-->
@secularmerlin
I am perfectly happy to entertain hypothetical situations and discuss the characteristics of fictional characters.
Well stated.
Evidence in a religious forum
Posts
Total:
338
-->
@3RU7AL
Thank you! I respect your posts a great deal as well.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
but the analogy is withiut merit as the writer admits it is a story
The author of the Book of Mormon doesn't admit it is a "story".
The author of the Quran doesn't admit it is a "story".
The author of the Bhagavad Gita doesn't admit it is a "story".
Do you believe these books are also 100% true?
And if you don't, why not?
-->
@ludofl3x
And your point, "You cannot use the Bible to show that God is evil but reject the other cialims in it," would reflexively mean that to accept any claim in the bible, one must accept all claims in it as fact, not pick and choose which ones you like to draw a character in some way that is otherwise inconsistent with the book.
Simply because "The Amazing Spider-Man" comics contain some historically accurate events and locations does not necessarily validate every single claim regarding the central character's super-human abilities.
-->
@secularmerlin
So all the babies and the donkeys were evil? The donkeys man? Why kill all the donkeys? Oh and the babies. Them too.
Zoiks!
-->
@3RU7AL
the hnidu book doesnt claim anyt religion, it is a philopshipy
-->
@3RU7AL
how so?
-->
@secularmerlin
I dont think so- I think I have stated and proved my points
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The author of the Book of Mormon doesn't admit it is a "story".The author of the Quran doesn't admit it is a "story".The author of the Bhagavad Gita doesn't admit it is a "story".Do you believe these books are also 100% true?And if you don't, why not?how so?
In the same way you believe the bible of course.
-->
@secularmerlin
I believe in the Bible
-->
@Tradesecret
The Bible is not a fictional book. Parts of it might be.
Full stop.
What parts "might be" fictional??
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I dont think so- I think I have stated and proved my points
I have addressed all your points. I see no reason to consider the bible more than fiction and whether it is fiction or nonfiction the Yahweh as described therein perpetrates, commands, and allows many acts that by my standard of ethics and morality is observably unethical and immoral. Roderick is at least engaging my points and has some well formed and cogezent (if still logically fallacious) arguments. For example his argument about people emulating the joker is compelling but doesn't actually correlate with the bible (the book actually under discussion) because in the bible the figure I don't want everyone to necessarily emulate is the Yahweh (ostensibly the 'batman' of the peice and not the 'joker') and even if it did... well I addressed that when I was actually addressing the argument itself.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
the hnidu book doesnt claim anyt religion, it is a philopshipy
The Gita is set in a narrative framework of a dialogue between Pandava prince Arjuna and his guide and charioteer Krishna.
Krishna (/ˈkrɪʃnə/,[9] Sanskrit pronunciation: [ˈkr̩ʂɳɐ]; Sanskrit: कृष्ण, IAST: Kṛṣṇa) is a major deity in Hinduism.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I believe in the Bible
The author of the Quran doesn't admit it is a "story".
Why don't you believe in the Quran and or the Book of Mormon?
I mean, they both describe Jesus (king of the jews), and I bet you like that, right!
Since the Quran and the Book of Mormon contain historically accurate accounts of Jesus, then they MUST BE TRUE!!
-->
@Tradesecret
Revelation is a valid form of evidence.
Fantastic.
This validates my personal revelation, NANABOZHO IS THE ONE TRUE CREATOR!!
Also, this just in, ALL RELIGIONS ARE TRUE!!
Case closed.
-->
@Tradesecret
I value logic and philosophy and good arguments.
Duly noted.
-->
@Tradesecret
Religious books are such books that we do swear on.
More than a dozen documents and books -- including the US Constitution, Eastern Orthodox Bible and Quran -- were used to swear in officials of various ethnic and religious backgrounds. [LINK]
I'm not sure "swearing" on a pile of boiled wood validates the contents.
-->
@lady3keys
Evidence - yes! It is evidence of history, not of truth. A million sci-fi comics are not evidence that the Avengers actually existed. But they are evidence of what people wanted to read about.
Is "evidence" admissible if it is not germane?
-->
@Tradesecret
They both demonstrate love and mercy and holiness and justice.
WTF.
-->
@Tradesecret
I have never believed in religion. Religion ought to be abolished from my point of view. Yet, the definition today of religion is unhelpful so this is unlikely to happen anytime soon. I understand what you mean by adapting and maturing into an adult. I left my atheistic days behind when I realised it had nothing to offer of lasting substance.
Not "religious" and also Not an Atheist.
Would you call yourself a DEIST?
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I believe in the Bible
Ok so then the question becomes what differentiates the bible to me as an outside observer from any book tied directly or peripherally to any religion that the religious proponents in question claim to believe? After all they all believe for equal quality (if not quantity) of evidence. Indeed if these religions are mutually exclusive (that is if christianity being the "correct" religion invalidates them) then there is far more weak anecdotal evidence against christianity (between the many other religions practiced to day there are more non Christians than Christians) than for. That leaves you with a lower quantity of equal quality evidence.
-->
@secularmerlin
Also, roughly 50% of Christians worldwide are Catholics, so any "appeal to popularity" must conclude that all other Christian denominations are false.
-->
@Tradesecret
.
Tradesecret, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, and now states there is fiction within the scriptures!
First thing, sorry you had to break the deal that I gave you, in that I promised that I would not make you the continued biblical fool within this forum, but you went and broke this deal in your biblically ignorant "Did God drown his Jewish creation including in Noah's ark?" as I have shown in said thread. Tsk, tsk tsk :(. Therefore you are again at my discretion in showing you to be the number 1 Bible fool here at this religion forum!
YOUR UNBELIEVABLE UNGODLY QUOTE IN YOUR POST #43: "The Bible is not a fictional book. Parts of it might be."
WTF? How could say such an ungodly statement?! Your Satanic statement is like enjoying the drink from the punch bowl at a party, and then all of a sudden a turd floats to the top of the bowl! Get it? Do you need this adage explained to you? Huh? You therefore put a chink in the armor of Christianity by your Devil Speak that "PART OF THE FAITH IS FICTIONAL!" OMG, you've been made the fool once again!
Does a TRUE Christian like me have to remind you of the following passages?
“EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5)
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.” (Matthew 4:4)
So, according to your Satanic thinking, and that every word of Jesus is flawless, then this includes the FICTIONAL words as well and the FICTIONAL words from Jesus mouth since He inspired the entire Bible?! (2 Peter 1:20-21)
Tradesecret, as if your other ungodly and RUNAWAY POSTS from me weren't enough, then you add this to your Satanic repertoire! Seriously, to save you from this continued embarrassment within this forum, maybe it is time for you to change your monikers name, and start over? Yes? LOL
.
-->
@3RU7AL
Also, roughly 50% of Christians worldwide are Catholics, so any "appeal to popularity" must conclude that all other Christian denominations are false.
Provided they are mutually exclusive to one another certainly.
-->
@secularmerlin
the claim of the God are different
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Ok how are they different? All examples cited are faith based claims evidenced only anecdotally. What about the Vishnu allows you to discount the Vishnu as the one true god and creator of the cosmos?
-->
@secularmerlin
many ways, simply read the books
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Let's say for the sake of argument that I have read both the bible and the gita. Let us further say that I don't see any difference in the believability of two claims. What difference is it you are pointing to? What specifically shows the gita to be false?
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I think I would like to invite you and indeed any other theists involved in the conversation to respond to this thread. www.debateart.com/forum/topics/1600-proving-all-other-religions-wrong
-->
@secularmerlin
there are tons of differences