Quote:
Originally Posted by citizen abuse
The article just makes the simple point that if the Christian god and his son were who the Christians say they were there would be certain things that we should observe when we look back besides hearsay. Very simple point. Doesn't take a genius to understand.
There are people who need more than hearsay.
|
the article's "point" is an opinion held by the writers. As Ziplock has said, they are picking the parameters and then disproving it. That's called a strawman argument.
You seem to be held up on the fact that no one is debating with you over whether Jesus was or was not real or not. We're pointing out that using the reasoning you are presenting from the article is not a competent argument.
That certainly doesn't take a genius to understand either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizen abuse
They make the logical argument that there should be evidence of some kind or another. The article gives several kickass-good examples, whether you agree or not.
|
That's not an argument based on logic, that is an argument based on what they believe the son of God should or should not do. PERSONAL OPINION. It uses logic to express itself, but that doesn't make it a logical argument.
To suggest that because Jesus doesn't meet their parameters that he either 1) wasn't the son of God or 2) didn't exist is a terrible argument.
Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hope that clears it up!
__________________
Just look out around us, people fightin their wars...
They think they'll be happy when they've settled their scores...
Let's lay down our weapons
and hold us apart
be still for just a minute
try to open our hearts
MORE LOVE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rev
It's not what you see, it's that you're looking.
|
"One thing Im sure of: Families making $200k gross are not rich." -dubstyle
"We are the ones we've been waiting for"- Barack Obama