The real religion?

[Jesster]

From your comments in parenthesis I would say that you are still going with testimony in unreliable.   So then the only reasonable option would be 1.  That neither scripture or science  testimony provide sufficient evidence or reason to believe.  I do grant that we accept things without sufficient evidence, but I don't think that it is unreasonable for others to not do the same.

So you're just going to go ahead and hang on to that fallacy until the tips of your fingers bleed, no matter how ridiculous you appear, huh?  That's about what I expected.

And, within the parameters of your 'scientific evidence is nothing more than testimony, just like biblical scripture' fallacy, the most reasonable world view according to YOU as stated above is:

'None of us can be confident in either scientific conclusions or scripture claims since they are both just testimony; that the only thing which qualifies as "sufficient evidence" is physically seeing something with my own eyes.'

Yes?

Do realize that according to this position accepting bible scripture as true is unreasonable, and accepting that the earth revolves around the sun is EQUALLY as unreasonable?  That seems rational to you?  That seems logical to you?

Uh oh. If he continues on the same path of arguments after that argument from you, I'm going to toss him in the same pile as the flat earthers.