tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post5608532545306461182..comments2023-10-25T14:20:11.408-05:00Comments on RHOBLOGY: Defending...Contending overreacts againRhologyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-16333484671125056282014-05-12T11:03:25.573-05:002014-05-12T11:03:25.573-05:00Justin,
Yes, I agree. Coram Deo is not such a bad ...Justin,<br />Yes, I agree. Coram Deo is not such a bad guy, I just want to say. <br />Chris Hohnholz, who used to be with D.C., has shown himself to be a pretty much mindless Miano defender, which has been disappointing. All too common, this nonsense.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-90580265960747497562014-05-06T13:17:32.222-05:002014-05-06T13:17:32.222-05:00I have many concerns about this body of believers,...I have many concerns about this body of believers, as well. They do appear to be very self-righteous. My main concern was with one who goes by Elain, on "Is P.O.D. a Christian band". My questioning, and requests for elaboration, and my defenses were met with arrogance, and assumptions that I do not read the bible like they do, and if I did, I would know. Every couple of months, when she would reply, she used the same circle of arguments, and skipped over points that I had made, and constantly reminded me that she is praying for me.Justin Blake Poythresshttps://www.facebook.com/jus10.poythressnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-65233762145585159202010-08-02T12:58:03.358-05:002010-08-02T12:58:03.358-05:00An example of the No True Scotsman fallacy in this...An example of the No True Scotsman fallacy in this context.<br /><br />CD: No depictions of Jesus are okay.<br />Rho: You have a depction of Jesus in one of your own posts.<br />CD: Oh, well that's not a depction of the <i>true</i> Jesus. (Or phrased another way: "I have no depictions of the <i>true</i> Jesus in my posts.")Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17321272184376541252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-85426682597769145402010-08-02T12:50:58.974-05:002010-08-02T12:50:58.974-05:00FYI,
That argument is part of an internal critiqu...FYI,<br /><br />That argument is part of an <a href="http://unavoxveritatis.blogspot.com/2010/05/internal-and-external-critique.html" rel="nofollow">internal critique</a> of CD's position. <br /><br />As far as that particular line of reasoning itself goes, it is more akin to the No True Scotsman fallacy than to the Ontological Argument, IMO.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17321272184376541252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-87108898486009522302010-08-02T08:16:45.262-05:002010-08-02T08:16:45.262-05:00Well, Vox isn't arguing for God's existenc...Well, Vox isn't arguing for God's existence here. Besides, I don't think the ontological argument is a bad argument. Just not the best.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-90288148302954833592010-08-02T08:05:35.677-05:002010-08-02T08:05:35.677-05:00This may be on or off topic. Who knows? Vox says...This may be on or off topic. Who knows? Vox says:<br /><br /><i>1) The "real Jesus" would not have done X.<br />2) Figure Y represents a person (who is recognized as Jesus in the popular western religious imagination) doing X.<br />3) Therefore, figure Y does not represent the "real Jesus".<br /></i><br /><br />Am I the only one here who recognizes Anselm's Ontological Argument here?zilchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01695741977946935771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-83658814471533412872010-08-01T20:34:23.135-05:002010-08-01T20:34:23.135-05:00More to the main topic of this post, I think that ...More to the main topic of this post, I think that CD's methods of argumentation on this issue (especially over at DefCon) are pretty well covered <a href="http://unavoxveritatis.blogspot.com/2010/07/how-to-argue-like-watchblogger.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17321272184376541252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-81516370630115462902010-08-01T20:05:33.653-05:002010-08-01T20:05:33.653-05:00NAL,
An objective understanding would exhibit wid...NAL,<br /><br /><i>An objective understanding would exhibit wide spread agreement of that understanding. A subjective understanding would exhibit wide spread disagreement.</i><br /><br />Once again, why is this the case? What is the argument? As discussed previously, there are logically possible worlds in which this is not the case. Furthermore, how many people must agree on something before it is considered to be a "wide spread" agreement? 100? 1000? A million? How many? And if you have a number, how do you determine that that specific number indicates widespread agreement indicative of an objective understanding, while something less than that does not?<br /><br /><i>No, I am claiming that only God knows that the correct understanding is, in fact, correct.<br />By correct, I mean that a person's understanding is the same as God's understanding. Only God knows if a person's understanding is the same as His.</i><br /><br />Once again, why is this the case? What is the argument?Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17321272184376541252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-52413755125266995742010-07-29T23:28:52.581-05:002010-07-29T23:28:52.581-05:00VV:
Do you have an argument to go along with it?...VV: <br /><br /><b>Do you have an argument to go along with it?</b> <br /><br />An objective understanding would exhibit wide spread agreement of that understanding. A subjective understanding would exhibit wide spread disagreement. <br /><br />An objective understanding would not necessarily be correct. A subjective understanding would not necessarily be incorrect. <br /><br /><b>And you claiming that only God knows the correct understanding?</b> <br /><br />No, I am claiming that only God <b>knows</b> that the correct understanding is, in fact, correct. <br />By correct, I mean that a person's understanding is the same as God's understanding. Only God knows if a person's understanding is the same as His. <br /><br />This, of course, assumes that God understands in a way that is comparable to the way a human understands. <br /><br />/Edited for spelling.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-17454425976995207092010-07-29T23:27:37.283-05:002010-07-29T23:27:37.283-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-75604818959857872742010-07-29T20:05:34.222-05:002010-07-29T20:05:34.222-05:00NAL,
I claim that such a condition indicates that...NAL,<br /><br /><i>I claim that such a condition indicates that the understandings of God's commandments are subjective. </i><br /><br />Your claim is duly noted. Do you have an argument to go along with it?<br /><br /><i>But one cannot get confirmation as to the correctness if only God knows the correct understanding. </i><br /><br />And you claiming that only God knows the correct understanding? If so, how do you know that? What is the argument?<br /><br /><i>Only God's understanding needs no confirmation as to its correctness. All other understandings need such a confirmation. Without that confirmation, the correctness can not be determined.</i><br /><br />Even if the claim that "All other understandings need such a confirmation" is true, it does not follow that such confirmation is unavailable to us. Beyond that, I am unclear as to exactly what you mean by "confirmation" and why such a confirmation is "needed by all other understandings." Moreover, the objective understanding of a thing, and the "confirmation" that such an understanding is correct, are two different matters. It could be the case that God's commands are objectively and correctly understandable, but that a confirmation that such an understanding is correct is unavailable. Even if this were the case, the unavailability of a confirmation of the correct understanding would in no way render the correct and objective understanding unavailable.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17321272184376541252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-90834089837554952452010-07-29T10:47:37.532-05:002010-07-29T10:47:37.532-05:00NAL said:
I have no idea what you mean.
Yep, exa...NAL said:<br /><i>I have no idea what you mean. </i><br /><br />Yep, exactly. According to your position as expressed here, nobody ever can know what anyone else ever means.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-33841233963333580712010-07-29T10:36:43.888-05:002010-07-29T10:36:43.888-05:00Rho:
Sorry, there are too many ideas what that l...Rho: <br /><br /><b>Sorry, there are too many ideas what that last comment from you meant.</b> <br /><br />I have no idea what you mean.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-69464162617849134382010-07-29T10:33:32.917-05:002010-07-29T10:33:32.917-05:00After some insightful comments from VV, I need to ...After some insightful comments from VV, I need to modify my previous comment from: <br /><br /><i>What this brouhaha shows is that an understanding of God's commandments is subjective.</i> <br /><br />to:<br /><br /><i>What this brouhaha shows is that an understanding of God's commandments is subjective, except for those who claim their understanding is not subjective.</i>NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-25410503332544871212010-07-29T10:28:20.243-05:002010-07-29T10:28:20.243-05:00Sorry, there are too many ideas what that last com...Sorry, there are too many ideas what that last comment from you meant.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-34009197402781158122010-07-29T10:16:56.751-05:002010-07-29T10:16:56.751-05:00Rho:
Including the assertion that we have no ide...Rho: <br /><br /><b>Including the assertion that we have no idea what anything means.</b> <br /><br />My assertion is that there are too many ideas what someting means.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-66529303215224014432010-07-29T08:53:58.760-05:002010-07-29T08:53:58.760-05:00Right, b/c on your view, nothing is ever confirmab...Right, b/c on your view, nothing is ever confirmable. We have no idea what anything means. Including the assertion that we have no idea what anything means. Your argument is self-defeating. Try another one.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-33087469715225148322010-07-29T08:42:00.724-05:002010-07-29T08:42:00.724-05:00Rho:
Even if you are correct, I'll never con...Rho: <br /><br />Even if you are correct, I'll never confirm your correctness.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-49624479608618115932010-07-29T08:36:51.800-05:002010-07-29T08:36:51.800-05:00VV:
Even if everyone disagreed with everyone els...VV: <br /><br /><b>Even if everyone disagreed with everyone else about everything that God had ever said, ...</b> <br /><br />I claim that such a condition indicates that the understandings of God's commandments are subjective. <br /><br /><b>... it would not follow from that state of affairs that the commands of God cannot be objectively and correctly understood.</b> <br /><br />Although my original argument was what "is" and not what "could be", perhaps this is possible, as far as the objectivity. But one cannot get confirmation as to the correctness if only God knows the correct understanding. <br /><br /><b>So, are you prepared to make an argument as to why the correctness of an understanding cannot be determined?</b> <br /><br />Only God's understanding needs no confirmation as to its correctness. All other understandings need such a confirmation. Without that confirmation, the correctness can not be determined.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-87771545402630486092010-07-29T07:11:14.599-05:002010-07-29T07:11:14.599-05:00Coram Deo,
I'd say "Touché" for cle...Coram Deo,<br /><br />I'd say "Touché" for cleverness, but I'd like to ask you to consider the severity of your accusations against such men as these. Express disagreement, but don't needlessly cause strife. Such unnecessary divisiveness also finds its condemnation in Scripture.<br /><br />Grace and peace to you,<br />RhologyRhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-53084767530899335212010-07-29T07:09:49.334-05:002010-07-29T07:09:49.334-05:00NAL,
My subjective interpretation of your comment...NAL,<br /><br />My subjective interpretation of your comments is that you agree 100% with my post and are in fact now a dyed-in-the-wool Reformed Baptist. <br />If you should attempt to correct me, just remember that disagreement on one of your statements increases the likelihood of disagreement on others.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-36280022709097056462010-07-29T01:29:08.989-05:002010-07-29T01:29:08.989-05:00NAL,
Not quite. Disagreement on one of God's ...NAL,<br /><br /><i>Not quite. Disagreement on one of God's commands increases the likelihood of disagreement on others. </i><br /><br />Even if everyone disagreed with everyone else about everything that God had ever said, it would not follow from that state of affairs that the commands of God cannot be objectively and correctly understood. Such a method of correctly and objectively understanding God's Word could well be available to all, with no one choosing to take advantage of it and make use of it. Hence, the <i>non sequitur</i> on your part.<br /><br /><i>I stated that there was no way that the correctness of an understanding could be determined (or confirmed).</i><br /><br />So, are you prepared to make an argument as to why the correctness of an understanding cannot be determined? Or do you simply know of no such way for it to be determined? If the former, where is the argument? If the latter, it is still <i>argumentum ad ignorantiam</i>.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17321272184376541252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-76213072838650510942010-07-28T23:54:07.189-05:002010-07-28T23:54:07.189-05:00VV:
It is a non sequitur to claim that God's...VV: <br /><br /><b>It is a non sequitur to claim that God's commands cannot be objectively and correctly understood, simply because there is disagreement among some as to how some commands are to be understood.</b> <br /><br />Not quite. Disagreement on one of God's commands increases the likelihood of disagreement on others. <br /><br /><b>Furthermore, to claim that there is no way that God's commands can be understood, because one does know of such a way, is simply argumentum ad ignorantiam.</b> <br /><br />I stated that there was no way that the correctness of an understanding could be determined (or confirmed). According to Rho, only God can conclude that the cartoon is or is not truly blasphemous, for example. Others may come to the same conclusion, but only God doesn't require confirmation of the correctness of His conclusion.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-11334569527108096622010-07-28T23:36:25.877-05:002010-07-28T23:36:25.877-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13358611.post-57089604010294647942010-07-28T23:13:54.757-05:002010-07-28T23:13:54.757-05:00And you. I simply urge you to direct your efforts ...<i>And you. I simply urge you to direct your efforts toward those things that indeed merit the attention of the heart God has given you, not sowing unnecessarily divisive seeds.</i><br /><br />You mean like creating blog posts entitled <i>"Defending...Contending overreacts again"</i>? :)<br /><br /><i>Grace and peace to you</i><br /><br />And to you!<br /><br />In Christ,<br />CDCoram Deohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03504564435400500996noreply@blogger.com