Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (3 Viewers)

[Nzoric]

Not really, I've read the book and I think it's truly great, majestic and a group of ancient guys alone couldn't write something like that.

Really? Philosphical questions of much higher complexity were being discussed in Ancient Greece, far before the Bible. Some of the Aristotelean texts blow the bible out of the water and are far more progressive than the bible could ever dream of being. Why give the Bible precedence and more importance over some of the much earlier and more "great and majestic" works? Surely, GOD must've inspired all great writers.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Sorry guys. I gotta run off to an engagement. I'll reply to you soon.

 

[pitbull]

Nzoric, a true christian would be fallowin 10 commanedments wich are primary the other stuff is really just stuff to show how to live, some stuff cannot be trusted because it was written how to live in those times, some still can because a lot if not most things there are universal, but 10 comandments is the main thing which oyu cannot pseudo around.

You can.
John 13:
34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

 

[Nzoric]

Honestly I don't even know those 10, half maybe.

The point is that those 10 are the basic most important rules if you will, from which every other story and it's teachings go. All other stories are just stories so you could easier understand in a liflike situation hwo to act according to those 10 commandments. What's so pseudo about I really don't get.

Are the Death Sins also relative?

 

[Maddy]

Not really, I've read the book and I think it's truly great, majestic and a group of ancient guys alone couldn't write something like that.

are u serious? try reading ancient greek literature.

 

[Raz]

Really? Philosphical questions of much higher complexity were being discussed in Ancient Greece, far before the Bible. Some of the Aristotelean texts blow the bible out of the water and are far more progressive than the bible could ever dream of being. Why give the Bible precedence and more importance over some of the much earlier and more "great and majestic" works? Surely, GOD must've inspired all great writers.

How does aristotel blow the bible away? Not to take anything from him, but I just don't agree with you.

But seeing as a lot of you here who are pro technocratic capitalists I can see why we don't see eye to eye

 

[ZoSo]

proof, please.

And you have every right to doubt it, as does anyone else. That is because the big bang theory is presented as a theory. A hypothetical scenario which seems possible according to the facts we know. No one subscribes blindly to it, and every time the theory is successfully attacked - it is modified.

Likewise, Tthere isn't one scientist in the world, or atleast not a respectable one, who accepts the theory of evolution as being without fault. But that is what is convenient about that state of mind, it's open to changes and adjusts it's beliefs according to what new analysis of empirical data shows. The Catholic Christian belief is a universal belief, it's immovable because it's entire foundation is over 2000 years old. If you try to circumvent that fact, you transcend Christianity and become something else.

What proof, a perfectly explained schematic of the human brain?

 

[Raz]

You can.
John 13:
34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

That comes doen from the same 10, not a new one at all.

- - - Updated - - -

Are the Death Sins also relative?

Don't get it? You mean death penalty?

 

[Maddy]

How does aristotel blow the bible away? Not to take anything from him, but I just don't agree with you.

But seeing as a lot of you here who are pro technocratic capitalists I can see why we don't see eye to eye

you dont know niko then?

lol @ ur bible vs aristotle bias much?

 

[pitbull]

Really? Philosphical questions of much higher complexity were being discussed in Ancient Greece, far before the Bible. Some of the Aristotelean texts blow the bible out of the water and are far more progressive than the bible could ever dream of being. Why give the Bible precedence and more importance over some of the much earlier and more "great and majestic" works? Surely, GOD must've inspired all great writers.

1) Aristotle was born 1000 years after Moses, at least a big part of the Old Testament was already written if not all of it. Keep your facts straight.
2) I haven't read much of him, but it's your subjective opinion if you think it's greater than Bible or not, don't state it as a fact. And yeah, of course God didn't inspire only the Bible, I don't think anyone thinks like that.

 

[Nzoric]

How does aristotel blow the bible away? Not to take anything from him, but I just don't agree with you.

But seeing as a lot of you here who are pro technocratic capitalists I can see why we don't see eye to eye

Because Aristotle deals in thought patterns and logical arguments, it encourages the reader to be critical and to try and put together coherent arguments against what he is saying. If we must, we can venture into the field of linguistics despite none of us knowing much about it (except @X maybe), but the general concensus is that the Bible isn't even a technically well written book. Not in the same way as Aristotle, atleast.

 

[Raz]

you dont know niko then?

lol @ ur bible vs aristotle bias much?

Still most of you are technocratic

Not much bias, just think that bible is more significant and has more wisdom in it then the later.

 

[Nzoric]

you dont know niko then?

It's like he did his utmost to decribe the opposite me in a parralel world

- - - Updated - - -

Not much bias, just think that bible is more significant and has more wisdom in it then the later.

Great, let's put aside all objective criteria. The bible is as well written as Narnia.

 

[pitbull]

are u serious? try reading ancient greek literature.

I had philosophy as my C course last year and had to read some of it. Maybe I didn't pay enough attention, but reading it was a burden. I've never found philosophy interesting (I study economics).

 

[Maddy]

Still most of you are technocratic

Not much bias, just think that bible is more significant and has more wisdom in it then the later.

the terror of science

well if u werent religious im quite confident u wouldnt look at the bible as the almighty.

i personal find the bible 50 % shit and 50 % pure gold. havent read it all tho (thank god)

 

[Nzoric]

1) Aristotle was born 1000 years after Moses, at least a big part of the Old Testament was already written if not all of it. Keep your facts straight.
2) I haven't read much of him, but it's your subjective opinion if you think it's greater than Bible or not, don't state it as a fact. And yeah, of course God didn't inspire only the Bible, I don't think anyone thinks like that.

1) the oldest surviving manuscript for the old testament is the 9th century BCE
2) by objective criteria Aristotle is a much more accomplished writer than whoever dotted down the bible.

- - - Updated - - -

I've never found philosophy interesting

How is this even possible?

 

[Maddy]

I had philosophy as my C course last year and had to read some of it. Maybe I didn't pay enough attention, but reading it was a burden. I've never found philosophy interesting (I study economics).

you study economics? a greek word they say..

never found philosophy interesting, but didnt you just sat how much you enjoy the bible?

 

[pitbull]

Great, let's put aside all objective criteria.

How do you objectively rate how wise and rich the book is? By making a poll?

 

[Nzoric]

you study economics? a greek word they say..

maddy pls

old testament word

 

[Raz]

Because Aristotle deals in thought patterns and logical arguments, it encourages the reader to be critical and to try and put together coherent arguments against what he is saying. If we must, we can venture into the field of linguistics despite none of us knowing much about it (except @X maybe), but the general concensus is that the Bible isn't even a technically well written book. Not in the same way as Aristotle, atleast.

Technicaly not well written? Why does it even matter. I really liked aristotle, but we will differ on this here and there is no point in continuing on this. If you put an emphasis that bible is not technicaly written well and use it as an argument against it, I don't see any point in continueng this