Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Proof of God: Argument from Motion (a very short explanation).
English
Thomistic Disputations
78K posts
Thomistic Disputations
@TDisputations
Thomist. Catholic Convert. Known among the pagans as the Atheist Destroyer. I make apologetics videos on YouTube.
Katılım Ağustos 2009
656 Takip Edilen12.3K Takipçiler
@Sapientia400 @danny_bttrmn Yeah, they knew after the revelation.
English
“before Abraham was, I AM." - John 8:58
Freedomain - with Stefan Molyneux, MA@StefanMolyneux
If the Bible was dictated by an omniscient God, please tell me what is in the Bible that couldn’t have been known at the time.
English
@Pseudomastix @heliz_2 I mean, the gospel accounts themselves have Jesus explicitly having a body (Jesus ate with them and said He’s not a ghost). You’d have to deny the gospel accounts.
English
@TDisputations @heliz_2 Though, I do see your point. Finding Christ's body would certainly falsify the vast majority of Christian accounts.
English
@Pseudomastix @heliz_2 It’d be a problem if we found Jesus’ body, though. I mean, come on.
English
@heliz_2 @TDisputations No? If we found Lazarus' corpse tomorrow and could prove that it was Lazarus from the bible; how would that disprove that he was resurrected?
He could have died, resurrected, then died again.
English
@danny_bttrmn Ok, dude, you have your own personal standard of evidence. No one else has to accept it.
English
@TDisputations This is so stupid.
The New Testament is the ONLY source for this claim. It can’t be verified by any other source
English
@danny_bttrmn The entire point is that the people at the time couldn’t have known that Jesus was God, but it’s actually true.
English
@danny_bttrmn Anything in a book is going to be claim. If the book said DNA is a double helix that would be a claim, but it would fulfill the requirement.
English
@danny_bttrmn That’s obviously not what we’re talking about. You’re just being intentionally retarded.
English
@TDisputations Because it is a claim. Knowing about a claim is jot difficult, you just have to hear the person making the claim
English
@TDisputations But that’s a CLAIM. How is it something they couldn’t have known?
English
@danny_bttrmn Yeah, that’s where it was revealed? What were you expecting something to be revealed they didn’t know was revealed?
English
@TDisputations At the time they wrote the New Testament? That was their whole claim
English
@danny_bttrmn The people at the time knew Jesus was God?
English
@TDisputations Because it doesn't say anything the people at the time didn’t know
English
Thomistic Disputations retweetledi
@lettuce_isgood @Pseudomastix He’s expecting some scientific thing because he’s a New Atheist who thinks science is the only thing which is important.
That’s not what the Bible is about, though. It’s about Christ.
English
@TDisputations @Pseudomastix He’s asking for either knowledge that would not be known through other means until years later, which can be explained by coincidence, or prophesy that came true, that can be explained by dating the work later.
English
Thomistic Disputations retweetledi
@Pseudomastix You don’t think miracles are falsifiable?
English
@TDisputations Isn't Stefan asking for falsifiable knowledge?
English
@Seano299 @ChrisRojas4081 I mean, we believe rights exist and that it’s common sense, we just don’t see how the fact that we want to do something makes it the case that we have rights. This is a question of metaphysical grounding, in other words, rather than of knowing.
English
@ChrisRojas4081 @TDisputations The reason for this is because to do something to implicitly signal that you have a right to do that because if you didn't think you had a right to do that, you wouldn't do that, and doing that when you explicitly do not think you have that right would be a contradiction.
English
When we say grass is green, we don’t mean that the grass is greenness itself.
That’s the difference between God and creatures. Creatures are good, but they are not goodness itself.
We mean God has goodness essentially, while creatures participate in goodness.
Thoughtful-Faith@ThoughtfulSaint
Saying God is goodness itself is meaningless. It’s just saying God is God. When people say x is Good they don’t mean x is God. So you have to define what you mean by Goodness and then show God meets that definition. Otherwise you are not saying anything at all about God.
English
@Seano299 It could be the case that I need other people to respect ability to achieve my goals for me to achieve them, but it could also be that I need to crush other people’s goals to achieve my goals. There’s not clear need for a universal rule here.
English
@Seano299 I just don’t see the contradiction.
Oughts do come from goal oriented behavior, but those seem to be personal ought to me. I ought to achieve my goals. Other people ought to achieve their goals.
Without God, I don’t see why people ought to care about other’s goals.
English