JohnEmmett
Well-Known Member
- Jan 21, 2017
- 5,139
- 454
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Buddhist
- Marital Status
- Celibate
Only in so far as I like to know what other people believe …
You seem focused only on the Bible
Upvote
0
Only in so far as I like to know what other people believe …
I am always willing to support my claims. You do not appear to understand what a reliable source is. Here is one clue, you cannot use a source to defend a source. In other words you cannot use the Bible to defend the Bible, especially since it does fail quite often.
That is not how it works. You have just admitted that you do not understand the concept of evidence. The person making the claim is the one responsible for evidence. To have evidence you need a way to test your beliefs. In other words you need to think of a reasonable test that could falsify them. Unfalsifiable beliefs are not rational beliefs. They cannot be since they have no evidence to support them.
Define evidence of higher realms
If you understood the history of the Bible you know that it is one source. More than once it was put through a selection process where certain books were rejected. That has the effect of making it a single source.Ok. Support this claim.
"Here is one clue, you cannot use a source to defend a source. In other words you cannot use the Bible to defend the Bible, especially since it does fail quite often."
You do realize the Bible isn't one source, but rather a collection of dozens of sources, correct?
That is not how it works.
That is correct. But you probably do not know what an atheist is.
You are still an atheist
Because you lack faith
Can you justify your beliefs?
Why make such a pointless claim?
We encounter educated theists who get it that there are thoseI'm sorry, but you will need to provide support for your claims and conclusions. Otherwise, they have to be considered unreliable. Your rules, not mine.
The problem here is that at some point you have to consider some things you consider true to be foundational, and therefore usable for support for other things within your own personal paradigm. In order for these things to be considered to be true would dictate where that person has placed their own faith. That's one of the great ironies of atheism, within its ranks reside some of the most blindly religious people I've ever seen. They just bow to the god of illogical reasoning instead of another, and their scriptures state, 'and science said' rather than 'and God said'.
and need religion no more than … football.
Ok. Support this claim.
"Here is one clue, you cannot use a source to defend a source. In other words you cannot use the Bible to defend the Bible, especially since it does fail quite often."
You do realize the Bible isn't one source, but rather a collection of dozens of sources, correct?
That is a red herring.
Did Jesus talk about evidence or faith?
If you understood the history of the Bible you know that it is one source. More than once it was put through a selection process where certain books were rejected. That has the effect of making it a single source.
There is more than one God?
We encounter educated theists who get it that there are those
who are not religious, just as there are those who dont care about
football, or are tone deaf to music, and they have the integrity
or good will if you like, to accept that there are honest differences
in people.
Others though, simply lack the capacity to grasp the concept
that there actually are people who just dont believe in god any more than
they do in chupacabra, and need religion no more than the need
football.
That lack of basic understanding is too bad, we've enough
dividing people as it is.
Too bad or not though, it does not justify making up
insulting falsehoods about atheists, no more than
concocting racist complaints is ever justified.
There is more than one God? The parts of the bible not involving
God are no more debated by atheists than they are by Christians.
Faith is not a pathway to the truth. It does not appear to serve any purpose besides making believers feel better.
Asking for evidence when faith is necessary
Where did I "tout my reasoning skills"? Exposing your errors is not claiming that I am superior reasoner. You made a mistake about the Bible. That is all. Understanding its history would lead one to the conclusion that it is one source.And here is where you lose me for good when you tout your reasoning skills. I'm almost at a loss for words. That was really, really bad.
Faith is not a pathway to the truth.