@Marcast1000@UgoCannon the problems is that it cant ground them, like why should the universe be orderly and intelligible, why do the laws of logic hold everywhere and always and why is human reason reliable if its just the product of blind, unguided processes that only favored survival? things like so
@Marcast1000@UgoCannon I didnt presuppose youre a naturalist I was responding to the common atheist position that starts with naturalism/materialism as the default and empiricism as the only valid one. If ur not a naturalist, then what is your foundational worldview? Id like to know 1/2
@Marcast1000@UgoCannon no it just means assuming as foundational which every worldview does, however you presuppose materialism by default, then use empiricism as your only criteria, but it cannot be empirically proven and naturalism cannot account for the preconditions of science without circularity
@Rogerinhawaii@UgoCannon Same methodology we use for any worldview: coherence, explanatory power, correspondence to reality, consistency with what we know, which set of presuppositions better accounts for logic, morality, consciousness, the finetuning of the universe, and the existence of objective truth
@DooglousHouzer@MartinTweats After I gave you a clear pre pauline creed when you first said there is no contemporary SOURCE, which is backed up by an atheist historian, you then said "uuhhh no that's a claim i want evidence" tell me how that's not moving the goalpost you fucking idiot 2 /2
@DooglousHouzer@MartinTweats How is Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 not contemporary u ape? Its attested by historians and I even gave u an atheist one, that itss dated 2-7 years within the crucifixion, you said its decades later, you stupid retard you did move the goal post, i gave you history 1/2
@rentier13@DooglousHouzer@MartinTweats Obviously debates were happening and even tho they got harsh that's human nature, but I'm talking strictly 1st to 3rd century of early church, where the early church fathers were disciples of the apostles, plus the Nicene Creed they defended has stood for 1700 years
@___TheGOOdWitch ah yes, the atheists with their subjective morality, are better than others that have the same subjective grounding for morality, atheists will force people to follow their subjective morality and claim it's better, even though it's subjective and arbitrary
@rentier13@DooglousHouzer@MartinTweats I dont get my historical sources just from Tacitus and Josephus, there are plenty others like Suetonius, Mara bar serapion, Pliny the Younger, Justin martyr and many more. Youre also missing a key point, the early church, we have early church fathers which kept a chain of narrati
@DooglousHouzer@MartinTweats are you stupid? When did I say there are no contemporary sources you illiterate dumbass, first you're shifting the goalpost now you're completly strawmaning what I said, it doesn't get more retarded than this you stupid faggot
@DooglousHouzer@MartinTweats The irony to call someone uneducated then say there are no contemporary sources when even B. Ehrman himself affirms in his books and blogs that Paul is quoting early prePauline creed in Corinthians, 2-5 years after the crucifixon making him contemporary. Retard
I can't imagine the sweet dopamine hit these atheists get when they post the most brainrotted assertions, treat them like serious arguments, and farm clout from an audience of philosophically illiterate fans.
The only atheist who truly deserves the utmost respect is Alex O’Connor. He’s intellectually honest, willing to admit when he’s proven wrong on theological/philosophical matters, pushes back against bad atheist arguments, and actively researches to find real substantive ones.
@offender_repeat@anchoredso37497 This is just another case of someone not knowing the difference between progressive CIVIL laws and MORAL laws. Please read the exegesis and learn the difference between these two.