You and I are finite mortal human beings. One day we will die and turn into dust and the only thing that will remain of us is the memories of those who continue to live.
Sure, we can’t imagine that 2+2 could ever equal 3. It seems impossible…because we exist in a universe where natural law is such that 2+2=4. Why does 2+2=4? It just DOES, if we say 1+1=2 and 1+1+1+1=4.
So what? If some entity is capable of altering the fundamental constants of the universe then our “logic” won’t mean squat, because logic only applies in THIS universe. Sure, we could say that a universe with contradictory laws would be a sterile ultimately uninteresting universe…but what do we know? We live in THIS universe, so of course the laws of this universe make sense to us.
If an entity that can manipulate the fundamental constants of the universe(s) wants to make 2+2=Wednesday, how are you gonna argue with that? Perhaps by arguing that there’s no good reason to believe such an entity exists, and then I’d agree with you. But if we conduct a thought experiment, the first postulate of which is that such an entity exists, denying that such an entity could exist seems to show some intellectual inflexibility.
“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”–Ralph Waldo Emerson
Badchad seems to believe that there is something inherently good about being consistent, and something inherently bad about being inconsistent, regardless of the outcomes. So he attacks liberal Christians instead of the “more consistent” fundies.
As for me, I don’t care by what process someone comes to their answers so long as I can agree with their answers. I’m not interested in how. I’m interested in what. And liberal Christian beliefs lead to better results–lead to a society closer to the one I want to be involved in–than any fucking fundamentalist on the planet.
While I respect your sensibilities and often value your contributions as a poster from “the other side,” John, I strongly disagree with your description of badchad as a “jerkish troll.”
While his intent is certainly not “being pleasent,” I find his logic, cites and overall knowledge of the tpoic at hand (Christianity), better than any devout religious poster on this board. For instance check out how he handles The Big Religious Guns® in these two threads: ONE and TWO threads where I felt he destroyed any number of knowledgeable posters on the matter such as Polycarp & Co.
So again, he might not be making any new friends amongst believers, nor are the odds in favor of him changing their mind – but other than proving them wrong (as he often/normally does) who says he’s here for any other purpose? I mean, does he have to be?
This doesn’t take into account the number of people who have taken his measure and don’t bother to “refute” him in the first place. And your rules of debate are obviously not the same as everyone else’s may be. If one of the ground rules of debate is that you play nice or your opponent disengages, then there’s no misunderstanding when the shit starts flying and your opponent walks away. You may choose to construe that as them “not being in the game to begin with” – and I’m sure badchad would agree – but your POV is hardly the only one.
The problem with the assumption that “leaving the debate = losing the debate” is that it means the debate can be “won” by mere gross offensiveness, or even by stupidity. If your opponent gets fed up or just gives up, because you’re too much of a jerk to talk to, or too stupid to see the point, well – congratulations. You’ve won.
Why not? He created humans. He created consciousness. He created inteligence. He could create a world where every time you added two things to two other things you ended up with three things. He could create a world composed entirely of pencils.
Humans have no morality of their own, if God exists. They only have what he wants them to have.
Sure he could. He could make it essential to the existence of the universe. You need to rid yourself of these limited notions of God, if he exists. If he exists, it is possible that everthing changes every nano second. If he exists, it is possible that you are thinking what you think at his whim, and that whatever thoughts you think you hold, you have only held for an instant. If he exists.
It is quite simple, really. Postulate an entity such that he creates and controls all of reality. He is, by definition, limitless, at least as far as a human can understand. Reason and logic are his servants. He is not bound by your ideas of reality; quite the opposite, in fact.
Forever? Less than me (and I consider myself about “middling” as far as seniority goes). Only 500 posts, all on the same subject. And he doesn’t know jackshit. If you want to see a "knowledgeable atheist with respect to scripture ", then look to DtC, not this pipsqueak troll (and I’d consider myself a "knowledgeable *agnostic * with respect to scripture "). After a brief scan of his posts (due only to this thread) , I haven’t seen one with his own opinion yet. All I see is posts where he attacks others dudes opinions (and when he does so, it’s never with original thought, he seems to get all his ammo from various Atheist blogs, I recognize the wording). If you can find me a post where he has actually stated his own beliefs- as opposed to attacking other’s- I’d read it.
I also don’t debate with rude people (well- at least not in GD or GQ, the PIT is different), I’ll walk away as soon as they trot out personal or ad hominen arguments. If they want to think that means they “won” then that’s fine by me. :rolleyes: I haven’t even ever bothered to debate with Badchad (AFAIK) as I have never seen a post of his that was worth refuting.
All I can say is look up some of his posts. He always says why he thinks jesus is evil. He quotes jesus in nearly every post.
The “general hard-on” for Poly stems from the fact that Poly is a cherry-picker and speaks to others about christianity as if it were fact rather than a widely-believed delusion. Don’t get me wrong…I’m sure Poly is a nice guy, but we will never agree about religion. I don’t have the background to debate him on scripture, but BadChad does. Why *shouldn’t * he call him on things he’s obviously errant about? What makes his word the last word? If he was giving false information on how to repair a car and someone with knowledge of auto mechanics saw it, wouldn’t you expect them to call him on it?
In this thread, http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=374782&page=2
our beloved Mod Giraffe sez "1. *A troll is someone who routinely makes false and/or deliberately inflammatory posts with the goal of pissing people off and/or getting attention. ". * Setting aside "false’ (not a requirement), how is it that what Badchad is not = someone who routinely makes …deliberately inflammatory posts with the goal of pissing people off and/or getting attention? He “routinely” does so (in fact, he does so 100% of the time). He admited here he does so “with the goal of pissing people off and/or getting attention” and there can be no doubt that his posts are “deliberately inflammatory”. He hits on all three points. Thus, Badchad= Troll.
The fact that Badchad may be a troll whose viewpoint you agree with should be beside the point.
You’re confusing BadChad with someone else. He’s spot on with all his cites. If you can find one errant cite, please lay it out for the scrutiny of the rest of us. BadChad is a bible literalist. Just not a christian.
Maybe I should have said “in every thread”. I have yet to see a thread he’s contributed to that doesn’t have cites in it. If you know of any, please enlighten me.
In order to find an “errant cite”, I’d have to find a cite first. Other than some out of context quotes from the KJV, I am unable (by an admittedly shallow look-see) to find any “cites”.
DOes that make it off-limits? The fact that someone wants christianity to be something other than it is doesn’t make it so. It’s all there in the bible. It’s just easier to see without the rose-colored glasses.
Also, he may be relying on a reader’s memory of other posts so that he doesn’t have to go back every single time and create a new link. I know I don’t need to be reminded every single time. YMMV.