[Lunar Shadow]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

No need to clarify as I mean both.

What so you want the privlage of having it both ways?? sorry it doen't work like that besides depening on the world view the person is probably gonna assume one way or the other wich makes it awfuly convienient for you doen't it?

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

Now this conclusion that you came to - Did you use the universal, abstract, invariant laws of logic to come to that conclusion. If so, you came to the conclusion borrowing the foundation for reason from MY worldview. You used the Christian worldview in refuting the Christian worldview.

I'm sure that you will protest at that notion but tell me, what is YOUR foundation for reason. How do you justify the universal, abstract, invariant laws of logic in YOUR worldview?

A world view can be self refuting just as the bible is self refuting if you actually look and read the bible contradicts itself many many times over much as the christian world voew contradicts itself so you have a self refuting world view.

Point of contention here Logic and science and natualistic morality are all observable so they are not tottaly abstract they only seem abstract to the laymen but with some study you will find they are observable things in our world therefore comming back to a materialistic world view.... you try to take it in to the abstract by twisting words to make it seem as such

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

Another point. Neutrality is a myth. Everyone evaluates EVERYTHING they encounter based on their already held beliefs - their presuppositions. Any evidence I produce you will evaluate based on your presupposition that God does not exist, just as I will evaluate anything you say based on my presuppositions that God does in fact exist. The only way that our argument can be satisfied is by evaluating each other's presuppositions to see who can support the preconditions for intelligibility. In other words, who can support logic and reason itself.

This is a moot point because I can not make you understand my world view but I understand your world view since I havve been there and I would have to go in favor of my world view when is comes to supporting logic and reason. I have the upper hand here because have held both world views in my life.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

My presupposition is that God exists and that His Word is true. His word gives us the foundations for logic (universal, abstract, invariants). His word also explains origins, science and the human condition.

I disagree I have read the book over and over and it does not explain science nor does it explain origins (tell me wich genesis account is true Genesis 1 or Genesis 2?) there are 2 sepperate stories there that in itself defies logic unless he made the wolrd twice.

Where doe you get the foundations of logic?? please do tell

Now as far as the human condition I am not gonna argue there the bible is a good book of myth and speaks of the human condition.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

Now you may correct me if I am wrong, but since God is not your ultimate authority, I imagine that your own human reason is your ultimate authority. This is what I meant by being your own God. Even if you could be reasonably convinced of God's existence, what would be proven to you would not be God, since according to your worldview your reason would have higher authority than God, and can work without His existence.

You knwo what its the same on your side you stack the deck in gods favor even in the face of evidences that call him in to question you give him a couple extra so he can come ou on top. the finger can be pointed right back at you man.

I am not asking to be convinced I am asking for proof there is a difference. but christians I have found rarley use the words "proved existance" they use words like "I am convinced" so that leaves out proof... a god argument can convince anyone of most anything. but when it comes down to hard core irrefutable proof there is somethign lacking... and come on lets just face it. you would hope for irrefutable proof when sitting on the jury for a muder trial when some one's life hangs in the balance... why not ask for the same in our lives? the most important question the god question. why not ask for irrefutable proof instead of beign asked to be convinced?

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

With that said, I challenge you to prove the validity of your human reason WITHOUT God.

no you don't get off that easy there... you're gonna have to prove the existance of god if you are gonna have me construct an arguemnt that big.
but you will find this all pointless due tothe facttaht you can nto prove his existance just like his non existance can not be universally proven... you can pick off gods one by one but can notknock them all out in one fell swoop because all gods have different attributes.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

When you realize that it cannot be done. I hope that you fall to your knees and thank the one true God of Christianity who makes even your ability to reason possibe.

Why Christianity? why believe in jesus? he is not unique in any way his stroy is a rehash of many dying and rising god over 1000 years before him. but you wouldn't know anything about that would you?

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

Thanks for the kind sentiment. I was wondering though what exactly do you mean by that.

meaning Peace be with you
I do not wish harm to come to anyone no matter how heated a debate gets I may get frustrated but I wish no harm on anyone... but I can not say the same about other religions who order the death of Atheists and blasphemers and disobedient children and so on and so on.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Canuckfish)

P.S. I had a peak at that other forum. I hope you dont call me the same things here as you did there.

I try to refrain from using ad-hom attacks in debate it is pointless and get the debate nowhere I hope the same form you.... but if I am not in a debate I will let my feelings of frustration be known. venting on a fourm where a debate between us is not happening is something I see as fair game.. sorry if you take offense to the language that is how I talk but per request for a few here I refrain form using it in debate and on most sections of the board.


Peace be with you