It is true because you dont understand it

[fr0d0]

'atheist logic' is screwy.

IMO it is as it never ties up logically for me. I see no one counter the logic only dodge and avoid. I'm no authority on this.. I just say what I see. You come out with your ignorant statements on Christianity (check the blaspheming day thread for example) so I'm merely doing the same.

Atheist argument relies on screwey logic.. cherry picking as with denying philosophy with science.

(my bolding).

Substantiate this claim. How does non-belief in God make you rely to screwy logical arguments? It's not part of the definition of atheism, which is mere non-belief...so the arguments entirely vary. So please substantiate that claim.

You ignored the bit where I did.

It makes logically sound claims. Other logical claims can stand against it. I have never seen, and you haven't presented anything that comes close.

And I haven't seen any of these 'logically sound claims' you are speaking of.

You have, you replied to them! LOL ...oh - you mean 'see' as in understand.. yeah I agree then - you haven't understood - I've witnessed that

There is reason and logic in the bible, and it does explain God, deal with reality and it can be studied. You refuse to consider it is because you don't understand the evidence. That's a different thing.

Saying that there is reason and logic in the Bible that explains God, doesn't make it so. I have no idea what you are talking about...where does the Bible give evidence that there is a "God" that exists, and that it is specifically that God?

From beginning to end I'm afraid.

---

spoiler

---

You say I refuse to consider it because I don't understand the evidence. But that's just from your point of view, and it does no help to just tell me that I don't understand. The fact that I have found no evidence doesn't mean that I don't understand it, it just means that whether there is evidence or not, I...just haven't found any. You think there is evidence that I haven't found, and I think that the reason I haven't found any, is that there isn't any...there's no reason for me to believe there's any, until I know of any.

Well we're talking about that in our debate. Care to continue?

You say I don't understand. But I say that you have failed to demonstrate such evidence, and I have no reason to believe that there is any until I know of any.

Of course not. That is entirely rational. Well it would be more plausible if you didn't approach it from a position of not wanting to understand it.

---

Oh so JP is the authority on Christianity and apologetics now? Of course they are going to agree with you because they are all apolgists.Not Christians in the traditional sense!Like minds create like opinions.

God is shown to change many times in the bible whether you like to admit it or not.Too bad I don't have a copy of the standard revised fr0d0 version of scriptures.By the way when do you plan on publishing that?

LOL

JP is the authority on the words of JP I think. Of course I know you read things your way tho'

JP is not agreeing with me - he agrees that my statement is correct. There's a difference.

So.. as you're such a bible maven - care to show me where God changes definition in the bible?