|
Until you sign up you can't do much. Yes, it's free.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 | / / / Viewing Topic
|  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nigeltheoutlaw
Connoisseur
|
Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 5:25 am on July 9, 2008
Quote: from nigeltheoutlaw at 1:30 am on July 9, 2008
Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 8:04 pm on July 8, 2008
Sure it does. The first person in this thread to talk about the Bible being written by a mad man or many mad men made the positive claim; therefore, the burden of proof rests on his shoulders. If you disagree, then prove that God doesn't exist. Same basic debate principle. 
I see that the other party needs to substantiate their claim as opposed to you, but I still fail to see how the origins of the bible and the existence of god are connected in this discussion. 
I was using the example of "prove that God doesn't exist" to illustrate my point that the person making the positive claim has the burden of proof. Just as it's not on you to prove that God doesn't exist, it's not on me to prove that the Bible wasn't written by a mad man or a group of mad men. It's the job of the person making the positive claim to provide the proof of that claim. That said, I really would love to see something from any reputable scholar that suggests that the Bible is the work of a mad man or a group of mad men. 
Saying god doesn't exist is a negative claim. So you would need to provide proof that he does exist, not me providing proof of the contrary. I'm not supporting or denying the claim, so look elsewhere for that.
------- I made it rain on my hoes.Then god smote me for trying to play god.
|
|
|
|
|
exceedinglyrare
Delicate Thing
Patron
|
Quote: from nigeltheoutlaw at 8:51 pm on July 9, 2008
Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 5:25 am on July 9, 2008
Quote: from nigeltheoutlaw at 1:30 am on July 9, 2008
Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 8:04 pm on July 8, 2008
Sure it does. The first person in this thread to talk about the Bible being written by a mad man or many mad men made the positive claim; therefore, the burden of proof rests on his shoulders. If you disagree, then prove that God doesn't exist. Same basic debate principle. 
I see that the other party needs to substantiate their claim as opposed to you, but I still fail to see how the origins of the bible and the existence of god are connected in this discussion. 
I was using the example of "prove that God doesn't exist" to illustrate my point that the person making the positive claim has the burden of proof. Just as it's not on you to prove that God doesn't exist, it's not on me to prove that the Bible wasn't written by a mad man or a group of mad men. It's the job of the person making the positive claim to provide the proof of that claim. That said, I really would love to see something from any reputable scholar that suggests that the Bible is the work of a mad man or a group of mad men. 
Saying god doesn't exist is a negative claim. So you would need to provide proof that he does exist, not me providing proof of the contrary. I'm not supporting or denying the claim, so look elsewhere for that. 
I don't think you're quite comprehending the analogy. Telling me to prove that mad men didn't write the Bible is akin to me telling you to prove that God doesn't exist. Comprende?
------- Let yourself be enchanted, You just might break through To ever ever after
|
|
|
nigeltheoutlaw
Connoisseur
|
Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 8:54 pm on July 9, 2008
Quote: from nigeltheoutlaw at 8:51 pm on July 9, 2008
Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 5:25 am on July 9, 2008
Quote: from nigeltheoutlaw at 1:30 am on July 9, 2008
Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 8:04 pm on July 8, 2008
Sure it does. The first person in this thread to talk about the Bible being written by a mad man or many mad men made the positive claim; therefore, the burden of proof rests on his shoulders. If you disagree, then prove that God doesn't exist. Same basic debate principle. 
I see that the other party needs to substantiate their claim as opposed to you, but I still fail to see how the origins of the bible and the existence of god are connected in this discussion. 
I was using the example of "prove that God doesn't exist" to illustrate my point that the person making the positive claim has the burden of proof. Just as it's not on you to prove that God doesn't exist, it's not on me to prove that the Bible wasn't written by a mad man or a group of mad men. It's the job of the person making the positive claim to provide the proof of that claim. That said, I really would love to see something from any reputable scholar that suggests that the Bible is the work of a mad man or a group of mad men. 
Saying god doesn't exist is a negative claim. So you would need to provide proof that he does exist, not me providing proof of the contrary. I'm not supporting or denying the claim, so look elsewhere for that. 
I don't think you're quite comprehending the analogy. Telling me to prove that mad men didn't write the Bible is akin to me telling you to prove that God doesn't exist. Comprende? 
Yes, entiendo.
------- I made it rain on my hoes.Then god smote me for trying to play god.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Looking for something else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
 | / / / Viewing Topic |  |
|