CADRE Comments

Argument: (1) we trust perceptions that work for us in navigating the world (2) we juge by criteria RCS (3) RE fits this criteria (4 )enables navigation (5) :. we are warranted to trust RE as indicative *We assume reality by means of a Jugement *we make such jugements based upon criteria *Because RE fits the same criteria we are justfied in making the same assumption; ie that these experinces are idicative of a reality. The criteria: If our experiences are: *Regular *consistant *inter=subjective *navigational Then we assume our eperience3s reflect reality. VIII. The Thomas Reid Argument. A. How do we Know the external world exists? Philosophers have often expressed skepticism about the external world, the existence of other minds, and even one's own existence. Rene Descartes went so far as to build an elaborate system of rationalism to demonstrate the existence of the external world, beginning with his famous cogito, "I think, therefore, I am.&

  The good folk over at the Secular Web have published a short blog in its Kiosk section entitled “ The Pandemic Disproves God .” The article, written by a someone named James A. Haught, makes unsupported assertions that the God’s cannot actually exist because the coronavirus exists. While I expect most Christian apologists would see through this charade quite quickly, I wondered why he is choosing such a non-event as the coronavirus to prove his proposition.  After some introductory questions that the author, James A Haught, apparently believes would create problems for Christians, he writes:  The pandemic gripping the world raises the age-old philosophical dilemma called "the problem of evil"—which asks why a supposedly all-loving God does nothing to stop horrors like diseases, tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes, and the like. If there's an all-merciful father-creator, why did he make breast cancer, childhood leukemia, cerebral palsy, natural disasters, and predator

Pixie has a major misconception about the version if thenirakargunet tahtI use. due to the nature of certain arguments this became important in several ways in discussision with Pixie. The Major point is he doens't understand which is my moral argument. He has the wrong one conquenctly he has not disproved mine. Joe: you must answer his idea of morality as just one example, science cannot tell us that, Pix: If he can prove his idea of morality is true, then I will concede the point. But not until then. Direct experience and Truth By Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) - September 14, 2020 Dialouge betwe comments: https://www.blogger.com/comment.gblogID=6363362&postID=2330342897145644583&isPopup=true Pixie says: Of course the reality is that what you have is a circular argument. 1. There are objective moral truths 2. Therefore God exists 3. Therefore there are objective moral truths You moral argument is sets 1 and 2. Your argument here is 2 an

Dialouge between Pixie and myselfon Metacrock's blog, the comment section of the threat: "Counterimg Scoentism" (Sept. 6, 2020) https://metacrock.blogspot.com/2020/09/countering-scientism.html anonymous said... Joe: That confirms exactly the criticism I made of your approach, you make everything into a little version of science, as tough science is the only way to think. Pix: I have never said "science is the only way to think", that is just your usual tired straw man. Joe:you basically have. You clearly assert that the only reliable knowledge is scientifically verifiable. Pix What I have said is that besides direct experience, science is the only methodology that gives us reliable knowledge. Joe:I have direct experience of God Do you not understand the difference? that is just bull shit. you are arbitrarily deciding what makes something reliable. Joe: I disproved that, as does Jim. That is just delusional! Here i what i said it to:&qu

        Adoption is the act of God by which He considers us to be members of His eternal family. We are deemed His children by faith. Adoption is a legal term, figure of speech used to describe a change in our standing before Him. Like justification, it is an undeserved, unmerited favor of God:         "But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12-13)         It is not by physical descent or by human efforts that one becomes a child of God, but by faith. He took action to redeem us by sending God the Son into this world. We obtain an inheritance in heaven that cannot perish or fade away.         The Apostle Paul used adoption as a metaphor to communicate that we as believers partake of the inheritance that belongs to Jesus Christ:         "and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ,

What follows is one of the most challenging subjects you will ever hear about. It is the best way to get a head ache, but I think it proves the existence of God. The problem is it requires a very specialized background to understand it. First you have to understand modal logic. Modal Logic is so called because it turns upon the use of so called "modal operators." It's called "modal" because it is the logic of modes of being. "modes" as in what type of existence something exits in, weather it is dependent upon other things, weather it can cease or fail to exist and so forth. The modal operators are "necessity," "contingency" "impossibly," "possibility." Necessity and contingency lie at the base of our modern understanding of cause and effect. They come from scholastic notions of logic, but the distinction between the notion our modern notions of c/e and the scholastic ones in the middle ages is not that gr

The English word “was” is about as bland a term as you can find. Yet in Greek, it is most expressive. The Greeks were quite concerned about being able to express subtleties in regard not only to when something happened, but how it happened as well. Our little word “was” is poorly suited to handle the depth of the Greek at this point. John’s choice of words is deliberate and, quite honestly, beautiful. Throughout the prologue of the Gospel of John, the author balances between two verbs. When speaking of the Logos as He existed in eternity past, John uses the Greek word rlv, en (a form of eimi). The tense’ of the word expresses continuous action in the past. Compare this with the verb he chooses to use when speaking of everything else-found, for example, in verse 3: “All things carne into being through Him,” eyeve ro, egeneto. This verb contains the very element missing from the other: a point of origin. The term, when used in contexts of creation and origin, speaks of a time when s