Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The 'best' arguments for atheism and Christianity

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Roy View Post
    But which bit is "was a bare rock for a while, and then apparently, it sank"?

    This so-called prophecy could, if it was genuine, be easily cleared up using Google's satellite images to show the areas that were (i) destroyed, (ii) not rebuilt, (iii) now used for nets. That no-one seems able to do this is a strong indication that this prophecy claim is bunk.
    This would be a good start point: Alexanders Isthmus
    Shunyadragon's claim that the fortress area survived seems valid. His claim that the city survived doesn't.
    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
    .
    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
    Scripture before Tradition:
    but that won't prevent others from
    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
    of the right to call yourself Christian.

    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

    Comment


    • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
      This would be a good start point: Alexanders Isthmus
      Shunyadragon's claim that the fortress area survived seems valid. His claim that the city survived doesn't.
      But when I look at the area that was formerly an island in Google satellite view I see that it includes hotels, shops, apartment blocks, restaurants etc.

      Anyone who wants to claim the island portion of Tyre was never rebuilt needs to acknowledge that there are modern buildings on land that was once part of the island.

      tyre.jpg
      Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

      MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
      MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

      seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Reading Paul's letters it is apparent that there was a great deal of proselytizing going on (which largely included people "who lived on the other side of the sea") in the areas he visited. If he was simply making things up these folks would have called him out and considering that not all of them were friendly toward Paul they would have delighted in doing so.

        You don't necessarily need one of the 500 but a couple of people who encountered some of them.
        If you want to show Paul's account to be true you only need to encounter a couple of them. If you want to show that Paul's account is false, that won't work, especially if there was never a gathering of 500 people, since anyone encountered will simply not have been part of the '500'.
        Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

        MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
        MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

        seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

        Comment


        • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          The Delta floods every year, and is covered by water and swamps.
          entire villages and towns have moved or died out when a stream in the Nile dries up and moves.
          Last edited by Sparko; 01-08-2018, 10:44 AM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Roy View Post
            Anyone who wants to claim the island portion of Tyre was never rebuilt needs to acknowledge that there are modern buildings on land that was once part of the island.
            If it's substantially underwater I think we can say it has never been rebuilt.

            "Looking down into the water one can see a mass of granite columns and stone blocks strewn over the sea bottom. Until recently the ruins of Tyre above water were few" (Nina Jidejian, "Tyre Through the Ages," Beirut: Dar El-Mashreq Publishers, 1969)

            "The ruins of ancient Tyre are different from all the others--situated … in the heart of the sea" (Nina Nelson, "Your Guide to Lebanon", p. 220, London, 1965)

            Blessings,
            Lee
            "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

            Comment


            • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              No they are not. Only the extreme southern part of the island of Hercules. The rest of the main island of the city of Tyre remains above water.
              Are you saying that Nina Jidejian is wrong?

              Blessings,
              Lee
              "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Roy View Post
                But when I look at the area that was formerly an island in Google satellite view I see that it includes hotels, shops, apartment blocks, restaurants etc.

                Anyone who wants to claim the island portion of Tyre was never rebuilt needs to acknowledge that there are modern buildings on land that was once part of the island.

                [ATTACH=CONFIG]25854[/ATTACH]
                Based on what I have seen to date, either viewpoint could perhaps claim a technical vindication. Some ruins of the city still stand on the land, the bulk of the ruins are under water. That the ruins on land still, quite visibly, stand shows that they have not been rebuilt. It also seems that the island in the immediate vicinity of Alexander's mole was (largely?) vacant land. For the most part, the city seems to have been positioned on the west coast and south of the mole. That section of the island, and a substantial section of the north, is now under water.
                The island is populated and built upon - very little of the original city could have been rebuilt, but perhaps a small portion has been.
                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                .
                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                Scripture before Tradition:
                but that won't prevent others from
                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                Comment


                • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                  If it's substantially underwater I think we can say it has never been rebuilt.
                  "If". We could equally say that it isn't a place to dry fishing nets.

                  You haven't shown that it is substantially underwater, only that there are some underwater ruins. You haven't even shown that these underwater ruins are where the city stood, as opposed to having been cast into the sea. You've also just admitted, possibly inadvertently, that there are above-water ruins:
                  "Looking down into the water one can see a mass of granite columns and stone blocks strewn over the sea bottom. Until recently the ruins of Tyre above water were few" (Nina Jidejian, "Tyre Through the Ages," Beirut: Dar El-Mashreq Publishers, 1969)
                  I note that you've not attempted to determine the extent of the underwater ruins vs the extent of the island that remains above water. I doubt you ever will, since (as with the remnants of the Roman Empire) you're assuming the prophesy is true and don't want to examine anything that might threaten your assumption.

                  I don't think there is any possible situation that could lead you to admit that Tyre was rebuilt. You'd always find some justification, such as the buildings were in different places, or that specific buildings such as temples had not been replaced, of that some of the ruins were being preserved for posterity, or that different architectural techniques were being used, etc etc etc.

                  You keep saying that the city has never been rebuilt, but your goalposts for what would qualify as rebuilding it get moved with each additional piece of information you can't ignore.

                  Do more people live on the (ex-)island area now than lived there when Alexander attacked? Given the presence of multi-storey apartment blocks it wouldn't surprise me if there were.
                  Last edited by Roy; 01-11-2018, 10:11 AM.
                  Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                  MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                  MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                  seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                    Based on what I have seen to date, either viewpoint could perhaps claim a technical vindication. Some ruins of the city still stand on the land, the bulk of the ruins are under water. That the ruins on land still, quite visibly, stand shows that they have not been rebuilt.
                    So if the city is rebuilt but the rebuilders deliberately leave some of the ruins preserved for archaeological reasons, it means that the city hasn't been rebuilt, as well as those individual buildings not having been rebuilt?

                    Using your criteria, Rome does not exist because the Coliseum has not been replaced by a multi-screen cinema complex.
                    The island is populated and built upon - very little of the original city could have been rebuilt, but perhaps a small portion has been.
                    AFAICT it has been rebuilt to the extent that changing coastlines and a desire for archaeological preservation allow. It retains the name. People live there. What would qualify as rebuilding that has not been done?
                    Last edited by Roy; 01-11-2018, 10:19 AM.
                    Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                    MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                    MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                    seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Roy View Post
                      You haven't shown that it is substantially underwater, only that there are some underwater ruins.
                      If at one time the ruins above water were few, that implies the ruins below water were many.

                      You haven't even shown that these underwater ruins are where the city stood, as opposed to having been cast into the sea.
                      Jidejian calls them the ruins of Tyre, not "the debris of Tyre".

                      You all have not yet acknowledged that the island of Tyre apparently, substantially, sank.

                      Source: Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties

                      In point of fact, the mainland city of Tyre later was rebuilt and assumed some of its former importance during the Hellenistic period. But as for the island city, it apparently sank below the surface of the Mediterranean, in the same subsidence that submerged the port of Caesarea that Herod had built up with such expense and care. All that remains of it is a series of black reefs offshore from Tyre, which surely could not have been there in the first and second millennia B.C., since they pose such a threat to navigation. The promontory that now juts out from the coastline probably was washed up along the barrier of Alexander's causeway, but the island itself broke off and sank away when the subsidence took place; and we have no evidence at all that it ever was built up again after Alexander's terrible act of vengeance. In the light of these data, then, the predictions of chapter 26, improbable though they must have seemed in Ezekiel's time, were duly fulfilled to the letter--first by Nebuchadnezzar in the sixth century, and then by Alexander in the fourth.

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                      Comment


                      • This thread seems to have been somewhat derailed.

                        Apologia's thread by this name got me to thinking about evidence for or against the reality of God. It is my opinion that there is no “objective” evidence either way. Belief in one way or the other is a matter of what seems most likely to you, or even what you would prefer.

                        I see two possibilities for the origin of everything: It was created by an uncreated being, or the whole mess just is what is. The first seems to me to be by far the most likely. Even the neo atheist saint Dawkins admitted that the world appears to be designed. His choice to reject the idea was effectively one of personal credulity, as was mine. There is no other certain evidence either way.
                        Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                          This thread seems to have been somewhat derailed.

                          Apologia's thread by this name got me to thinking about evidence for or against the reality of God. It is my opinion that there is no “objective” evidence either way. Belief in one way or the other is a matter of what seems most likely to you, or even what you would prefer.

                          I see two possibilities for the origin of everything: It was created by an uncreated being, or the whole mess just is what is. The first seems to me to be by far the most likely. Even the neo atheist saint Dawkins admitted that the world appears to be designed. His choice to reject the idea was effectively one of personal credulity, as was mine. There is no other certain evidence either way.
                          I would agree that I have never heard a "proof" for the existence of god that works, nor have I ever heard of a "proof" for the nonexistence of god that works. That makes both atheism and theism matters of faith built (hopefully) on the best available evidence. I'm not sure how anyone would assess the "likelihood" of creation, but perhaps the intent was to say that the evidence is stronger for the existence of a god than against it. Obviously, I come down on the other side of that assessment. I think the patterns of history point clearly to religion as a human invention, largely to serve three purposes: 1) answer the question "why," 2) answer the question "what comes after?" and 3) provide an answer to the unknown. along the way, has also served to provide a means for encoding moral codes and attributing them to an authority.

                          I have not used the word "designed" to describe the universe since becoming atheist. I find that argument to be largely circular. However, I do agree that the universe has order to it that can be described as principles, rules, or "laws" of operation. I see no reason to think those laws have to arise from a sentient being. They appear to arise from the universe itself. The universe has a "nature," in much the same way god is said to have a "nature." Just as god's "nature" is said to govern morality, etc., so too the nature of the universe governs its operation. I see no need to add more to that than is needed.
                          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                            I would agree that I have never heard a "proof" for the existence of god that works, nor have I ever heard of a "proof" for the nonexistence of god that works. That makes both atheism and theism matters of faith built (hopefully) on the best available evidence. I'm not sure how anyone would assess the "likelihood" of creation, but perhaps the intent was to say that the evidence is stronger for the existence of a god than against it. Obviously, I come down on the other side of that assessment. I think the patterns of history point clearly to religion as a human invention, largely to serve three purposes: 1) answer the question "why," 2) answer the question "what comes after?" and 3) provide an answer to the unknown. along the way, has also served to provide a means for encoding moral codes and attributing them to an authority.

                            I have not used the word "designed" to describe the universe since becoming atheist. I find that argument to be largely circular. However, I do agree that the universe has order to it that can be described as principles, rules, or "laws" of operation. I see no reason to think those laws have to arise from a sentient being. They appear to arise from the universe itself. The universe has a "nature," in much the same way god is said to have a "nature." Just as god's "nature" is said to govern morality, etc., so too the nature of the universe governs its operation. I see no need to add more to that than is needed.
                            No! My point is there is no real evidence one way or the other, the best available evidence does not exist at all. What evidence brings you down on the atheist side? I would guess that it is actually the lack of solid evidence for the reality of God. If you have any real evidence I would love to hear it, what is your "best available evidence?" So you choose to believe in a self existent universe rather than a self existent creator. I did not suggest that you used the term designed to refer to the creation (I use creation in this case simply to include what ever exists - multiverse or what ever. There is no need to think of it as requiring a creator.) I only pointed out that is does appear to be designed as even Dawkins admits. I will try to deal with "I think the patterns of history point clearly to religion as a human invention, . . . " separately.
                            Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                            Comment


                            • The thrust of history:

                              Carpedm said “I think the patterns of history point clearly to religion as a human invention, . . . “ he added the reason religion was invented. I want to look at another possibility.

                              If (suspended belief if you are able) the God of the Bible is actually the creator of all, how would that show up in history? If the creation is even remotely accurate (to the degree that it happened at all) the original humans would have had stories to tell to their children and grandchildren. Those stories, since history was not yet invented, would have been somewhat distorted and inaccurate. Over a long period of time it is easy to see how the wildly differing religions of the earth came to be. These beliefs could well have been used to “ 1) answer the question "why," 2) answer the question "what comes after?" and 3) provide an answer to the unknown.” It is also easy to see how these distortions (as well as the truthe) could also serve to provide a means for encoding moral codes and attributing them to an authority.

                              Since this is possible (unless you decide in advance that it is not) history does not show us any evidence for or against the reality of a creator god.

                              Lets look at the nature of religious explanations for the world. With a very few exceptions the creation myths of the world include a universe that is already there, with gods who are mostly super deluxe human beings. The Greek, Roman, and Nordic gods are a fine example of this. Look at the Navajo stories of origins, there is already something there and it is modified by the “creators.”

                              The Judeo – Christian tradition begins with nothing but God. He then creates everything. A big difference. Few others actually see this.
                              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Roy View Post
                                Apart from your references explicitly contradicting each other - if Tyre is a sleepy town with a harbour it clearly still exists and has many intact stones - you're now suggesting that the underwater areas where columns and stones exist, and which you have claimed to be the part of Tyre referred to by the prophesy and which became bare rock, were above water in 1965 (when Nina Nelson was writing) and sank beneath the waves since then.

                                Such events should be easy to document - unless you made it up.
                                There are low rocky areas called the Island of Hercules on the south end of the island, which may have been inhabited at the time of the siege and destruction of Tyre by Alexander, but the major Island of Tyre was where the major fortress, walls and Temple were located, and have been rebuilt a number of times and continuously occupied.

                                They did not sink. The slow rise in the sea level has mad them a rocky reef.
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                25 responses
                                84 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                78 responses
                                415 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X