Subject:
|
Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 20 Dec 2002 21:43:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2143 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
>
> > I understand and accept your choice to withdraw from the debate, but I
> > thought it worthwhile to point out the flaw in your basic premiss re:
> > number-of-believers. If your intent is to validate Christianity by some
> > statistical or scientific reasoning, it is imperative that you get your
> > methodology straight.
>
> Perhaps Nathan meant it in the reverse-- if it truly were a bogus religion, it
> probably would have faded into the past by now (a sort of twist on Occam's
> razor?). Since Christianity is still going strong after 2,000 years,
> *something* is working
But Buddhism is going strong for quite a bit longer, and Judaism is no
johnny-come-lately, either. Are both of those belief systems as strongly
validated as Christianity by virtue of their respective ages?
> (a parking lot full of trucks usually *does* mean good
> eats;-)
I like that analogy!
> Though numbers aren't proof, it is certainly evidence (however much weight you
> care to give it)
But we have to be careful. Numbers are evidence belief, but not of
veracity. It's not as though we're proving the existence of cancer or
smallpox (nor even the quality of a roadside diner); we're trying to verify
the existence of a metaphysical entity whose only evidence is in the
"hearts" of his believers.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
| (...) Except that sometimes the parking lot is full only because they are the best eats within the next few hundred miles. Doesn't mean they're GOOD, just that they're the best of a bad lot. -- | Tom Stangl, Sun ONE Internet Technical Support, Sun (...) (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
| (...) Certainly Judaism. I honestly don't know that much about Buddhism to comment, but can billions of Chinese be wrong? And if they were, would you point it out, knowing full well that you could anger them into all deciding to jump off of a step (...) (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
| (...) Perhaps Nathan meant it in the reverse-- if it truly were a bogus religion, it probably would have faded into the past by now (a sort of twist on Occam's razor?). Since Christianity is still going strong after 2,000 years, *something* is (...) (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
205 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
