RE: Why the "There are so many interpretations of the Bible" claim is confused
October 7, 2015 at 11:36 pm
(October 7, 2015 at 11:18 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote:(October 7, 2015 at 10:56 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Please enlighten me on my violation of logic... And I wasn't being smug, just trying to be consistent. Am I incorrect in believing that logic/reason should be consistent.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - was my point. You're comparing apples and oranges. That's not "consistent logic" - just childish "I know you are, but what am I?" kind of debating tactic.
If you really want to meet Richard Dawkins - you can. He has public appearances, book-signings and such. And there's little remarkable, or unbelievable about who he is and what he does. Plus - his theories regarding evolution are just as valid in the eyes of science, as they would be if Dawkins didn't actually exist.
No matter how hard one may want to - there is no confirmed way to meet god. And the claims that are being made about him are very outlandish and contrary to scientific understanding and common sense. And if he doesn't in fact exist - the vast majority of religious teachings is utterly useless and a giant waste of time.
Ok.. Is their an objective criteria for extraordinary claims? I find a lot of the claims of Dawkins extraordinary, but I only ask for standard evidence for these. Are you telling me I should stack the deck against those claims and deny the evidence if he finally does come and provide it.
I can understand being skeptical, but what claims of God do you think are contrary to Science. I do find Some of Dawkins claims contrary to science, So I can just dismiss his fairy tales, attribute the claims as legends right?
