I saw this happen on the sec web. They created their own form of Bible scholarship then it became established among them so to argue on that board meant one was in a wired world where the whole of Biblical scholarship was meaningless and you had to learn Bible scholarship form the ground up using their ideas.
Get them out of their board community and they were like uneducated morons compared to the real world Biblical scholarship. They had accepted certain things as facts so many times that they just became facts in the their minds and now how much proof one had to the contrary they were just stuck on those ideas. One such ideas was John Rylands Fragment was like dated to 200AD no scholars agree with.
I see atheist make up their own logical rules then imposing them as though they real rules of logic. These rules are designed to get around God arguments.
(1) you can prove a negative.
no logician anywhere agrees. In fact those who try to prove you can't don't deal with a true negative in the same way as the negative "lack of God." But they just about have it made into a hard and fast rule.
(2) lack of evdience is proof.
it's corollary
(3) Argument form silence is proof
this latter is especially liked by the Jesus mythers.Those guys are also making up their own rules of historiography.
(4) A necessity can only do necessary acts.
(5) contingencies can be independent of other things and could be eternal.
these are all things real logicians abhor.
One of the mjaor one's
(6) argument from analogy.
always a fallacy. can't prove anything with an analogy. I see atheists using them as proof all the time.
No comments:
Post a Comment