The Incoherence of the Accusers (3)


Christianity is accused of being stubbornly ignorant for holding that there are some things that are absolute, certain, some beliefs that are immovable. The detractors say, certainty is not part of the human existence; things change all the time and so does our understanding. Well, one wonder whether the person who says this is certain about it.  Are they certain about this change, is it absolute? Are they even certain of Christianity’s ignorance? I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and let them retract the statement. Let there be no certainty even in the change. Now, what? Well, it seems now that change can at any point cease to be change and give way to periods of certainty. The accusers are caught in a trap. Can we trust those who tell believers their ignorance is certain when they themselves ignorantly reject certainty?

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “The Incoherence of the Accusers (3)

  1. Let there be no certainty even in the change. Now, what? Well, it seems now that change can at any point cease to be change and give way to periods of certainty

    Certainty, of the kind Christianity lays claim to, requires omniscience. If you’re suggesting change will result in members of humanity becoming omniscient, then…

    Well, I don’t think there’s really anything TO say.

    If you can demonstrate that any human being today is omniscient, I’ll concede your point. Lacking that, you must concede that we can never experience absolute certainty.

  2. Christianity says the universe contains both change and certainty. It’s not “either/or”, but “both/and.” If you take one out, the universe becomes unintelligible and the foundations of science are destroyed. Change without certainty makes the outcome of observation and experimentation untrustworthy. Certainty without change makes observation and experimentation impossible.

    You say, “we can never experience absolute certainty.” Do you not see the contradiction inherent in the statement? Are you certain about this? Sometimes I think the atheists have been spouting their dogma for so long they just don’t think about it anymore. When you relegate the other side to blithering idiots, who cares what you say in response, or if it even makes sense? It’s when you lend legitimacy to the other side, paradoxically, that you begin to make sense.

    Experiencing absolute certainty is not impossible for finite beings. They would just have to know a being who is absolute certainty, someone who does not change.

    1. Christianity says the universe contains both change and certainty. It’s not “either/or”, but “both/and.” If you take one out, the universe becomes unintelligible and the foundations of science are destroyed.
      Here, you’re equivocating between absolute certainty and reasonable certainty.

      Experiencing absolute certainty is not impossible for finite beings. They would just have to know a being who is absolute certainty, someone who does not change.
      Without omniscience, how can a finite being have absolute confidence in his/her knowledge / perceptions / understanding? After all, it’d take the ability to test the truthiness of a proposition in all times, places and situations to achieve this – and finite being lack that ability.

  3. Sometimes I think the atheists have been spouting their dogma for so long they just don’t think about it anymore.

    What dogma?
    Name it. Quote it. Spell it out.

    (…awkward silence…)

    Atheism is a lack of belief in your brand name magical being.
    That’s it.
    Hardly a dogma.

    When you relegate the other side to blithering idiots, who cares what you say in response, or if it even makes sense?

    The “blithering idiots” get there all by themselves.

    It’s when you lend legitimacy to the other side…

    That’s silly. Legitimacy is something that must be earned.
    Make a claim and give supporting evidence for the claim.
    It’s very, very simple.
    Word games will get you nowhere.

  4. Dogma – A principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

    What dogma?

    Legitimacy is something that must be earned. — Dogma

    [You must] make a claim and give supporting evidence for the claim. — Dogma

    Word games will get you nowhere. — Dogma

    we can never experience absolute certainty. — Dogma

    (Awkward Silence)

  5. Word games will get you nowhere. They just make you look silly.

    Again, what atheist dogma?

    Legitimacy is something that must be earned.

    There’s nothing inherently “atheist” about this. Nor is it associated with any dogma. The English language is not your friend.
    It’s up to you to make a legitimate argument and not be a blithering idiot like the rest.

    Making a claim and being expected to provide evidence for a claim is common sense. Nothing particularly “atheist” about it.

    Dogma – A principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

    Even using the definition you yourself chose, your original comment does not work.

    Atheism is a lack of belief in your brand name magical being.
    That’s it.

    There are no “principles” laid down by any “authority” that claims “incontrovertible truthiness” or otherwise.
    That’s just all you.

    1. You said, “There are no “principles” laid down by any “authority” that claims “incontrovertible truthiness” or otherwise.”

      I’m sorry… I thought you knew what you were talking about. I guess you aren’t sure of your truth after all. You sure speak like you are, but I’m glad you admitted you aren’t. I can go ahead and dismiss everything you said.

      1. I’m sorry… I thought you knew what you were talking about.

        Do more than spout mindless talking points. List the principles and authorities. Remember, those principles must be universal to all atheists, and the authorities must be recognized as such by all atheists.

        FWIW Dan, I’m not an atheist – and it’s telling that you’d assume otherwise

  6. You said, “There are no “principles” laid down by any “authority” that claims “incontrovertible truthiness” or otherwise.”

    I’m sorry… I thought you knew what you were talking about.

    I do.

    You said…“Sometimes I think the atheists have been spouting their dogma…”

    I called you on that.
    What dogma?
    Name it. Quote it. Spell it out.
    You don’t seem to be able to do so.

    I guess you aren’t sure of your truth after all.

    What truth are you talking about?
    There is no “atheist dogma”.

    You sure speak like you are, but I’m glad you admitted you aren’t. I can go ahead and dismiss everything you said.

    I have no idea what you are talking about.
    It does not follow.
    The word games from you continue. They will not make your magic, invisible friend poof into existence.

    “Sometimes I think the atheists have been spouting their dogma…”

    What dogma?
    There is none.
    Atheism is a lack of belief in your brand name magical being.
    That’s it.

    Take Baal for example.
    Do you believe in Baal? I’m guessing…no.
    Well, congratulations. You are an atheist with regards to Baal.
    See?
    No dogma required.

    How about the Loch Ness Monster?
    Same diff’.

    The One True God

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s