Subject:
|
Re: Problems with Christianity
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 22 Dec 2000 18:11:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1057 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Steve Chapple writes:
> As far as I'm concerned, my "conclusions" (our definitions on what exactly
> those conclusions are would undoubtedly differ) are supported by "debate
> and critical thinking".
I believe you'll have a hard time demonstrating that to my satisfaction.
> If you refuse to accept anything Biblical however,
> then yes, the debate is totally pointless.
I don't accept that every asserted fact in the bible is the literal truth. I
don't even accept that every asserted fact in the bible is allegorically
true. But I do not refuse to accepet anything biblical.
I am willing to accept specific assertions (of fact) as true if they are
subjected to the objective tests that I subject other assertions of fact to.
Thus, for example, I accept that an entity with the name Jesus lived and
died. It's been independently corroborated to my satisfaction. By the same
token I do not accept the creation mythos as literally true, as it has been
refuted to my satisfaction.
To accept the bible as anything more than an account, written by many
fallible humans, of myths and events, and therefore subject to the same
evidentiary tests as other accounts, is to accept the conclusion as a
premise. I don't accept the bible as the word of god without proof.
Asserting that you believe it is is not a proof, it is a statement of your
preference.
No one can supply that proof, since the nature of your god is to be
inexplicable and undemonstratable. Therefore it's a matter of personal
preference, and the debate is totally unresolvable, although not for the
reason that I don't accept the bible as literal truth, but rather for good
and justifiable reasons, to wit, that debate is not the proper tool.
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
| (...) As far as I'm concerned, my "conclusions" (our definitions on what exactly those conclusions are would undoubtedly differ) are supported by "debate and critical thinking". If you refuse to accept anything Biblical however, then yes, the debate (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
