What do you think of the Vatican's historical and continued use of the Ellis defense to prevent known victims of sexual assault from seeking reparations from the church?

(May 15, 2015 at 6:46 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 15, 2015 at 5:37 pm)Alex K Wrote: Why would anyone want to be catholic?

Because it is true. 

How do you now this?

From an outsider point of view, how can I test your claim against other Christian sects, or other religions?

In other words, lets say I am an alien visiting Earth. How should I go about discerning your claims against those of the majority of humans that have other supernatural claims? 

Doesn't really touch on the fact that the Bible is a load of made-up bollocks, does it?

(May 15, 2015 at 6:18 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Early church "fathers" would dispute your opinion.

And newer ones even carefully embrace evolution. They're not as brazen in their stupidity and ignorance as the evangelicals.

(May 18, 2015 at 5:20 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: In this argument, the necessities are all normative necessities and the kind of membership being discussed is formal membership. The argument has a logically valid form (in fact, it expresses a variation on what is known as the "hypothetical syllogism" argument form), meaning that the truth of its conclusion depends only on the truth of the premises it contains.
 

So what?

I can come up with an endless list of logically valid syllogisms that do not prove their conclusions, because they are not sound. 


For an syllogism to prove its conclusion it has to be both valid and sound.

What would change your mind about Christ, God and the Catholic church? What would it take for you not to believe?