Part 9 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Thumpers also misinterpret.
Why do you think there are 1000's of versions of christianity?
Why is God's latest revelation rejected by almost all of them? Mormons?

 

Because you say it is so doesn't make it so. The bible specifically states that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. It did not say Pharaoh was free to chose one way or another. You are making things up.

 

We await your telling us how something that is only approximately true can be inerrant.

The "bible" is at best, only approximate, when it is not simply false.

 

Of course he is making things up. It is a defining characteristic of the fundy, to make things up and otherwise play fast and loose with their falsehoods.

Show me one who doesnt do that, and I will show you an ex-fundy.

 

You mean people like the ones who made up the concept of the FSM or Russell's Teapot?

 

What is a fundy?
I have a feeling some would call me a fundy simply because I'm a Republican. I'm more of a compassionate Libertarian.

 

Can you show "PROOF" that the Bible is "false"?

 

To you or to a logical, rational person?
No disrespect intended.
Your words, not mine.

 

To me of course... I am the one who requested the "PROOF". Now; What "words" are mine?

 

Then the answer is no, it would be equivalent to proving Mary had a little lamb.

 

That you are neither logical or rational.
If the proof is for you, then there is none.

 

Are you sure that there is not a Mary that had a little lamb?

 

The question you were responding to at post #409 was "Can you show "PROOF" that the Bible is "false"?"
Quit trying to change the goal posts with your little innuendos such as "That you are neither logical or rational."

 

It's not an innuendo. It was neither indirect nor subtle. It was directly recapping something you have overtly stated about yourself.
If you think it's derogatory, why did you describe yourself that way? Self-disgust?
Anyway, there is never proof to the illogical and irrational.

 

I described myself that way because I believe it to be a fact.. I am not obligated by your choice of logic or any other system of logic that is not mandated by a societal law requiring that all persons use logic. Self disgust? Not hardly. If anything, the sin of pride... prideful that you and others cannot compel me to accept the things you say as 'true'. PTL on that one.

Your closing statement is your admission that you cannot provide to me compelling evidence or argument that will cause me to accept your arguments or evidence as 'true'.

 

That's correct.
Proof can only be provided logically to a rational person.
You have already stated in the past that nothing can be suggested of any kind to change your beliefs. That being a symptom of the illogical and irrational mind, no proof is possible for you.
I'm sure you won't disagree with this.
They are, after all, your words.

 

Can you show us PROOF that the bible is true.

 

Like me, you already have a particular mindset with regard to the Bible and as another poster on this forum claims, you cannot provide proof to anyone who is not rational or logical. It just so happens that the system of logic and rationalization which you are using is not the same system that I am using. Therefore, like yet another poster on this forum has stated.... it presents a situation of futility to attempt to convince someone who already has a preconceived idea of a given subject matter. So, why should I waste my time in such a futile attempt?

 

Then right there is your admission that you cannot provide proof to this person.

Yes, I did and I still maintain the same belief.

So what if it is a symptom? Is that supposed to be some dreaded disease that the worlds medical doctors have not listed on their list of dreaded diseases?

Why should I when I admit that I have the capacity of being irrational and of not using your preferred system of logic?

You still have not shown where they are my "words". I don't own words.

 

It isn't the predisposition regarding the subject matter that is at issue. It is what constitutes evidence. If logic and rationalism are rejected, there remains no basis to evaluate the credibility of the evidence presented.

 

I've already stated that.
I have said we agree on this.
Did you have a point?

 

no point in it, because you set the bar for proof out somewhere in the purple dimension.

showing it is approximate at best is much simpler, and equally non-inerrant.

let us know when you can admit that your "bible" is no better than approximately correct, when it isnt false.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh come now, we all know what a fundy is.

 

Only that you are beating a dead horse.. If we have (as you declare) agreed on this then why do you desire to continue on with that part of the discussion?

 

No, I mean people like you who simply make up "facts" as it suits them.

The FSM is a parody of your "god". Tho, I will admit, its tough to parody fundies or their
god beyond how they parody themselves.