Religious Background

[TheBeardedDude]

1. I disagree. If that were that were true, then many more people would be convinced of atheism and it would be growing instead of stagnant. The atheist never had or has overcome the built in sense that the supernatural exists.

I've never had a theist actually deliver on the claims of evidence being real. And the paucity of evidence for a claim, clearly does not correspond to a sudden loss of a belief in the claim. See: astrology, magic, crystal healing, homeopathy, etc, etc, 

You really need to read up on "special pleading". I am clearly discussing/comparing bodies of evidence and don't come close to the definition. 

Special pleading: argument in which the speaker deliberately ignores aspects that are unfavorable to their point of view.

So when you reject one religion (like Islam) for not having convincing evidence, but don't reject your own for the exact same reason, it is special pleading. 

What you have accused me of is...well I don't know exactly. You claim that I have engaged in special pleading for pointing out basic facts about the NT and the paucity of contemporary records/accounts of the Jesus character from the NT. It isn't special pleading to point out the flaws of a position, its inherent weaknesses, and its dearth of evidence.

Sorry. I thought we were having a discussion. Like what often happens, this discussion does not seem to be able to move from vague generalities to a detailed discussion. In my experience here, that usually means I got through the inch in the mile wide, inch deep knowledge of the other person. I certainly may be wrong, but that is my experience here.

In my experience here, that usually means I got through the inch in the mile wide, inch deep knowledge of the other person.

My knowledge of the issues surrounding the Bible and the paucity of evidence for its claims isn't "an inch deep." It isn't a discussion when you're trying throw about insults.

The point of this thread is for people to give a glimpse into their religious background. I did so and you took issue with my experience and either don't understand the points I have made, or don't care because you want to try and score some sort of points or victory via semantics. The problem is that when you've tried to do so, you've mischaracterized my argument into a straw man while simultaneously accusing me of special pleading (a term you use incorrectly). 

You should spend less time trying to insult and incorrectly define logical fallacies.

What exactly is your goal in questioning my background and religious experience? Do you think that I would suddenly go back to Christianity if you could find that one theological argument that's just right?