, dear.'' Prior to that you appeared to be denying the given definition
    NOT WHEN???????

    ABSOLUTELY WHEN.....I provided several scientific evidences.....you just ignored them all to play your get out of reason card. All the while (for years) you have been ignoring all the evidence and reasoning I was providing so that you could so faithfully hold to your faith in faith as a defeater. Like wow already. Didn’t Dawkins say that faith was a belief in something against the evidence? Hence my comment to your persistent ignore of my evidence. …great example. Get it now?
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Which is fundamentally the definition of faith given in the Gospels;
    So you and some other atheists believe…. in this limited understanding of faith. Ignores the obvious distinction between faith “that” and faith “in” throughout the gospels. Ignorance is your weapon against the actual evidence I keep presenting. It’s your get out of reason card. DBT doesn't have to reason with remez because remez has “faith”.
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    ''Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen'' - Hebrews 11:18
    You just stepped in it. BIG TIME. First Hebrews is not a gospel. But more importantly…. What is assurance? What is CONVICTION?
    Try this
    Hebrews 11:1 King James Version (KJV)
    11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
    EVIDENCE?

    So at this point.... the real question is......

    Have I challenged your faith in faith yet?
    Serious question.
    The question makes no sense. I have no faith in faith. I'm not sure why you'd think I do. You haven't explained.

    Nor does your 'scientific evidences' support your faith.

    Plus I didn't mean to say that Hebrews 11:1 is in the gospels, I meant the NT as a whole. I should have noticed.

    The point was that Hebrews 11:1 tells us that faith is its own justification, it's own 'evidence.' In other words, a belief held without the support of evidence.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •