From: joeb@arden.linet.org (Joe Beiter)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Beiter thinks there is a God
Date: 7 Jan 93 21:41:48 GMT
Organization: The Courts of Chaos

In article <jfelder-040193094046@latvia.lerc.nasa.gov> jfelder@lerc.nasa.gov (James L. Felder) writes:
>> -- 
>
>I can understand your frustration with the discussions threads that you are
>participating in in this group.  It is because they are exactly that - 
>"discussions".  They are not logical aurguments.  Logical aurguments (in my
>very limited understanding, jump in here anyone with a better background in
>logic) require that both sides start from an common set of premises.  We
>have not been working from the same set in all these discussions.

hmm I'm not feeling particularly frustrated.  Not too sure what I've been
doing after reading this (discussing or arguing).  I'll have to watch for
some examples of the formal scenerios you've informed me of.  Apologies
to all for not observing a little closer.


>That is because it seems that you have included in your set of premises
>that God, and specifically the Christian God exits.  We do not share that
>premise.  Rather, "God exist" is one possible conclusion that can be drawn
>after aurguments are presented starting from the shared set of premises.

Yes that is the premise of my issue.  Not that "God exists" but I belive
God exists and you (?) believe he does not exist.

Or if you prefer, *I* believe God exists and you believe I believe God 
exists.

>If you can not accept to set aside the initial premise that God exist, then
>true logical discussions will be impossible.
>
>A few other points.  One, you can not use the Bible in your arguments
>because this would be circular reasoning.  Two, as the holder of the
>positive (God does, must exist) position, the burden of proof is on you. 
>Of course, the same burden would be shared by any atheist that concludes
>that God can not exist.  The middle gound, the "I have yet to see
>convincing evidence that requires a God to explain" group, need only refute
>your arguments.  Sorry, I don't make up the rules of logic.  

Well the Bible may have some points of interest in the existance of God
but I'd rather hold out for those less I spew my ignorance for all the world
to see.

I know what you are advising and was attempting to take a different approach
both for the "sake of discussion" and to prehaps truly learn a thing or two.
I'm trying to avoid the position of "Me know God, You don't and should".
I've seen it crash and burn in this newsgroup and others of this nature.
I'm attempting the position of "I think I know a real God, I think I'm 
freaking please help!"  Thus the burden of proof and argument is not on myself
since I"m not trying to convince you hes there.  I'm seeking help to be
convinced hes not.

>Can you work from this starting point Mr Beiter?  If you can then lets go,
>I tire of these attacks ad hominem (on both sides!!).

Me too.  What do you think?
>
>BTW, this thread has really drifted.  My I suggest that with the next
>reply, we start a new one.  I, for one will no longer be following this
>thread.
>

Done.  :-)


-- 
 -|:..Joe.Beiter@arden.linet.org          TCOC: Public Access..:|-
  -|:..........................................................:|-
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc