Video: the incoherence of omnipotence

[Tom Sawyer]

Yes, there's uncertainty with every question. That's why some sort of methodology is needed to separate the wheat from the chaff.

 

[Underseer]

I note your use of the equivocation fallacy in post no. 411. You have used the word 'reason' in 2 different senses in the same sentence and hoped I would not notice it.

Pot meet kettle.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, it is a basic presumption based on your experience in the world and the general relationship between mothers and their children. Your parallel falls flat on its face due to entire lack of any first, second, or third hand experience with a deity. So trying to juxtaposition faith in a mother's love with the belief in an unobservable deity... pretty damn weak.

Unobservable deity - that is precisely what we are arguing about. What constitutes evidence? We shall have to agree to disagree.

Perhaps you should learn what an "equivocation fallacy" is before accusing others of it.

My argument did not hinge on other people confusing they two different definitions. I was using the word two different ways for two different purposes.

Second, your defense is a tu quoque fallacy. Even if you can demonstrate that I was using an equivocation fallacy (and you can't), that doesn't prove that you weren't. Someone else being wrong doesn't make you right. Your mother should have taught you that.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, there's uncertainty with every question. That's why some sort of methodology is needed to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Gosh if only we had something that let us separate the true claims from the false ones.

 

[bilby]

Yes, for some people.

That makes his existence a question of science which is unrelated to faith.

A question? If it's a question then there's uncertainty.
...for some people.

Well it clearly is a question; There's lots of uncertainty.

There's also lots of unjustified certainty. Many muslims are certain that there is one indivisible God, whose last prophet was Mohammed, and that Jesus was a prophet but not divine. Many christians are certain that God is a trinity, whose son, Jesus, was a divine incarnation of God himself.

One of these certainties is certainly wrong, and all the evidence suggests that both are.

In both cases, certainty is misplaced and misguided. Deciding to be certain of something for which compelling and overwhelming evidence is not available is not a virtue, it is a serious error of judgement.

Faith is a truly stupid methodology for determining facts about reality. It's almost certain to fail, and in the highly unlikely event that you have faith in something that's actually true, you have no way of knowing that you are correct.

Draw a random card from a shuffled deck. Never show it to me, nor to the audience; In fact, don't even look at it yourself.

I have faith that it's the eight of hearts.

Are you impressed? Does my faith in this seem sensible, reasonable, and noble? Or just stupid?

I'm very likely wrong; and if I am right I will never know it. It's not an impressive trick. Particularly as I don't even know if it's a deck of standard playing cards, or a tarot deck, or uno, or the Chance cards from a Monopoly game...

 

[Lion IRC]

Tom Sawyer was trying to suggest that it's either unfalsifiable blind faith or its open to the scientific method.

For some people it really is the former. For others, only empirical science will suffice. (Scientism)
But I think it is a little of both - somewhere in between.

And so the point I was making is that even science entails doubt/faith/hope. Looking for something that you may not find is science writ large.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Tom Sawyer was trying to suggest that it's either unfalsifiable blind faith or its open to the scientific method.

For some people it really is the former. For others, only empirical science will suffice. (Scientism)
But I think it is a little of both - somewhere in between.

And so the point I was making is that even science entails doubt/faith/hope. Looking for something that you may not find is science writ large.

Yes, that’s pretty much the entirety of science, which is one of the reasons it’s so awesome. However, it’s not the mere process of looking which is worthwhile, it’s how you go about the looking and how you figure out if you’re on the path to actually finding something as opposed to sitting there gazing at your navel and doing nothing that matters.

 

[Lion IRC]

I love science
Thank You God ✞

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I love science
Thank You God ✞

You’re welcome.

 

[Jobar]

Yes, for some people.

That makes his existence a question of science which is unrelated to faith.

A question? If it's a question then there's uncertainty.
...for some people.

There's uncertainty if and only if there are observable effects that seem to require a god or godlike being to exist. Observable to everyone who looks for them, not just "some people".

Years ago I wrote about the possibility that we skeptics are for some reason 'faith-blind'; we are simply incapable of seeing the things which inspire faith in believers. But if their faith was in something real, which had positive effects upon the lives of all (or only some few) who had faith, we doubters would then be able to see those effects on real people. The Bible says that those with faith no greater than a mustard seed can heal diseases, speak in other languages, even move mountains on command; yet we see none of those things happening.

For instance, there have been many experiments done trying to test the efficacy of prayer. One of the earliest involved looking at the lifespans of royalty, who in many countries were wished long life and health daily, in huge numbers of prayers. Yet the royals proved to live shorter lives, and had no better health than others who lived comparable lifestyles. No honest test I ever heard of gave results which showed prayers were any more effective than no prayers.

Never forget, Lion, there are "some people" who say (and by all appearances, actually believe) that the Earth is flat. Misinformation, stupidity, and dishonesty are rife. We ought to be skeptical, if we are to avoid being one of the suckers that P.T. Barnum observed was born every minute.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Moses saw God in part.

So God is observable, and your evidence is an alleged person allegedly seeing God... roughly 2700 years ago, during a massive exodus that has no recorded historical evidence as ever happening.

Wonderful!

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Moses saw God in part.

So God is observable, and your evidence is an alleged person allegedly seeing God... roughly 2700 years ago, during a massive exodus that has no recorded historical evidence as ever happening.

Wonderful!

Or God is in theory visible and directly observable. Or in theory myth writers lie about God. A lot.

 

[Jobar]

I love science
Thank You God ✞

Let's hear from Carl Sagan on that subject.
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t7Uvqrh8kU[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Lion IRC]

Moses saw God in part.

So God is observable, and your evidence is an alleged person allegedly seeing God... roughly 2700 years ago, during a massive exodus that has no recorded historical evidence as ever happening.

Wonderful!

Jesus saw God.
There's tons of evidence that Jesus was a real historical person.

Also - if the Exodus never happened, who invaded Canaan?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Moses saw God in part.

So God is observable, and your evidence is an alleged person allegedly seeing God... roughly 2700 years ago, during a massive exodus that has no recorded historical evidence as ever happening.

Wonderful!

Jesus saw God.
There's tons of evidence that Jesus was a real historical person.

Also - if the Exodus never happened, who invaded Canaan?

Mohammed was also a historical person and he saw the angel Gabriel who was very specific about the fact that Islam is the One True Path.

Also, if the Greek gods never gave Paris a golden apple, who invaded Troy?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Moses saw God in part.

So God is observable, and your evidence is an alleged person allegedly seeing God... roughly 2700 years ago, during a massive exodus that has no recorded historical evidence as ever happening.

Wonderful!

Jesus saw God

Oh goody, the number doubled to 2. .

There's tons of evidence that Jesus was a real historical person

.
2000 lbs? Must be a large New Testament!

Also - if the Exodus never happened, who invaded Canaan?

The Manitbites.

Seriously, the whole integration of the Hebrews into Egypt, yet neither the Joseph nor Moses accounts name a Pharaoh.

So two people who observed God, in the last 2700 years. Not very convincing.

So can we get back to the part where the true context of your observation quip meaning recently.

 

[Lion IRC]

It wasn't a quip.
You seem a bit concerned about this particular topic. Why? I'm not.
Science doesn't threaten God.

But you shouldn't mislead people about the bible naming pharaoh.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It wasn't a quip.

Apparently not your quip... it was from Tiger. That's on me.

You seem a bit concerned about this particular topic. Why?

And the apologists continue rifling through their apologist retort sheet.

Apologist A: X
Retorter: But not X.
Apologist B: You seemed concerned! *heh heh*

Debunking a claim isn't a sign of concern.

Science doesn't threaten God.

Science doesn't threaten Oliver Twist either.

But you shouldn't mislead people about the bible naming pharaoh.

Cute... so the Book of Genesis refers to antiquated leaders and kings, who had absolutely no impact on the story, and some of whom no one has ever heard of otherwise, but calling Pharaoh, a main player for Joseph and the Exodus, just "Pharaoh" was common courtesy. Except, later on in the Tanakh, very specific names are used for the Egyptian leaders.

 

[Lion IRC]

Apparently not your quip... it was from Tiger. That's on me.
And the apologists continue rifling through their apologist retort sheet.

Apologist A: X
Retorter: But not X.
Apologist B: You seemed concerned! *heh heh*

Debunking a claim isn't a sign of concern.

I'm asking you to elaborate on your concern.
What exactly IS your contention?

Science doesn't threaten God.

Science doesn't threaten Oliver Twist either.

THATS your retort?
Is the Op about Oliver Twist?

But you shouldn't mislead people about the bible naming pharaoh.

Cute... so the Book of Genesis refers to antiquated leaders and kings, who had absolutely no impact on the story, and some of whom no one has ever heard of otherwise, but calling Pharaoh, a main player for Joseph and the Exodus, just "Pharaoh" was common courtesy. Except, later on in the Tanakh, very specific names are used for the Egyptian leaders.

Why is it necessary to disambiguate the personal name(s) of Pharaoh? Because there were so many? To help you put more trust in Moses' parting of the Red Sea?

It's not as if extra-biblical historical documents of the same period are crystal clear as to the names and dates of Egypt's Pharaohs.

 

[jab]

Moses saw God in part.

My schizophrenic sister, for whom we have actual documents and living eyewitnesses as to her existence, heard God speaking to her.

 

[jab]

Jesus saw God.
There's tons of evidence that Jesus was a real historical person.

Also - if the Exodus never happened, who invaded Canaan?

Mohammed was also a historical person and he saw the angel Gabriel who was very specific about the fact that Islam is the One True Path.

Also, if the Greek gods never gave Paris a golden apple, who invaded Troy?

Yes, Lion, please convert to Islam. Or perhaps you would prefer Mormonism, based on what Joseph Smith saw and heard less than 200 years ago. Both religions have eyewitness testimony from actual historical figures, info which updates your religion.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Jesus saw God.
There's tons of evidence that Jesus was a real historical person.

Also - if the Exodus never happened, who invaded Canaan?

Mohammed was also a historical person and he saw the angel Gabriel who was very specific about the fact that Islam is the One True Path.

Also, if the Greek gods never gave Paris a golden apple, who invaded Troy?

Yes, Lion, please convert to Islam. Or perhaps you would prefer Mormonism, based on what Joseph Smith saw and heard less than 200 years ago. Both religions have eyewitness testimony from actual historical figures, info which updates your religion.

Also, Jesus appeared to me on a piece of toast this morning and told me that he's a fictional character from a storybook, so everyone should convert to atheism based on this latest update of eyewitness testimony.