(April 2, 2018 at 6:16 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: I wanted to be free from the proofs I know are true if they were wrong. I did. And if I can disprove any of them, I would.
But you guys aren't the ones to do it.
This is the exact oposite of a rational reason to believe.
You should be disbelieving until the claim meets its burden of proof, not believing until the claim is proven wrong. Your method of believing until it is proven wrong, can lead to all sorts of of unsupported and contradictory beliefs.
For example, do you believe in: bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, leprechauns, alien abductions, etc, etc, until they are disproven? I'll bet not.
Quote:You can't. You are too afraid to go my layer of understanding and solve it if it's wrong, you won't go that deep, so if I am wrong, it won't be you to do it.
Your arguments have been provably shown to be fallacious.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
