New Video on Apologetics

[catfish]

Are you incapable of being open-minded? You were presented with an alterante hypothesis and you responded thusly:
"Interesting theory. Too bad the Bible completely contradicts this theology. Have you read the Book of Acts? It's probably the one most filled to the brim with magic of any of the NT books. Certainly so when you consider only mortal-wielded magic. "

Seems pretty fucking dogmatic to me. As for your understanding of "coherent", I don't think I can use smaller words or make it any simpler than I already have, shall I type more slowly next time?
.

---

BTW, are you still supporting your presuppositional position as logical?
.

[DeistPaladin]

Seems pretty fucking dogmatic to me.

What you call "dogma" I call "reading what's there".

Speaking of being consistent with how we operate in every other area of life. If I wrote business contracts and then decided that they meant something completely different than what's written in the contract, I'd get sued. The same whimsical liberal Christian "interpretation" (which usually boils down to making stuff up based on how it sounds good to the individual) they apply to the Bible wouldn't work in any other area of life.

As for your understanding of "coherent", I don't think I can use smaller words or make it any simpler than I already have, shall I type more slowly next time?

Maybe you should try making sense in what you type. A non-Christian Christian belief is an oxy-moron.

[Cyberman]

Do we really need to go over the difference between "open-minded" and "credulous" again?

[Cinjin]

See, but there could be. I don't trust that what scrolls and fragments that are available aren't the only ones. There could be some pointer to scientific proof and noone can really be sure of anything until the entire case has been presented.

What do you want, evidence of God or that the "Biblle" is true? Or both? Personally, I wouldn't defend the Bible untill I saw what the Vatican is hiding...

Wait ... what?

Are you saying that DP is inaccurate simply because there could be evidence that simply hasn't come to light yet??

If you are saying that, than it is you who has made the epic fail here.
"Hey everybody, don't discount unicorns just yet. We haven't discovered all the ancient scrolls which of course "prove" their existence."

Please tell me that I misunderstood this post and this is NOT what you're trying to say.
This seems like a rather obvious statement to make but apparently you need to hear it: Evidence that isn't yet evidence is still not evidence.

[catfish]

Wait ... what?

Are you saying that DP is inaccurate simply because there could be evidence that simply hasn't come to light yet??

If you are saying that, than it is you who has made the epic fail here.
"Hey everybody, don't discount unicorns just yet. We haven't discovered all the ancient scrolls which of course "prove" their existence."

Please tell me that I misunderstood this post and this is NOT what you're trying to say.
This seems like a rather obvious statement to make but apparently you need to hear it: Evidence that isn't yet evidence is still not evidence.

wow, just wow....

And you guys think Christians are illogical when you both are here supporting making conclusions before evidence has been provided.

You made your decisions, it's obvious to me that even if you were presented with compelling evidence, you'd dismiss it.
.

[Cinjin]

Wait ... what?

Are you saying that DP is inaccurate simply because there could be evidence that simply hasn't come to light yet??

If you are saying that, than it is you who has made the epic fail here.
"Hey everybody, don't discount unicorns just yet. We haven't discovered all the ancient scrolls which of course "prove" their existence."

Please tell me that I misunderstood this post and this is NOT what you're trying to say.
This seems like a rather obvious statement to make but apparently you need to hear it: Evidence that isn't yet evidence is still not evidence.

wow, just wow....

And you guys think Christians are illogical when you both are here supporting making conclusions before evidence has been provided.

You made your decisions, it's obvious to me that even if you were presented with compelling evidence, you'd dismiss it.
.

So you're not denying my assertion of what you said about "evidence" that has yet to present itself?

[catfish]

Yeah, I'll deny that. You're not the center of the universe and you do not dictate truth.

What would you require to prove God, evidence? Do you search for evidence yourself or simply accept what is presented to you?
.

[DeistPaladin]

You made your decisions, it's obvious to me that even if you were presented with compelling evidence, you'd dismiss it.
.

It's because of that cross-shaped hole in our hearts.

[Baalzebutt]

Yeah, I'll deny that. You're not the center of the universe and you do not dictate truth.

What would you require to prove God, evidence? Do you search for evidence yourself or simply accept what is presented to you?
.

Wow. The sheer perfection of your dickheadedness is astounding.

[catfish]

And he proves failure at every turn...
.

---

Wow. The sheer perfection of your dickheadedness is astounding.

Do you have evidence of that???
.