Die Hard Christians:

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
it is n doubt a good point that you make dear beetle, however, the actual account
itself has some good points which seem to me to take it from the realms of myth
and lend themselves more to the 'ring of truth;', than a merely fabricated story.

1.the report is made by two women to the apostles, why? in a male dominated
society like Palestine ...[text shortened]... ane elements in a
carpet or tapestry that one needs to bind together to form a whole 🙂

Cool!

I keep in mind the fact that the resurrection can be understood solely as a miracle with extremely high improbability. I admit I would love to get an independent confirmation in order to accept this story. Therefore, as I told to our Zalhanzi earlier, I strongly believe that a rational person could well accept the miracle and thus the story of the resurrection based on her/ his faith alone. This means that, in my opinion, the story of the resurrection can be accepted as "absolute truth" by your fellow Christians alone
😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Cool!

I keep in mind the fact that the resurrection can be understood solely as a miracle with extremely high improbability. I admit I would love to get an independent confirmation in order to accept this story. Therefore, as I told to our Zalhanzi earlier, I strongly believe that a rational person could well accept the miracle and thus the story of ...[text shortened]... ry of the resurrection can be accepted as "absolute truth" by your fellow Christians alone
😵

ah yes dear beetle, not only that but a textual examination can reveal much, for ones belief must be based on something, for when it states that it is based solely on faith without any substantiating evidence, (in my case the textual evidence of the scriptures), it seems to me to be a kind of delusion, in the sense that realities which should be present are unable to be demonstrated, but a kind of blind acceptance without foundation exists, thus what is the Christian left with but the ancient text? yes he can point to his own experience, or his own opinions, but these as you rightly say remain uncorroborated and how can they be, for if someone states that they have had a religious experience, how can we deny it? thus much of what passes for faith is nothing of the sort but a mere subjective reality, uncorroborated and lacking a firm foundation. I will really try to find something on the text with regard to the Romans but my favourite scholar, Edersheim, says almost nothing on it except that the saying proceeded up until the time of Justin Martyr. 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ah yes dear beetle, not only that but a textual examination can reveal much, for ones belief must be based on something, for when it states that it is based solely on faith without any substantiating evidence, (in my case the textual evidence of the scriptures), it seems to me to be a kind of delusion, in the sense that realities which should be pres ...[text shortened]... ys almost nothing on it except that the saying proceeded up until the time of Justin Martyr. 🙂

This "mere subjective reality" of every individual becomes the ground of the reality each individual is creating; I wish you to be always in deep awareness and cut these given realities with your sword😵

Originally posted by black beetle
This "mere subjective reality" of every individual becomes the ground of the reality each individual is creating; I wish you to be always in deep awareness and cut these given realities with your sword😵

Lol, i am not such a fool dear beetle to know that we are at times a mere ragged clown chasing shadows, to be sure 😵

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Lol, i am not such a fool dear beetle to know that we are at times a mere ragged clown chasing shadows, to be sure 😵

I am well aware of the fact you are not fool ye numptie😵

Originally posted by black beetle
I am well aware of the fact you are not fool ye numptie😵

great learning is driving you mad dear beetle!😵

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
great learning is driving you mad dear beetle!😵

Insanity is merely a forgotten path😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Insanity is merely a forgotten path😵

We're all mad! 🙄😉

Originally posted by black beetle
Edit: "suppose the other man's wife performed the same acts of love as your wife did. wouldn't it be correct to assume then that the same tools, conditions you use to asses your wife's love, he used them too? would it be then feasible to bet your life on the love the other man's wife holds for her husband? wouldn't it be more reasonable to assume that y ...[text shortened]... , there is indeed love -but this condition is known solely to the agents of the bond
😵

however if you agree that love is purely subjective, since you did say that the only people to declare love is the very people in love and only while it concerns them, how can you say for sure and without a doubt your partner is in love? if you are unable to say for certain that your neighbour is really in love, what makes your partner different? just because that partner is declaring his/her love to you? do you see how that is merely a willing renuntiation of rationality, the same rationality that made you unwilling to bet your life on the fact that your neighbour's wife loves him? you willingly renounced to reason for a second because the belief that your wife loves you makes you happy. and you don't care if you are making a leap of faith because the contrary of that belief would be unpleasant anyway.

i don't understand how you believe your wife absolves herself from the same judgement you pass unto your neighbour and his wife? you just admited that were you to be an outside witness to a relation identical to yours you would be reluctant to bet your life on one outcome or another.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
however if you agree that love is purely subjective, since you did say that the only people to declare love is the very people in love and only while it concerns them, how can you say for sure and without a doubt your partner is in love? if you are unable to say for certain that your neighbour is really in love, what makes your partner different? just becau ...[text shortened]... elation identical to yours you would be reluctant to bet your life on one outcome or another.

Edit: "however if you agree that love is purely subjective, since you did say that the only people to declare love is the very people in love and only while it concerns them, how can you say for sure and without a doubt your partner is in love?

I know it for sure because I can evaluate her behaviour in full and accurately; and I can conduct this evaluation because her behaviour creates hard facts constantly. These hard facts are existent, and they exist unrelated to one's faith. However, I cannot know for sure whether an other couple is in love because, since I am not aware amongst else of its behavioural hard facts in total, there is no way for me to know what exact agent keeps that couple together. Therefore I can speak with full confidence solely regarding the bond I established along with my wife. I argue that I can easily evaluate whether this bond is caused from love or from another agent; furthermore, I argue that my confidence regarding this matter is irrelevant to any kind of faith as you pose it, because it is based on my evaluation of given hard facts alone
😵

Originally posted by clandarkfire
I understand the importance the resurrection story holds in your particular religion. If I too knew some guy that had been killed and placed inside a cave with a rock in front of it and I visited the cave to find the rock moved and his body gone, the only logical assumption would be that he had risen from the dead and is the son of God. Once, my friend ...[text shortened]... iarized the above content. However, can we agree that the author makes a good point?[/i]

You didn't just plagerize that....you didn't even quote the website or the thread from a few weeks ago where you found it!!!

Jebus, dude. Give some credit where it's due.

Thread 134160

Originally posted by black beetle
Edit: "however if you agree that love is purely subjective, since you did say that the only people to declare love is the very people in love and only while it concerns them, how can you say for sure and without a doubt your partner is in love?

I know it for sure because I can evaluate her behaviour in full and accurately; and I can conduct this eval ...[text shortened]... nd of faith as you pose it, because it is based on my evaluation of given hard facts alone
😵

i just said that the other couple reports an identical life. if your wife once surprised you with a breakfast in bed for no reason, so did the wife of your neighbour on the exact same time. anything your wife did, for some reason the other wife did as well.

yet you consider the possibility the other wife is simply putting up an elaborate ploy to get your neighbour's money or to bring him to a false sense of security or to whatever insane other reason. a slim possibility but still it is there. And then i ask again. why is your wife any different? from a purely rational perspective, why don't you consider your wife might simply be acting her love for you in order to make you to <insert random gain from getting you to like her here>

"I know it for sure because I can evaluate her behaviour in full and accurately"
Really? how can you be sure? do you monitor her every second of every day? How do you know she isn't sacrificing goats to Baal when you are not looking? How do you know she isn't secretly a soviet spy and you are her cover for a seemingly normal life? Yes, the questions i posed are highly improbable. but not impossible. there are other less outlandish possibilities that you can never fully dismiss.

"because it is based on my evaluation of given hard facts alone"
Haha you sound like josephw 😀 I am starting to not like this discussion because you are breaking some of my convictions. That you are mostly rational, among the most rational on this forum. Do you think that joseph doesn't have his "hard facts"? In this case, what makes your facts "harder" than his? Do you think you can judge a person and predict his/her behaviour simply by observation? Yes, your observation of your wife is more accurate than the observation of let's say, your boss's wife. But can you think of experiments that measure how in love your wife is? Do you think saying "i love you" is enough? how about giving you a massage when you come back from work? if so, how many of these "hard facts" must your wife give you to cross into the "she loves me for sure" territory.

Hard facts are e=mc2. the speed of light in void. not "if she makes me cookies, she loves me".

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i just said that the other couple reports an identical life. if your wife once surprised you with a breakfast in bed for no reason, so did the wife of your neighbour on the exact same time. anything your wife did, for some reason the other wife did as well.

yet you consider the possibility the other wife is simply putting up an elaborate ploy to get you ...[text shortened]... the speed of light in void. not "if she makes me cookies, she loves me".

Edit: "And then i ask again. why is your wife any different?"

For starters, everybody is different -there are no identical persons, each individual is unique and therefore there is no way for two couples to have such a thing as “identical life”. But my wife is not merely “different” -she is also the person whose behaviour is perfectly known to me within a specific spacetime. Since her acts and my acts in this context are indeed events and therefore the basis of specific hard facts, our relationship is constantly evolving on the basis of this type of perfect information. And, due time, as we are decoding constantly each other’s actions, we came to know in detail our motivations. This kind of relation is well established when the two persons are frank, and until this very moment we didn’t monitor the slightest indication that could prompt us to think that both or one of us is not frank Therefore, until this moment herenow, I neither speculate nor have “faith” that we love each other; I know for sure that we love each other.

But I could never know the motivations of unknown to me persons, therefore I cannot comment about the wife of my neighbour because I don't know what exactly these two individuals are doing together. This is the reason why I am sure that my wife was not pretending until this very moment, and this is the reason why I said there is no way for me to know if the wife of my neighbour is pretending;
😵

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i just said that the other couple reports an identical life. if your wife once surprised you with a breakfast in bed for no reason, so did the wife of your neighbour on the exact same time. anything your wife did, for some reason the other wife did as well.

yet you consider the possibility the other wife is simply putting up an elaborate ploy to get you ...[text shortened]... the speed of light in void. not "if she makes me cookies, she loves me".

Edit: "Really? how can you be sure?"

I am quite sure -and she is quite sure about me too. When we are saying something, we always do mean it. Everything we do is a solid contract to us, and whatever we say is a word of honour. When she will love me no more, I know I will be the very first to know it. So, the questions you posed are not highly improbable herenow but absolutely impossible. However I cannot claim that, until the next time I will see my Maria, she will be still in love with me, although this probability is highly improbable
😵

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i just said that the other couple reports an identical life. if your wife once surprised you with a breakfast in bed for no reason, so did the wife of your neighbour on the exact same time. anything your wife did, for some reason the other wife did as well.

yet you consider the possibility the other wife is simply putting up an elaborate ploy to get you ...[text shortened]... the speed of light in void. not "if she makes me cookies, she loves me".

Edit: “Haha you sound like josephw I am starting to not like this discussion because you are breaking some of my convictions. That you are mostly rational, among the most rational on this forum. Do you think that joseph doesn't have his "hard facts"? In this case, what makes your facts "harder" than his?”

On the contrary, I do like this discussion because I have the chance to expose in full my philosophy and to readjust it on the spot when I will see the slightest contradiction -and I have no doubt that you can spot the possible contradictions easily regarding many issues. Each time I have a conversation I am learning, and this conversation is no exception.

Now, methinks you really believed for a moment that I sounded like our josephw, however josephw does not have the slightest hard fact based even on a sole event regarding the existence of the so called “god”. He merely speculates. On the contrary, I have at my disposal countless hard facts based on events that they prove I am in love with my wife and that she is in love with me too;
😵