by Psychotic Parrot 120 Replies latest jw friends
Many here have fallen prey to the Parrot of the Gaps fallacy. This is where stupidity that is currently unexplainable to science gets attributed to a Psychotic Parrot. This is also known as argumentam ad passwordprotectentam.
Watching Password and Psycho go at it for 5 pages is.........the neurons I've lost are gone forever.
Both have initials of PP.
Coincidence?
BTS
""there was no hate"""
Not directly at me - re-read your posts to others though!
is it arrogant of me to point out falsehood when i see it
No - this is what you "think" is falsehood. I am merely saying that if you want to have a reasonable debate you need to start by respecting what others think/feel/ believe - you have not done this.
So don't be so stupid
Example of above.
only to then accuse me of being arrogant just because you aren't knowledgeable enough to respond to my reply
Your right - I wish I was as clever as you.
which is of course what you really meant when you said you couldn't be bothered to respond
Not at all - I think if you read through this thread it has been pretty futile and pointless - just like the vast majority on this subject. You clearly do not want to discuss the subject - unless we all agree with you - then you seem to be content.
You obviously did not want a debate, you just wanted to preach
Come on - pot, kettle. black moment surely!! LOL
Hey PP - have a nice day. No hard feelings - we disagree - no big deal.
As long as we are happy and content with our lot in life - thats all that counts in the end.
BTS is here, so thread has jumped the shark. All traces of substance must be swept away to make room for his unsavoury presence.
Will BTS ever have anything to say which isn't pure slander?
Nope, he won't.
Never noticed that they both had PP as initials.
Just to be clear then, I was addressing Psychotic Parrot in my posts, when I used PP.
Tammy
In a certain sense, parrot, even for those of us who call ourselves believers, we should allow--at least I do--that the whole bunch of Bible miracles can be written off as the least reliable arguments for God. Especially if you throw in the likelyhood of spurious additions, the accretions of biased theology and the slowest but most devastating effect of all--our customary/traditional attitudes. For the most part we have neither time nor resource to examine any of this fully. Really, who has?
Any, I mean ANY event in the Bible can be discounted. Why not-? people do all the time. What is easier to discount than the virgin birth? Who would really know? Joseph? Well--Mary would. Uh...No. What if there were a date rape drug back then--or she was subject to seizures. Who knows? Well, maybe not Mary either. But there is no reason for anyone to believe these stories. Moses and the Red Sea. The resurrection? It could all have been made up.
So I don't think the stories try to make an argument for God. But I believe the stories are very much true.
A Spanish proverb says:
Everyone judges the fair according to how it goes for him.
As this relates to faith we have either the most deeply cynical view of it or we have the most profound explanation of it.
You have your pocket picked? the fair was bad for you. You got cotton candy and won the prize? It was a good fair.
But one thing is sure: I can't tell the guy who had his pocket picketed he had a good time--even if I had the time of my life.
It might seem to be a draw except what happens to people, some people, is that with all the skepticism we can muster we something happensn our life that we cannot explain away. Even if we don't want to tell anyone for fear they will laugh.An when we have this unshakable conviction that-- they know that we know.
Even if it does involve ordinary elements (Mary did have a human baby after all--not a rhinoceros) the attending parts to the whole overwhelmingly convince us of a thoughtful, supernatural event. We end up in the aftermath trying to understand it. And we may not really understand it at all of course.
Even so, how often would you have to have such a thing occur to be convinced that the first event was genuine --and evidence of a vast intelligent power? Would you have to have someone else experience it with you? Maybe someone did experience it with you. They weren't likewise moved? Should that change your perception of a real event? Your conclusions might be different but the event was the same event. We can't change our perception of reality. That is cognizant dissonance after all. So crazy Bible stories don't make me laugh. They may not have some proper conclusions. But I am unable to discount the core of the story even when it is not clearly evident. Such a thing has happened to me.
Now , I am perfectly well aware that this doesn't change a thing for you, Parrot. In general, no one is very interested in stories unless they are already disposed to believe such things. This, either because they are credulous types who like stories or because they have had such things happen to them as well. But I know that most people would rather watch their dish water drain down than hear why I know God exists. So it's a draw.
The Bible preaches to the choir. Mostly, it was never meant to convince unbelievers to believe, in my opinion. But the story collection does become deeply relevant when you yourself have had a moment when you recognize your mustard seed of faith and claim it --and not even publically. then the Bible does speak in a personal way to you.
Your mustard seed moment might not be a huge thing either. But I'm a bigger skeptic than most and it took some convincing to get my attention. I have doubts about my own ability to perceive truth and fiction, real and unreal. And I am surrounded by quick-witted and better educated people who take me to task for my foolishness. My husband and my family for starters.
But God generously presented me with no arguments. We are inadequate to understand them anyway. Instead, I recognize in the Bible peoples trying to tell their stories of a Being they have met and don't know all that well. Until Jesus. The Jesus stories are the most wonderful and the most absurd --and the most. He told his stories. He called It Father and called us brothers and sisters. And he told us to trust it with our life. Mere argument cannot take anyone there.
I am ready for your laughter, Parrot.
Psycho
Oh i see, i'm a liar. I get you now!
Relax, I'm not going down that route. I believe you're trying to be honest with me. But, I do think you're fooling yourself.
My use of "semantics" hides my real leaning? I've made my 'real' leaning quite clear, so how can i be accused of hiding it?
I guess if you aren't sure which position you hold, I can't say you're doing this intentionaly, but it does pose some problems. I'm sure you understand why this appears conflicted.
Yes, i admit that it doesn't point in either direction, while you cherry pick aspects of it that point in the direction you prefer. Now you tell me who is being more intellectually honest here?
If that's true, what causes your leaning or your "gut" feeling?
I should thank everyone on all sides, who seem to understand the confusion.
To those who are asking for evidence, I'm sorry but I don't think "evidence" is the real issue here.
God of the gaps arguments are simply not convincing.
Good point...next topic please. LOL...I quit trying to convince anyone in the existence of God years ago. It's a choice, like so many other things that aren't 100% conclusive either way. Just be prepared to be called an idiot by the side who disagrees with you, which is really the biggest issue with the whole thing as far as I'm concerned.
When you quit caring about that, everything's fine.
Parrot--I wanted to say "the Jesus stories are the most believable."
Mindmelda, You said it so much quicker. Shows folks can arrive at the same destination on different transportation.
It is the Abrahamic God that is being forced on people in this day & age & in these parts of the world, if it were the above mentioned Gods who were being forced on people then it would be those Gods that i would be addressing.
That's what I meant when I said it's political not religious.
