Why is that Rhythm? It doesn't matter whether you have reviewed other positions to see if there are others who may be able to rebut your arguments? Why is that not significant?
In the atheist world, you can call yourself a free thinker because you repeat what some coffee table view of religion says. I think that is incredibly ironic, and even more ironic that you can't catch the error.
The reason is plain as day, none of you are serious thinkers, you are all under 25 and you havn't read more than maybe 5 books about the subject you are talking about, none of them serious scholarly books.
You aren't taking the time to seriously investigate the nature of your objections to Christianity, you are just repeating objections that other people have come up with.
If you weren't lazy people with no character and a lack of an honest spirit, you would read the strongest and most potent defenses of Christianity, you would study online who the authors are (such as NT Wright, Bruce Metzger, Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig or more at a popular level Lee Strobel, FF Bruce wrote a popular level book, CS Lewis again at the popular level).
But I bet you will respond back with a crude, naked assertion about how religion is a "delusion", instead of explain why if you are a thinker committed to logic, you should not use logic in everything that you do, not only where it helps you disprove religion but in assessing the validity of the claims defending the Christian religion.
In the atheist world, you can call yourself a free thinker because you repeat what some coffee table view of religion says. I think that is incredibly ironic, and even more ironic that you can't catch the error.
The reason is plain as day, none of you are serious thinkers, you are all under 25 and you havn't read more than maybe 5 books about the subject you are talking about, none of them serious scholarly books.
You aren't taking the time to seriously investigate the nature of your objections to Christianity, you are just repeating objections that other people have come up with.
If you weren't lazy people with no character and a lack of an honest spirit, you would read the strongest and most potent defenses of Christianity, you would study online who the authors are (such as NT Wright, Bruce Metzger, Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig or more at a popular level Lee Strobel, FF Bruce wrote a popular level book, CS Lewis again at the popular level).
But I bet you will respond back with a crude, naked assertion about how religion is a "delusion", instead of explain why if you are a thinker committed to logic, you should not use logic in everything that you do, not only where it helps you disprove religion but in assessing the validity of the claims defending the Christian religion.
