Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Did Sye take his FaceBook page "underground"???

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty50
    https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75600108 https://www.facebook.com/wayne.junior.526 (16) From: Wayne Junior Date:
    Message 1 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75600108

      https://www.facebook.com/wayne.junior.526

      (16)

      From: Wayne Junior
      Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
      Time: About 7:15 AM MT

      Let's be honest, Robert... There is no explanation
      or answer to the three questions that would be provided
      by a 'presuppositionalist' that you'd accept, further,
      if there was one provided you would still have the problem
      of rationalizing the statement via circular reasoning because
      you fail to believe in the source of all reason, so your
      acceptance or denial of such an answer, to you, would be
      arbitrary, and to the argument, void.

      (17)

      From: Robert Baty
      Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
      Time: About 7:25 AM MT

      Wayne, that's not a very nice way to frame your evasion.

      In fact, I have seen Sye and Eric affirm (agree with me)
      elsewhere that the minor premise and conclusion are true
      and, by implication, they believe the major premise to be
      true while I do not.

      It's simple stuff; no tricks or traps.

      They could easily and quickly answer, but, so far, they
      have refused and "run off".

      You are welcome to give it at try, Wayne, and show a
      little good faith. The problem, as I have noted without
      rebuttal, is that while Eric and Sye may believe their
      major premise is true they cannot demonstrate that it
      is true and they, when pressed, I propose, will admit
      that their much touted "proof of God" is NO "proof" at all.

      I think I've got their game figured out on this fundamental
      level; very simple.

      They can play along and deal with their problem regarding
      their "proof of God" claim, or not.

      I can take it either way.

      They simply "presuppose" God and in doing so are being
      disingenuous to then try to claim they've got the "proof
      of God".

      I am more than willing to discuss my analysis, my argument,
      and those 3 questions if any be open and honest enough to
      engage that discussion in the context of Eric and Sye's
      "proof of God" claim.

      ------------------------------------
      ------------------------------------
    • rlbaty50
      https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601606 https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9 (18) From: Sean Boatman Date:
      Message 2 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601606

        https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9

        (18)

        From: Sean Boatman
        Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
        Time: About 8:45 AM MT

        Does debate require knowledge Robert?

        Does debate require logic and absolute truth?

        (19)

        From: Robert Baty
        Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
        Time: About 9:40 AM MT

        Sean,

        What do you think?

        Can you even bring yourself to answer your own
        questions?

        You may have noticed that I answered those 3
        simple questions I asked?

        Sean, are you suggesting we might have a reasonable
        discussion regarding what we think about the important
        public issues I have addressed (i.e., Eric's and Sye's
        alleged "proof of God").

        Sean, do you think, like I do, that the following
        argument is so constructed that if the premises are
        true the conclusion will follow as true therefrom?

        Sye's and Eric's Major Premise:

        - If you can prove something,
        - then God exists.

        Sye's and Eric's Minor Premise:

        - You can prove something.

        Sye's and Eric's Conclusion:

        - Therefore, God exists.

        Come out, come out, Sean, and try your hand at openly,
        honestly telling us something about how YOU think!

        Or not!

        ----------------------------------------------
        ----------------------------------------------
      • rlbaty50
        https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601606 https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9 (20) From: Robert Baty Date:
        Message 3 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601606

          https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9

          (20)

          From: Robert Baty
          Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
          Time: About 9:55 AM MT

          I don't think there can be any reasonable doubt about
          Eric and Sye affirming the truth of the minor premise
          and conclusion in the argument I have presented as
          representing their "proof of God" claim.

          One of the things I am waiting for is for them to
          explicitly affirm or deny that they believe the major
          premise to be either true or false.

          I can take it either way they want to go with that.

          What sayeth Eric and Sye?

          What sayeth their fellow "Presuppositionalists"?

          Can they be open and honest enough to "give an answer"
          on these simple, quite uncontroversial matters?

          Not yet, but I am long-suffering and waiting!

          ----------------------------------------------
          ----------------------------------------------
        • rlbaty50
          https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601606 https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9 (21) From: Sean Boatman Date:
          Message 4 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601606

            https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9

            (21)

            From: Sean Boatman
            Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
            Time: About 10:30 AM MT

            Clearly, you don't understand the term
            "presuppositionalist".

            Of course, maybe you do and it's why you refuse to
            justify how any of the things necessary to have an
            intelligent discussion are accounted for according
            to your worldview.

            Carry on Robert.

            Better men than I have tried to get you to back up
            your implied claims with no success.

            Like most atheists I encounter, lots of claims and
            assumptions.

            Zero ability to justify any of them......

            (22)

            From: Robert Baty
            Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
            Time: About 11:45 AM MT

            Sean,

            I think your problem is that I do understand the
            "presuppositional" problem as evidenced by your antics
            and the "proof of God" claim popularized by the likes
            of Eric Hovind and Sye Ten Bruggencate.

            Eric, Sye and even you and yours and I can have an
            intelligent conversation regarding your problems with
            that "proof of God" claim, but you and they apparently
            aren't up to the exercise in critical thinking with
            emphasis on the "proof of God" claim of Eric Hovind and
            Sye Ten Bruggencate.

            As I opined earlier, I think the reason for that is
            because you "know" that I am right and you "know" that
            Sye's and Eric's "proof of God" claim is NO "proof".

            I've tested y'all and your argument and have found
            you wanting!

            Little ol' me!

            What a hoot!

            What's to back up regarding my claims with reference
            to Sye's and Eric's argument.

            Sye, Eric and I are all in agreement; Eric and Sye,
            and their followers, simply won't come out, come clean
            and admit to it.

            #1:

            The argument I set forth as representing
            Eric's and Sye's "proof of God" is so
            constructed that if its premises are true
            then its conclusion will follow as true
            therefrom.

            #2:

            Eric, Sye, and I all agree that the minor
            premise is true.

            #3:

            Eric, Sye, and I all agree that the
            conclusion is true.

            #4:

            Eric, Sye, and I all agree that Eric and
            Sye think the major premise is true but
            Eric and Sye cannot show that the major
            premise is true.

            #5:

            Eric and Sye falsely claim that the
            "proof of God" is that "without Him
            you couldn't prove anything".

            So, Eric's and Sye's alleged "proof of God" is NO
            "proof of God"!

            I "know" that!
            Sye "knows" that!
            Eric "knows" that!

            If that is not the case, someone who thinks they possess
            a little moral influence needs to go to work on the
            fugitives Eric Hovind and Sye Bruggencate and get them
            the come out, come clean and carry on an intelligent
            conversation with me regarding their problems.

            I think I have represented their position on the "proof
            of God" accurately and have no interest in misrepresenting
            them.

            Evasions provided by their lesser, like-minded followers
            such as I have encounted is cute cover for them, but no
            substitute for the direct testimony and admissions of Eric
            and Sye.

            Maybe Eric and Sye will repent and bring forth their works
            meet for repentance.

            Maybe not!

            ------------------------------------
            ------------------------------------
          • rlbaty50
            https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601836 https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=658766302 (23) From: Paul Anderson
            Message 5 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601836

              https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=658766302

              (23)

              From: Paul Anderson
              Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
              Time: About 3:30 PM MT

              Is it really that hard for them to understand,
              or do they intentionally strawman it?

              (24)

              From: Robert Baty
              Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
              Time: About 3:35 PM MT

              Paul, you do what so many do; make a statement like
              that and fail to specify who it is you are attempting
              to criticize.

              So, I will assume you intend to address your criticism
              to my evasive adversaries here (Eric, Sye, Sean, Wayne,
              Vike, et al) who haven't been able to bring themselves
              to admit to what they think regarding those 3 simple
              questions that go the heart of Sye's and Eric's "proof
              of God" claim.

              By the way, Paul, what are your answers to those 3 simple
              "yes" or "no" questions?

              --------------------------------------
              --------------------------------------
            • rlbaty50
              https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601836 (25) From: Robert Baty Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 Time: About 3:50 PM MT I
              Message 6 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75601836

                (25)

                From: Robert Baty
                Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
                Time: About 3:50 PM MT

                I thought I might try this and see what happens!

                Sean Boatman wrote, in part:

                - "...you refuse to justify how any
                - of the things necessary to have an
                - intelligent discussion are accounted
                - for according to your worldview."

                Sean's implied argument:

                Major Premise:

                - If God does not exist,
                - then there can be no intelligible
                - discussion.

                Minor Premise:

                - There can be intelligible discussion.

                Conclusion:

                - God does exist.

                Question #1:

                Do you think Sean Boatman's implied
                argument is so constructed that if its
                premises are true its conclusion will
                follow as true therefrom?

                - Sean Boatman - ???
                - Robert Baty - Yes

                Question #2:

                Do you think Sean Boatman's implied
                minor premise true?

                - Sean Boatman - ???
                - Robert Baty - Yes

                Question #3:

                Do you think Sean Boatman's implied
                major premise true?

                - Sean Boatman - ???
                - Robert Baty - No

                Anyone here willing to join me in answering the questions
                with a simple "yes" or "no" and considering a discussion
                thereof?

                ---------------------------------
                ---------------------------------
              • rlbaty50
                https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75602721 https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9 (26) From: Sean Boatman Date:
                Message 7 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75602721

                  https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9

                  (26)

                  From: Sean Boatman
                  Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
                  Time: About 3:55 PM MT

                  Perhaps if you keep copying and pasting the
                  same thing over and over, nobody will notice
                  that you won't give your epistemology.......

                  From: Robert Baty
                  Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
                  Time: About 4:00 PM MT

                  Run, Sean, run!
                  See Sean run!
                  I see Sean running!

                  Maybe someone else will come out, come clean
                  and engage in a discussion of the fundamental
                  problems with Eric's and Sye's and Sean's
                  "proof of God" claims.

                  (27)

                  From: Robert Baty
                  Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
                  Time: About 4:04 PM MT

                  Sean, why not try your complaint about repetition
                  with Sye and Eric and just try to get them to quit
                  repeating their "proof of God" claim since it has
                  been noticed that they have NO such "proof of God".

                  --------------------------------------
                  --------------------------------------
                • rlbaty50
                  https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75602721 https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9 (28) From: Sean Boatman Date:
                  Message 8 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75602721

                    https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9

                    (28)

                    From: Sean Boatman
                    Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
                    Time: About 4:10 PM MT

                    Is it absolutely true that they have done that
                    Robert?

                    Tough to tell on your worldview as you deem such
                    questions as the nature of truth to be irrelevant.

                    (29)

                    From: Robert Baty
                    Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
                    Time: About 4:12 PM MT

                    Sean, you are way behind on answering questions
                    and your continuing, evasive, hypocrisy is further
                    noted.

                    Those questions are waiting dare you answer and tell
                    us what you think?

                    I do thank you for your latest hypocrisy is proposing
                    a complaint against my repetition while endorsing,
                    implicitly, that of Sye and Eric regarding their
                    "proof of God" claim that is the issue I am addressing.

                    (30)

                    From: Robert Baty
                    Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
                    Time: About 4:15 PM MT

                    P.S. to Sean:

                    Yes, it is absolutely true that Eric and Sye have gone
                    about repeating their "proof of God" claim and it has
                    been noticed that their "proof of God" claim is NO
                    "proof".

                    ----------------------------------------------
                    ----------------------------------------------
                  • rlbaty50
                    https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75602721 https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9 (31) From: Robert Baty Date:
                    Message 9 of 17 , Mar 6, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      https://www.facebook.com/marcuspittman/posts/516274831744414?comment_id=75602721

                      https://www.facebook.com/sean.boatman.9

                      (31)

                      From: Robert Baty
                      Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
                      Time: About 5:25 PM MT

                      Here's another angle on Eric's and Sye's problem, and the
                      problem they have created for their misguided supporters
                      regarding that "proof of God" claim I have been addressing.

                      I've seen Sye here and there trying to make a big deal of
                      how it is that logic is in the very nature of God and is
                      "immaterial, unchanging and universal"; or something like
                      that.

                      The "if..., then..." logical formulation is commonly found
                      in the Bible, quite approvingly, and here it is that little
                      ol' me has presented Eric and Sye and their misguided
                      followers with a simple "if..., then..." logical formulation
                      that presents Sye's and Eric's "proof of God" argument and I
                      can NOT get Sye or Eric or their misguided followers to even acknowledge that it is so constructed that if the premises
                      are true its conclusion will follow as true therefrom.

                      THE ARGUMENT

                      Major Premise:

                      - IF you can prove something,
                      - THEN God exists.

                      Minor Premise:

                      - You can prove something.

                      Eric's Conclusion:

                      - Therefore, God exists.

                      Question #1:

                      Do you think the argument is so
                      constructed that if the premises
                      are true the conclusion will
                      follow as true therefrom?

                      - Sye Ten Bruggencate - ???
                      - Eric Hovind - ???
                      - To be named - ???
                      - Robert Baty - Yes

                      If there be any who can "give an answer", we can then consider a possible discussion and consider moving on to the #2 and #3 questions.

                      Or run...and cover for Eric and Sye!

                      -------------------------------------
                      -------------------------------------
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.