tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post238789357238083236..comments2023-12-01T18:05:24.875-05:00Comments on Debunking Christianity: What Would Convince Victor Reppert to Give Up Christianity?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-83518220964315700772010-06-27T15:22:51.240-04:002010-06-27T15:22:51.240-04:00This has been an interesting read since I last che...This has been an interesting read since I last checked.<br /><br />One comment re. evidence. While Islam may be weaker or Mormonism on sketchy ground, for one, Christianity has numerous issues that remain unexplained except for speculation and 'possible' reasons like a possible morally sufficient reason for evil which no one can specify or a possible explanation for the decrease in tangible, observable interactions with humanity despite this being alluded to by Jesus himself (miracles, immunity to poison, etc.).<br /><br />Despite focusing on this... I find it interesting that some think that once you make the leap to a possible creator, you enter the buffet of world religions and have to actually choose one.<br /><br />I find it far more possible that there <i>is</i> a creative force but that the world <i>has no clue in the slightest</i> what it is or what it's like. Why find the need to compare religions to figure out which one's true? Rather, look at all of them and see all of their inconsistencies (or as John likes to say, agree with every religion's criticism of every other religion) and see that they clearly all lack some key piece of evidence or explanation for the world.<br /><br />I'm not so sure any of us has a damn clue what god is even if he does exist!jwhendyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03615608336736450543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-75538199154128004102010-06-23T20:27:46.312-04:002010-06-23T20:27:46.312-04:00@Victor I just read that link on your blog. You s...@Victor I just read that link on your blog. You said we have to take Muhammads word for what he says in the quran, etc. You then go on about Christianity as if the events described in the bible are established facts. To do this you just take whoever the author of the gospels word for it that the events are true. There are not any other reasons too do this.<br />Do you see its the same thing for Christianity, Islam, Mormonism or any religion.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11634377050739847996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-90485057343159809192010-06-23T20:21:45.040-04:002010-06-23T20:21:45.040-04:00"You see, it's faith that trumps evidence..."You see, it's faith that trumps evidence for most people and it's faith I deny." <br /><br />Yet you have "faith" that born-again Christianity is somehow not true and you compare it to other religious structures when all other religions are performance based rather than "faith in God's work for you" based. You have faith that there is no logical separation from YHWH or His glory (hell) for multi-faceted reasons which you do not present in your books. IOW,you have 'faith' that there is no hell.<br /><br />You have "faith" that Jesus wasn't born of a virgin nor do you *believe* that He rose again proving He was uniquely God (Deity).<br /><br />It is NOT that you have "no belief regarding Jesus or the God of Abraham." Instead, you currently DO have a belief that Jesus is somehow NOT the Savior, and not Lord, God and Rightful King. You have left your first love of Him for philosophy and universal common descent theory and alleged logic.<br /><br />I agree with you wholeheartedly that you should attempt to be as objective as possible...for those of us who have seen miracles and spiritual warfare...we too are trying to be as objective as possible - as not to be deceived (but ultimately we pray to the God of the universe for wisdom/guidance). Question everything...but when you question - pray to the God of the universe for the right answer (and know that the right answer comes to you by His grace).<br /><br />If we over-simplify everything...we will begin to wrongfully believe that is some petty guy in the sky that wants us to worship him. Anyone who believes this has a concept of God that is far too small and you expect way to little from the Infinite Omniscient/Omnipresent Righteous and Holy Creator of the universe.<br /><br />Reducing God to what a finite being does (like a king or tyrant) is utterly ridiculous and that is why so many remain in deception.Breckminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16059206540177008895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-68668644867438472602010-06-23T20:21:22.214-04:002010-06-23T20:21:22.214-04:00@Victor
>For example, I really do think that Ch...@Victor<br />>For example, I really do think that Christianity has an evidence base that other religions don't have, such as Mormonism or Islam.<br /><br />Victor could you please list what this evidence is?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11634377050739847996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-24929823497980703582010-06-23T19:58:52.976-04:002010-06-23T19:58:52.976-04:00I just covered this.
http://dangerousidea.blogsp...I just covered this. <br /><br />http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2010/06/why-founding-of-christianity-is-far.htmlVictor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-41920086051903504412010-06-23T19:55:21.219-04:002010-06-23T19:55:21.219-04:00No. I think there are far greater difficulties wit...No. I think there are far greater difficulties with Islam than there are with Christianity. I also think that Islam is far easier to explain away than is Christianity. I just covered that on my site. <br /><a href=""<http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2010/06/why-founding-of-christianity-is-far.htmlVictor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-8198976857871158122010-06-23T19:37:25.488-04:002010-06-23T19:37:25.488-04:00"I do not currently believe in Islam, and I d..."I do not currently believe in Islam, and I don't think the evidence in support of their claims is particularly strong. I don't think there is this profound conundrum in how Islam got started that there is about how Christianity got started. So why should I become a Muslim. I would just be applying my epistemology by rejecting their claims."<br />"For example, I really do think that Christianity has an evidence base that other religions don't have, such as Mormonism or Islam. There are things that make me skeptical of those religions which are not present in the case of Christianity. In other words, if Christianity was a delusion, I think the case against it is a lot trickier to make than the case against other revealed religions. (Eastern religions typically don't make the kinds of divine revelation claims that Christianity does). If I thought that Christianity was in the same shape as those other religions, it would cause some cognitive dissonance. "<br />Funny. Just switch around "Islam" and "Christianity" and you will end up verbatim with what Muslims think about your faith.<br />It is amazing you don't even have a clue how circular it sounds. I believe it because it is my religion, it is my religion because I believe it.Hoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15922760916006173291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-18415541813894902402010-06-23T19:32:16.463-04:002010-06-23T19:32:16.463-04:00Vic said: I think there are limits on the extent t...Vic said: <i>I think there are limits on the extent to which we can expect intellectual neutrality or objectivity from people. I don't think we can just throw away our priors and be neutral...</i><br /><br />So far so good. I'm in agreement. As human beings we are not like a proverbial Spock. We don't think logically. This is the human condition.<br /><br />Vic continues: <i>...nor do I think we should.</i><br /><br />Here the disagreement surfaces. Precisely because of the human condition we should try to be as objective as possible with what we think is true.<br /><br />Just look at how confident some Muslims are that they are being objective. Some of them are so certain they're objective about their faith they are willing to fly planes into buildings. Ask them if they’re objective and it would be a no brainer for them. <b>But ask them to subject their own faith to the same level of skepticism they use to reject other faiths and THAT will get their attention.</b> Since we cannot pluck out their eyes we must offer them a shocking test, one that may help get them out of their dogmatic slumbers like nothing else can do. And they will object as strenuously as they can to the OTF because they know their faith does not pass that test. <br /><br />You see, it's faith that trumps evidence for most people and it's faith I deny. Faith concludes more than what the evidence leads us to accept. An outsider must only go with what the probabilities are and never go beyond them, as much as humanly possible.<br /><br />It's the standard for whether to accept what we do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-38811342513130303672010-06-23T19:29:32.285-04:002010-06-23T19:29:32.285-04:00"I wish that I could allay your fears about h..."I wish that I could allay your fears about hell and damnation and purgatory."<br /><br />I have no fear of hell. The Sacrifice of Jesus dying on the Cross for my sins is great enough and meaningful enough unto God the Father to completely pay for all of my sins (violations against His Holy Nature). Hell is an English word to discribe the concept of darkness and separation from God's fellowship and glory which will some day be cast into the Lake of Fire. We don't know how to define ontological Lake of Fire...but we DO KNOW that it is unfathomable horror, terror and suffering with no hope when you are completely helpless.<br /><br />All of the reasons why this place is eternal are multi-faceted and connected together and can NOT be isolated on as though one being is torturing another. To claim this reductio ad absurdum isolation of connected premises is unwise and will lead you to deception (that God is somehow unjust as though He is somehow given eternal punishment for finite sin. This is incorrect).<br /><br />Question everything...because IF you question enough, you might begin to learn the real reason(s) why hell/Lake of Fire is eternal. It's not about torturing. <br /><br /><br />"I wish I could show you the silliness in using Pascal's Wager as a way to lead your life."<br /><br />Pascal's Wager was his own strawman. He never argued it or presented it correctly. God's omniscience would clearly see that there was no faith anyway, just fear.<br /><br />I wish I could show you the silliness of believing that born-again Christians lead/live their lives based on Pascal's Wager rather than by FAITH in God's Incredible Grace to them.Breckminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16059206540177008895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-57940734567407001292010-06-23T19:20:09.687-04:002010-06-23T19:20:09.687-04:00I do not currently believe in Islam, and I don'...I do not currently believe in Islam, and I don't think the evidence in support of their claims is particularly strong. I don't think there is this profound conundrum in how Islam got started that there is about how Christianity got started. So why should I become a Muslim. I would just be applying my epistemology by rejecting their claims.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-60195162694912593132010-06-23T19:14:54.013-04:002010-06-23T19:14:54.013-04:00It might surprise some people to know that I actua...It might surprise some people to know that I actually bring up the Outsider Test when I am teaching classes, especially when I run across people who are fideists. I also bring up the Flying Spaghetti Monster in the same context. If it is a way of helping us to reflect on our beliefs, to not believe them arbitrarily, to see if they really can stand up to a rational test or not, then the OTF is fine. <br /><br />However, I think the way John uses the test is slanted against religious beliefs in an arbitrary way. First, I think there are limits on the extent to which we can expect intellectual neutrality or objectivity from people. I don't think we can just throw away our priors and be neutral, nor do I think we should. <br /><br />For example, I really do think that Christianity has an evidence base that other religions don't have, such as Mormonism or Islam. There are things that make me skeptical of those religions which are not present in the case of Christianity. In other words, if Christianity was a delusion, I think the case against it is a lot trickier to make than the case against other revealed religions. (Eastern religions typically don't make the kinds of divine revelation claims that Christianity does). If I thought that Christianity was in the same shape as those other religions, it would cause some cognitive dissonance. <br /><br />I also don't think that the step from noticing a sociological influence to doubting the belief in question is as easy as John makes it out to be. In a way, this kind of reminds me of adolescents who think they are being nonconformists and really independent thinkers when their ideas differ from those of their parents. Of course, what they don't notice is how much their beliefs and attitudes conform to the people they care about most, their peers. The academic community puts a huge amount of intellectual peer pressure on religious belief in general and Christianity in particular. You escape one set of sociological influences when you reject your religious beliefs, but you become subject to all sorts of other sociological influences. <br /><br />C. S. Lewis once called materialism a "boy's philosophy," and in my book I said I cringed when he said it. But I think that nonbelief as a certain adolescent appeal to a lot of people.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-45032548253344199952010-06-23T19:12:20.201-04:002010-06-23T19:12:20.201-04:00"there are billions of people who believe the..."there are billions of people who believe the same things about Allah and Mohammad, also using your standard for your beliefs (Pascals Wager), so therefore Islam and the Quran are %100 true. Praise be to Allah!!!"<br /><br />Yes, Praise be to Allah for becoming Isa (His Son) and dying on the Cross for our sins.<br /><br />What you don't understand is that Allah is the Abrahamic God and born-again Muslims who convert FROM Islam worship His Son Isa. Allah is dynamically equivalent to the English word "God" in the Arabic language.<br /><br />The problem has been that you have been misled by evangelical Christians who wrongfully believe that the Qur'an has a monopoly on the Arabic word "Allah" and that because some place it the Q'ran Mohammad say "Allah has no son" that therefore YHWH and Allah are not the same God. This is nonsense<br />to the born-again Christian in the Middle East who understands that the Qur'an does not have a monopoly on defining Allah (The God of Abraham).<br /><br />When you appeal to the concept of "hell" from Allah, you are still appealing to the same concept that comes from the Abrahamic God (Orthodox Monotheism).<br /><br />IF anything, all Islam does with their belief in hell is corroborate the reality that the concept of hell existed in understanding with Abraham and was passed down through the descendents of Ishmael, Esau, etc.<br /><br />Praise be to Allah Who sent Isa to be a Holy Sacrifice for sins so that any Muslim can become born-again and trust in Isa's Holy Sacrifice on the Cross for their sins and experience Allah's Holy Spirit (the Infinite Creator, the Same God as YHWH when you believe correctly through Isa/Jesus), and saves them from eternal separation from His Eternal Glory and His logical wrath on objective guilt (disobedience) of His Law.<br /><br />The concept of hell comes from the same God and the same Monotheistic belief structure. Question everything.Breckminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16059206540177008895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-19768103084312629942010-06-23T18:55:27.956-04:002010-06-23T18:55:27.956-04:00So now we have gone from "FSM, being spatio-t...So now we have gone from "FSM, being spatio-temporal, is not consistent with the universe we know" to "if Pastafarianism can give us some expectation as to what will happen if there is a FSM that is different from what we should expect if there is no FSM, then we can look at experience and see what happens. If there's no difference between experience with an FSM than there is with no FSM, then there is no content to their statements." Guess what, that is precisely why I do not believe in a patriarchal god of christianity or islam.<br />I do not particularly care if you find evidence from physical senses enough for the existence of the physical world. But that is evidence accepted by legal system, and so listing philosophers that may question it, be it a De Cartes or a Bertrand Russell, sounds like grasping as straws.<br />And I am still waiting to see what it take to convert to islam, given that you haven't disproven the islamic miracles.Hoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15922760916006173291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-8679162365168651092010-06-23T18:38:51.344-04:002010-06-23T18:38:51.344-04:00@Victor:
If Jesus had been resurrected, should we...@Victor:<br /><br />If Jesus had been resurrected, should we expect to find:<br /><br />- consistent reports from the supposed oral tradition handed down by actual eye witnesses<br />- ancient peoples caring enough about the empty tomb to mark it for posterity so that all would know where Jesus emerged from (that is until Constantine's wife decided to care hundreds of years later)?<br />- consistently answered prayers?<br />- unambiguous miracles?<br />- individuals able to drink poison and not be hurt?<br />- lack of miracles in other traditions or at least a far more abundant occurrence of miracles in Christianity?<br />- Jesus' return as promised while some were still alive?<br />- modern prophets (why only speak to ancient people's about the future??)<br />- an answer to my continual asking/praying to Jesus about how to believe or how to know him?<br />- protection of Christians from diseases or natural disasters?- mention of Jesus miracles, working, or any details about his life confirmed by non-gospel authors?<br /><br />These <i>facts</i> have convinced me that Jesus probably did not actually rise. He gave no qualifications about answered prayers, miracles are stated to be abundant in Acts and there is no explanation for their diminishing by Jesus/Paul/other NT writers (only modern theologians who posit hiddeness or unworthiness of those praying), etc.<br /><br />What is your positive evidence about the resurrection? Simply that Christianity exists today? It seems that this is what most people lean on:<br />- Jesus is thought to have existed and died on a cross<br />- Jesus was reported to be seen after his resurrection<br />- Belief sprung up<br />- Therefore, Jesus rose bodily from the grave at the hands of god almighty.<br /><br />Really? A supernatural resurrection is the only thing you find as a satisfying answer to these facts?jwhendyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03615608336736450543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-9055870483968621682010-06-23T18:29:59.986-04:002010-06-23T18:29:59.986-04:00When we talk about the external world, we are talk...When we talk about the external world, we are talking about a world external to our own minds. Maybe I should have called it the physical world, but that is what I had in mind. <br /><br />Bertrand Russell once pointed out that solipsism was irrefutable. A woman wrote him and told him that he was glad to hear him say that, because she had been a solipsist for years and always wondered why more people weren't solipsists also.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-25916967385860998552010-06-23T18:28:56.566-04:002010-06-23T18:28:56.566-04:00@Victor:
What are your thoughts on what people ar...@Victor:<br /><br />What are your thoughts on what people are bringing up about your views on other religions when it comes to the fact that you feel 'properly justified' in belief by virtue of [probably] being raised a Christian?<br /><br />I'm not suggesting that you don't have reasons you think support your current faith, but what about the origins of it in the first place?<br /><br />Do you think it is better to have facts as a starting point to one's beliefs, or to take beliefs and look for supporting facts afterwards?<br /><br />Also, do you believe that with highly emotional, lifestyle-enmeshing beliefs like religion one is more or less prone to have an open mind to threatening facts?<br /><br />I think this is why the OTF is so helpful. I have shared my questioning of faith with many people and have yet to encounter any in my circles who think I just might be on to something. Everyone suspects I'm wrong. Yet I'm quite respected for intelligence and cleverness and research in many other areas by the same friends! People admire my researching when it comes to how I picked my car, the minivan I just selected for my family, a digital camera, why I use Linux, which Linux is better, machining/building advice (I'm an engineer), budgeting, planning events, managing details...<br /><br />Don't take this as a horn-tooting exercise, I just find it so funny that my findings and abilities are respected and credible and <i>have been</i> to my whole circle of acquaintances for quite some time... yet when it comes to what I now believe to be the case no one thinks I might have found some credible information or have valid arguments?<br /><br />It doesn't even seem like they want to know! Indeed, many extremely intelligent friends of mine, to my surprise, shared in confidentiality that they had undergone a similar struggle of faith and emerged finding nothing conclusive but made their decision to be Christians purely based upon pragmatism -- seemed like a more hope filled path and affected their family/friends the least negatively.<br /><br />I want to follow where the facts lead; I don't want to support a more emotionally appealing stance with possibilities and flimsy explanations for a myriad of arguments against that belief!jwhendyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03615608336736450543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-5528469248701940242010-06-23T18:27:10.700-04:002010-06-23T18:27:10.700-04:00Chuck: How do you have a probability curve based o...Chuck: How do you have a probability curve based on a data point that is unique to itself and non-verifiable (Jesus' resurrection). The only thing your answers show is that you don't work with probability curves as a decision-engine.<br /><br />VR: There's all sort of things that, as we examine history, we would expect to find if Jesus had been resurrected, as opposed to things we should not expect if Jesus had been resurrected. We can see if those things are true, or not.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-91575532366642687092010-06-23T18:23:03.690-04:002010-06-23T18:23:03.690-04:00If Pastafarianism can give us some expectation as ...If Pastafarianism can give us some expectation as to what will happen if there is a FSM that is different from what we should expect if there is no FSM, then we can look at experience and see what happens. If there's no difference between experience with an FSM than there is with no FSM, then there is no content to their statements.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-65219702258224170552010-06-23T18:20:47.557-04:002010-06-23T18:20:47.557-04:00I'm not a great fan of inerrancy; it can possi...I'm not a great fan of inerrancy; it can possibly be given a plausible understanding, and supposedly what is inerrant are the original autographs of the Protestant canon.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-17285743529660343562010-06-23T18:03:59.319-04:002010-06-23T18:03:59.319-04:00@Victor: "Simple propositions like "The ...@Victor: "Simple propositions like "The burden of proof lies with the affirmative" run into trouble when you get to statements like "The external world exists." That's an affirmative statement, and therefore it's got the burden of proof"<br /><br />What exactly is wrong with that statement-the external world exists? External to what? If you do not think the world really exists you are in big trouble! Didn't a guy called Galilleo have something to say about this already?<br /><br />Victor, which Bible is the inerrant word of God? The Sinai Bible, The Vatican bible with all their obvious alterations in the 4th C? There is no mention of the virgin birth or the resurrection in these early versions of the Bible. The Catholic Bible or the King James-? they are all different.<br />If your faith hinges on the veracity of the King James or later versions of the Bible, you need to rethink.Clarehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17836679819711814306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-66485734511650254972010-06-23T17:52:16.547-04:002010-06-23T17:52:16.547-04:00How do you have a probability curve based on a dat...How do you have a probability curve based on a data point that is unique to itself and non-verifiable (Jesus' resurrection). The only thing your answers show is that you don't work with probability curves as a decision-engine.Chuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15657598456196932490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-3075025656601485222010-06-23T17:46:30.789-04:002010-06-23T17:46:30.789-04:00Victor said,
"...What happens to belief in t...Victor said,<br /><br />"...What happens to belief in the flying spaghetti monster? Well, we find events that are not what we should expect if a flying spaghetti monster existed."<br /><br />You, sir, are a heretic!<br /><br />Everyone knows that if you try to test the reality of the FSM, he reaches out with his noodly appendage and alters the results!<br /><br />rAmen...GearHedEdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288513835630145996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-52423509862674976192010-06-23T16:57:23.719-04:002010-06-23T16:57:23.719-04:00Specifically, what is it the world does not includ...Specifically, what is it the world does not include, which it would have to? FSM can violate laws of physics, they are simply irrelevant. (See "bodily assent", "walking on water", or my favorite, "existence for centuries before being born").<br />Let me slightly rephrase John's question. What would it take you to covert to Islam? You haven't disproven that prophet mohammad rode a winged horse to his heavenly rendezvous with god himself. Shouldn't, then, you be praying toward Mecca?Hoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15922760916006173291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-59592634312862410102010-06-23T16:42:09.486-04:002010-06-23T16:42:09.486-04:00Victor, what is it about pastafarianism that looks...Victor, what is it about pastafarianism that looks inconsistent to you? So, the FSM is spatial. Maybe the FSM lives in another dimension, where the physical laws as we know them do not apply? May be the FSM cannot be subjected to laws of physics, after all, he created them himself? Maybe the FSM constantly changes the results of scientists tests so they think his existence contradicts the laws of physics whereas it doesn't? May be it is all too big a mystery for us mere mortals? Or maybe the gospel of FSM shouldn't be read literally- if you take it as just being "inspired by a higher being, in whose image noodles were created" it all makes sense? (It doesn't matter that pasta is a human invention-all human inventions are ultimately creations of the FSM, because that is what my faith says). Haven't you heard any of this before?<br />Besides "the external world exists" does need evidence. And the evidence exists-in what I feel with my own senses, as do other people. Abstraction like Cartesian skepticism not withstanding, we are talking about evidence that is ADMISSIBLE IN A COURT OF LAW. And that is the kind of evidence that is missing when you are talking about miracles, alien abductions, or benefits of homeopathy.Hoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15922760916006173291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-65057804727469657852010-06-23T16:32:01.167-04:002010-06-23T16:32:01.167-04:00Let me try to clarify. I can imagine it being the ...Let me try to clarify. I can imagine it being the case that a belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster was properly basic for some person. That doesn't mean that I have to disprove the FSM in order to not believe in the FSM, that means that that person's ceasing to believe in the FSM would rationally have to involve seeing evidence that the FSM does not exist. Once we form a hypothesis as to what we should expect to take place if the world were created by the FSM (and we can raise questions about the coherence of Pastafarianism as well), then we can see that the world does not contain what we should expect if a FSM existed.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.com