Comments for True Horizon http://truehorizon.org Where Clear Thinking Faith Meets The Real World Fri, 05 Sep 2008 16:09:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3 Comment on Vision by True Horizon » Back From A Little C.I.A. Work http://truehorizon.org/vision/#comment-22909 True Horizon » Back From A Little C.I.A. Work Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:57:17 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/vision/#comment-22909 [...] think Christianity is worth thinking about. I believe in the Vision of TrueHorizon and I intend to make it a reality. My hope is to become an active part of the The [...] […] think Christianity is worth thinking about. I believe in the Vision of TrueHorizon and I intend to make it a reality. My hope is to become an active part of the The […]

]]> Comment on Dawkins’ Incomprehensible God (2) by Rick Gerhardt http://truehorizon.org/2008/08/12/dawkins-incomprehensible-god-2/#comment-22232 Rick Gerhardt Sun, 17 Aug 2008 03:35:58 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/08/12/dawkins-incomprehensible-god-2/#comment-22232 Bob: I sure enjoy reading your stuff! Keep it up. Bob:

I sure enjoy reading your stuff! Keep it up.

]]> Comment on New Atheists (7) by Bob http://truehorizon.org/2008/07/15/new-atheists-7/#comment-18708 Bob Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:49:45 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/07/15/new-atheists-7/#comment-18708 Sorry Philip ... I disagree. Sam Harris thinks all religions are wrong in virtue of the fact that they are religions. In other words, he dismisses them <em>a priori</em> because he categorizes all religions as the same -- wishful thoughts that are simply packaged differently. I dismiss Zeus because I see no evidence consistent with the claim that Zeus exists nor do I see any evidence that propositions about Zeus correspond to the way the world actually is. By contrast I accept Christianity because I see evidence (scientific, philosophical etc.) that IS consistent with its claims and that those claims are also consistent with the way the world actually works. Those are two vastly different things. Thanks for the comment ... Sorry Philip … I disagree. Sam Harris thinks all religions are wrong in virtue of the fact that they are religions. In other words, he dismisses them a priori because he categorizes all religions as the same — wishful thoughts that are simply packaged differently.

I dismiss Zeus because I see no evidence consistent with the claim that Zeus exists nor do I see any evidence that propositions about Zeus correspond to the way the world actually is. By contrast I accept Christianity because I see evidence (scientific, philosophical etc.) that IS consistent with its claims and that those claims are also consistent with the way the world actually works.

Those are two vastly different things.

Thanks for the comment …

]]> Comment on New Atheists (7) by philip http://truehorizon.org/2008/07/15/new-atheists-7/#comment-18669 philip Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:09:19 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/07/15/new-atheists-7/#comment-18669 You have gone out of your way with great effort to miss Sam Harris's point. All he was saying was that the way YOU Christians view Islam is the same way He Sam Harris views Christianity. Meaning he thinks all religions are wrong in the same way you Christians think all religions are wrong... except your own religion of course. That is all he was saying there it's quite simple really and he is actually correct. In the same way I think Jesus Christ as savior is a man made myth you would feel the same about Zeus being the ruler of the world from a top Mt Olympus. You have gone out of your way with great effort to miss Sam Harris’s point. All he was saying was that the way YOU Christians view Islam is the same way He Sam Harris views Christianity. Meaning he thinks all religions are wrong in the same way you Christians think all religions are wrong… except your own religion of course.
That is all he was saying there it’s quite simple really and he is actually correct. In the same way I think Jesus Christ as savior is a man made myth you would feel the same about Zeus being the ruler of the world from a top Mt Olympus.

]]> Comment on New Atheist Rebuttals (4) by True Horizon » New Atheists (7) http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/16/new-atheist-rebuttals-4/#comment-18580 True Horizon » New Atheists (7) Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:03:31 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/16/new-atheist-rebuttals-4/#comment-18580 [...] about the differences between them. To put that claim in context, Harris (as discussed earlier here), misunderstands the concept of condemnation to hell and, because of that misunderstanding, [...] […] about the differences between them. To put that claim in context, Harris (as discussed earlier here), misunderstands the concept of condemnation to hell and, because of that misunderstanding, […]

]]> Comment on New Atheist Rebuttals (3) by True Horizon » New Atheist Rebuttals (4) http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/11/new-atheist-rebuttals-3/#comment-16937 True Horizon » New Atheist Rebuttals (4) Fri, 27 Jun 2008 02:29:27 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/11/new-atheist-rebuttals-3/#comment-16937 [...] restate from the last post on this topic [...] […] restate from the last post on this topic […]

]]> Comment on Risk Free? by Bob http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/22/risk-free/#comment-16748 Bob Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:51:24 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/22/risk-free/#comment-16748 Yeah. If that is the purpose of civilization, the concept of civilization is pretty overrated because we've been failing miserably! Thanks Rick ... Yeah. If that is the purpose of civilization, the concept of civilization is pretty overrated because we’ve been failing miserably!

Thanks Rick …

]]> Comment on Risk Free? by Rick Gerhardt http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/22/risk-free/#comment-16739 Rick Gerhardt Wed, 25 Jun 2008 00:08:00 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/22/risk-free/#comment-16739 Wow! I can't imagine what other interesting nonsense one would find if he could hear Haseeb's worldview in its entirety. "..the purpose of civilization is (hopefully) the prevention of suffering.." What a puny idea! An yet, I suppose there are many in our day who share such a goofy, simplistic notion of the purpose and meaning of life. Wow! I can’t imagine what other interesting nonsense one would find if he could hear Haseeb’s worldview in its entirety. “..the purpose of civilization is (hopefully) the prevention of suffering..” What a puny idea! An yet, I suppose there are many in our day who share such a goofy, simplistic notion of the purpose and meaning of life.

]]> Comment on New Atheist Rebuttals (4) by Bob http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/16/new-atheist-rebuttals-4/#comment-16464 Bob Sat, 21 Jun 2008 09:00:05 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/16/new-atheist-rebuttals-4/#comment-16464 "The difference is, he holds no divine right to commit atrocities (or not to commit them)." Atrocities? What atrocities are you referring to and by what standard do you deem them atrocious? I do not know of any Christian theists who are claiming a "divine right" to atrocious conduct. "... you are in fact wrong and continue to perpetuate such thinking as that you are correct." Maybe so. Then again, that is your opinion -- about which you (and Sam Harris) could also be wrong while continuing to perpetuate the notion that you (or Sam Harris) are correct. Your blatant, unsubstantiated claim that I am wrong does not make it true. Please provide evidence to back it up. "Lions, tigers, ghosts, angels and demons… the burden of proof is on you - not Sam Harris ... Prove God. Now." Actually, I doubt you will find anyone who will debate the reality of lions and tigers. That said, what do you require as "proof" that God exists? Your standard of proof is important. For instance, how would you "prove" that electrons exist? You may see the effects of electrons but have you ever seen one? No == you rely on evidence. YOU certainly can't prove it yourself. How do you "prove" that you, or anyone else exists? How do you "prove" that you didn't pop into existence 6 nanoseconds ago with all your memories preprogrammed in place? How do you "prove" the existence of other minds? Prove these things. Now! The fact is that there are many "proofs" for the existence of God. What is a standard of proof that you are willing to accept? In my experience, many who claim atheism will not accept any amount of evidence -- yet they condemn theists for mindlessly accepting things on "blind faith." If there is no amount of evidence that will convince you of the existence of God, your dismissal of that idea is not intellectually based. “The difference is, he holds no divine right to commit atrocities (or not to commit them).”

Atrocities? What atrocities are you referring to and by what standard do you deem them atrocious? I do not know of any Christian theists who are claiming a “divine right” to atrocious conduct.

“… you are in fact wrong and continue to perpetuate such thinking as that you are correct.”

Maybe so. Then again, that is your opinion — about which you (and Sam Harris) could also be wrong while continuing to perpetuate the notion that you (or Sam Harris) are correct. Your blatant, unsubstantiated claim that I am wrong does not make it true. Please provide evidence to back it up.

“Lions, tigers, ghosts, angels and demons… the burden of proof is on you - not Sam Harris … Prove God. Now.”

Actually, I doubt you will find anyone who will debate the reality of lions and tigers. That said, what do you require as “proof” that God exists? Your standard of proof is important.

For instance, how would you “prove” that electrons exist? You may see the effects of electrons but have you ever seen one? No == you rely on evidence. YOU certainly can’t prove it yourself. How do you “prove” that you, or anyone else exists? How do you “prove” that you didn’t pop into existence 6 nanoseconds ago with all your memories preprogrammed in place? How do you “prove” the existence of other minds?

Prove these things. Now!

The fact is that there are many “proofs” for the existence of God. What is a standard of proof that you are willing to accept? In my experience, many who claim atheism will not accept any amount of evidence — yet they condemn theists for mindlessly accepting things on “blind faith.” If there is no amount of evidence that will convince you of the existence of God, your dismissal of that idea is not intellectually based.

]]> Comment on New Atheist Rebuttals (4) by whoisgringo http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/16/new-atheist-rebuttals-4/#comment-16129 whoisgringo Mon, 16 Jun 2008 19:27:02 +0000 http://truehorizon.org/2008/06/16/new-atheist-rebuttals-4/#comment-16129 The difference is, he holds no divine right to commit atrocities (or not to commit them). Therefore, he accepts total and full responsibility for what he does and says. The only thing is, you are in fact wrong and continue to perpetuate such thinking as that you are correct. Lions, tigers, ghosts, angels and demons... the burden of proof is on you - not Sam Harris. Prove God. Now. The difference is, he holds no divine right to commit atrocities (or not to commit them).

Therefore, he accepts total and full responsibility for what he does and says.

The only thing is, you are in fact wrong and continue to perpetuate such thinking as that you are correct.

Lions, tigers, ghosts, angels and demons… the burden of proof is on you - not Sam Harris.

Prove God. Now.

]]>