“Comments without objective proof WILL be deleted... UNLESS/UNTIL you finally admit,
"No, I can't prove my little theories, but I WOULD like to defend them."
If and when you do that, embrace a bit of humility and reason and respect, THEN we can talk.”
Coming from someone who regularly can’t prove their claims and still insists that those claims are “reality”, this is rich.
Okay here's your chance. I'm telling you right here, right now, it is an objective fact that there is NO record anywhere of God saying God is opposed to any gay folks marrying. That is an objective observable reality in this world. That data does not exist anywhere in the world.
ReplyDeleteNow if you want to disagree with me, by all means, provide one bit of data to disprove me. That's ALL it would take. You won't because you can't, because again my claim is an objective fact. In good faith, I stand entirely ready to be corrected... with data. That ball would be in your court.
But to demonstrate good faith it would be helpful if you would acknowledge that, No, I cannot objectively prove that claim.
Also just to demonstrate where you're coming from, it would be helpful to say something like, "But I do think that's factual, even though I can't prove it." Or "I simply don't know what to think about that." Something like that.
Seeing as how I think this is one of my claims that you think I haven't supported, here's your opportunity.
Dan
I’m not sure how this is on the topic of this post, but we know about your memory problems.
DeleteThe problem is that your claim was that YHWH had not said anything, therefore the proof is on you to prove the claim YOU made, not me to prove a claim that you made.
That you’ve added “marriage” to the conversation doesn’t help you because we have a reasonably good record of what YHWH said about marriage and “gay marriage” isn’t even hinted at.
You claim that YHWH “blesses gay marriage” based on absolutely zero evidence beyond you twisting some random texts around to sort of support your claim.
In short, if you make a claim the onus is on YOU to prove it, not the other way around.
But I do think you have now addressed an additional area where you misrepresented/lied about me and what I believe.
Do you need to get a longer shovel?
"But to demonstrate good faith it would be helpful if you would acknowledge that, No, I cannot objectively prove that claim."*
DeleteDan can't even "prove"...objectively or otherwise...that it's even in any way possible that God would "bless" SSMs. It's just something he created out of whole cloth. Or rather, "unholy" cloth! It's pure fiction and fantasy invented to stroke his perverse love of perversion and the perverts who indulge in it.
Of course, you are right, and Dan has admitted (elsewhere) that he cannot prove that claim. But it doesn't stop him from making it, nor does it stop him from demanding of others what he will not demand of himself.
DeleteThis notion that I have to prove a claim that I have not made (one that Dan decided that I made) and that he is so insistent that I prove this made up claim, while he won't prove his own gives me a good chuckle.
Of course his insistence (he is studying ALL of the date from the whole earth) on his absurd position, undercuts any one (including him) who says that YHWH said or did anything. "Word of God", that's out for sure. He's so obsessed with getting out of the hole that he dug with his initial claim, that he's unaware of the damage he's doing to other positions he holds.
DeleteYou truly don't get it. There is no record, you have zero bits of data to prove objectively that God said anything about anything. As an objective fact, that data has not been demonstrated anywhere, ever, in all the universe. Do you understand that reality?
ReplyDeleteWhat we have is a written record that was recorded by some humans and those humans claimed that God claimed something. That's not objective proof that God said anything. Do you understand the distinction?
Craig...
"The problem is that your claim was that YHWH had not said anything, therefore the proof is on you to prove the claim YOU made, not me to prove a claim that you made."
My claim is that there is no data anywhere in all the universe (above and below the heavens, in your bathroom, in your outhouse, buried in your backyard) that proves that God made a claim about gay folks. That proves that God gave us a universal rule about gay folks. That is an objective fact: that data is not out there anywhere.
Now, maybe I'm mistaken. Maybe there's been this secret bit of knowledge that no one's revealed before but YOU have access to it. Then if you're the one that's making the crazy outlandish claim, YOU are the one that needs to prove the claim. I'm stating the known reality.
That's how proof works. I'm just stating the observable.
Dan
In some way I almost admire your monomaniacal commitment to the false premise that you’ve latched on to.
DeleteThe problem is that I never made the claim you claim I did, therefore I feel no compulsion to defend or prove a claim I didn’t make.
If you made your claim knowing that there was no evidence, that was probably a stupid choice you made. Likewise your apparent claim to have examined every bit of possible evidence seems either suspect, stupid, or hyperbolic.
You claim to know how “proof works” yet fail to actually prove your claim. Which I believe was “God never said…”, not the new version made up for this thread.
Your choice to pretend that your comments here are not off topic, not a mistake, and not a memory failure on your part are simply hilarious.
"There is no record, you have zero bits of data to prove objectively that God said anything about anything."
DeleteHere we see Dan pretend he believes in God while insisting nothing we know of God is provable by citation of the only source we have for supposing He exists at all. Dan likes to pretend he'd know God exists because of that which he can ironically only know because Romans 1: 19-20 told him so.
Where Dan is concerned, there is no Scripture emphatic enough to affirm what honest people know is true, no amount of verses enough, no nothing which Dan will accept as God's Truth where God's Truth conflicts with Dan's preferred alternative. And then he'll whine about "respectful, adult 'good faith' discourse".
It's simple. It's Dan's way or the highway and God can go scratch for all he cares.
You stated, speaking of me...
ReplyDelete"Coming from someone who regularly can’t prove their claims and still insists that those claims are “reality”, this is rich. "
Just to be clear my claim is that the reality is there is no data proving that God has staked a position on gay people getting married. There is zero objective proof of that in the whole world. My evidence for this reality is all the universe and everything.
I'm saying if that news was objectively out there and objectively proven, it would be out there. Someone would bring it up. You would bring it forth if you could prove it. You can't because it doesn't exist in all the universe anywhere. Not in some sewer or alleyway or in an Indiana Jones secret cave. It doesn't exist.
Now your task, if you want to disagree with reality as I'm stating it, is to simply present one bit of objective proof to prove it. I've supported my claim by pointing to all of reality as we know it. Those who wish to disagree with all of reality as we know it, the onus is on them to disprove it. If the data exists it should be easy.
The data does not exist, my friend.
Accept it, apologize for your mistake, and move on.
Dan
I have no “task”, I made no claim, I didn’t even disagree with your claim. I merely suggested that you prove the specific claim that you made.
DeleteFeel free to hold yourself to the standard you demand of others.
“1. God has never called "homosexual behavior" an abomination.”
ReplyDeleteThis is your exact claim from the thread you should be commenting in.
“Just to be clear my claim is that the reality is there is no data proving that God has staked a position on gay people getting married. There is zero objective proof of that in the whole world. My evidence for this reality is all the universe and everything.”
This is some new claim made up out of thin air to hide the fact that your original claim was a huge problem for you.
Copy/paste is a bitch.
Apparently being able to keep track of two whole threads is beyond you as well. You made a claim you couldn’t prove, and now you’re lying about it.
This post is about your hypocrisy in rarely proving your claims, not the specific claim I’m referring to in the other thread.
It’s hard, I understand. Maybe you should slow down, take a step back, and read your comments again before you hit publish.
The conversation:
ReplyDelete“1. God has never called "homosexual behavior" an abomination.”
This is your exact claim from the thread you should be commenting in.
“Just to be clear my claim is that the reality is there is no data proving that God has staked a position on gay people getting married. There is zero objective proof of that in the whole world. My evidence for this reality is all the universe and everything.”
This is some new claim made up out of thin air to hide the fact that your original claim was a huge problem for you.
Look, I'm sorry if you're not understanding, but this is PRECISELY what I've been saying all along, in a variety of ways. When I state the objective fact:
"“1. God has never called "homosexual behavior" an abomination.”
I'm indicating that "Just to be clear my claim is that the reality is there is no data proving that God has staked a position on gay people getting married. There is zero objective proof of that in the whole world. My evidence for this reality is all the universe and everything.” Those are simply two ways of saying the same thing. I DO apologize if it's confusing, I find it obvious but maybe you don't.
So, now that you DO (hopefully) understand what I've been saying all along, DO YOU RECOGNIZE that reality? It's hard, I understand. Maybe you should read, you know, like an adult.
Thank you for acknowledging that I accurately copy/pasted actual claim, and not the revised claim you’ve introduced here.
DeleteNow that you acknowledge the claim thar you made, it’s up you to prove the claim you actually, initially made.
Now the problem you have is that you can’t objectively prove either of your claims. Unless there’s a third claim that you’ve actually examined every possible bit of evidence.
Maybe you should write like an adult and not play this game where you say one thing and mean another. Maybe not try to dig yourself out of one false claim by making two more false claims.
What’s the one saying about “absence of evidence…”?
Sounds like you have a problem that’s bigger than snarky shots at me will solve.
""“1. God has never called "homosexual behavior" an abomination.”"
DeleteThis is not an "objective fact". It's an intentional lie, consciously and willfully told. Lev 18:22 says exactly what you say God never said. Pretending we need video confirmation and a government notarized document in order to affirm the verse as God's Will is abject petulance not conducive to "respectful, adult, good faith discourse". Indeed, there's nothing at all "good faith" about it. To pretend there's any question or "controversy" about what the verse says and means and whether or not it is a universal "rule" is likewise no better than rank pro-mo fantasy. In short, Dan lies by merely daring to question this verse...this reality...in the manner he does.
Craig said, earlier in the thread:
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that your claim was that YHWH had not said anything, therefore the proof is on you to prove the claim YOU made
And once again, I'm saying that there is no objective proof that God said anything specifically AND that God said anything about God's opinion about gay folks marrying. BOTH things are factually true according to the known data we have. Do you understand that?
Take your time and read for understanding.
Of course that’s what are saying now, the issue what said then, which I quoted.
DeleteMore "objectively true" is the fact that Dan has no legitimate way to move from an unassailable and complete prohibition of a behavior to some imagined possibility that God would bless the union of two who indulge in that behavior. He pretends there's ambiguity enough to allow him the liberty to invent the absurd and attribute it to the God in Whom he doesn't believe in the first place, but only postures as such in order to present himself as a "good" person.
DeleteAgain if you didn't understand - if I wasn't clear enough, I apologize. Now I'm making it clear. Do you accept the reality that I'm stating is the reality? ...because it is reality.
ReplyDeleteAnd I HAVE proven my claim. I'm looking at ALL the data in the known world and no one has ever proven this and there is no data to support it. Given ALL of that, I have nothing else to do but accept the reality that God has not stated what you think God believes. As a point of objective fact.
Now that you understand I'm asking you: do you accept that very basic reality, that you and no one else can prove this theory that God has stated a position on gay folks marrying?
Look at it this way: if I make the claim that there is no data to prove that there are purple unicorns living on the moon, I'm stating an objective fact. Right? Answer the question. If someone wants to suggest that I'm mistaken, the onus is on them to prove it. Right?
Where am I mistaken?
Answer? I'm simply not because I'm sticking to the known facts.
Dan
You literally made two/three separate and distinct claims.
DeleteYou’ve completely backed off of the first claim and totally rewritten it. Under the guise of you not being “clear enough “.
As a general rule, the more words and qualifications you add the less clear it becomes. Your initial claim was abundantly clear. You couldn’t prove your initial claim, won’t acknowledge that fact, and somehow it’s my fault for not reading your mind.
Your second claim, was theoretically more provable, but a completely different claim. Yet, you didn’t even prove that objectivity.
Your third claim (implicit in your second), but now explicit is that you “are” ( present tense) “looking at ALL the data in the known world and there is no data to support it”.
Do you realize how arrogant, and insane you sound to make this claim? After looking at “ALL the data in the known world”, you can’t be bothered to provide a source or two that isn’t you?
I am well aware that you cannot prove your hunch about YHWH “blessing gay marriage” despite how often you state this (and similar claims) as fact. As I HAVE NOT made a claim on this topic, I have nothing to prove. You have made 4 claims, and objectively proven none of them. Hell, you just admitted you can’t prove anything.
No.
No, the onus is on you to prove your claim. That’s the standard you apply to everyone else, apply it to yourself.
I don’t think you’re mistaken, I think you are deluded and arrogant if you believe that you have personally examined and vetted “ALL the data in the known world.”.
Again, what’s the saying about absence of evidence?
Dan's true claim...the one to which he won't cop due to the absence of character and honor...is that Scripture is not evidence of anything the Christian is to believe and can be discarded when inconvenient. Whatever proof Scripture presents must be proven, because there's no end to the demand for proof, just as the small child will forever ask "Why?" when the previous asking is answered. The true claim of Dan is that Dan doesn't give a flying rat's ass about God's Will where Dan's will or the will of his lesbo grannies are concerned. Dan comes first and God must abide.
DeleteI've thought that his position does completely undermine the authority of Scripture but hadn't gone there yet. Because, ultimately, absent being an eyewitness there is no "proof" that Jesus actually said any of the things that Dan builds his "theology" on.
DeleteIt's interesting to watch his troll spend so much time extolling the value of the Holy Spirit in communicating "truth(s)", yet Dan's demand for some bizarre level of proof means that nothing that the Holy Spirit says can be taken seriously either.
Dan's True problem is (as the title of the post notes) that he has different rules for himself than for others.
Of course his claim that he's studied every possible bit of "data" is simply the ravings of a lunatic.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. He's making an argument from silence as he's done before.
As always, I appreciate it when you demonstrate the accuracy of my posts.
ReplyDelete