Conflicting statements in the bible

[The Reality Salesman01]

According to your own postulated standard that we can only believe that which we can experience, then yes. Do not blame me for the fact that you obviously cannot play the game by your own set of absurd rules. I find it amusing that falsifiability is one of your criteria for a valid belief and yet there’s apparently no way in your mind that abiogenesis could ever be falsified.

This is a misunderstanding we really need to correct if we are to continue. If you continue to respond with things like this, there's really no reason for me to continue arguing with you...

Look at Newtonian physics compared to Relativity. But, it's a heck of a lot more than anything offered by Christianity, and even the flimsiest of scientific theories are verifiable and falsifiable. That's the point of science!

Wait, so you are trying to use a source that you openly admit is fallible to try and prove a source is not infallible? How is that any different than trying to use the testimony of a person who openly admits to being a liar to try and prove that another person is also a liar? That’s not possible.

You seemed to miss my entire point. ALL scientific hypotheses are falsifiable. There is no point to persuing an understanding of an unfalsifiable claim which by nature, has nothing to understand as it cannot be tested. That's the difference between just chalking things you don't understand up to God, and theories that can be subjected to testing. Such as Relativity and Abiogenesis. They maintain their credibility THROUGH TESTING AND RESULTS. When something new is found that is MORE accruate, then that is accepted. Its the scientific method bro!

Me: How do you know your car was made?
You: Because Toyota made my car.
Me: How do you know Toyota made your car?
You: Because it has a sticker on it.
Me: Why does that sticker mean Toyota made your car?
You: Because Toyota said that’s what the sticker means.
Me: Why does it matter what Toyota says?
You: Because Toyota made my car.
Me. How do you know Toyota made your car?

Again, you continue to demonstrate a lack of understanding in the difference between a claim that can be verified, and one that cannot.

Because the Toyota Car Company exists, a product made by them, can be confirmed by them. It's not circular logic to have a verifiable object confirmed by its creator.

The converstation is more accurately this:

You: How do you know Toyota made your car?
Me:Because we can go to the factory and watch them create it and witness the creation personally.
You: Why does that mean Toyota made your car?
Me: Because by definition, if we are at the Toyota factory, and they are creating cars that they sell and own as property and products of Toyota, then the products they create, are in fact Toyotas.
You: Why does it matter what Toyota says?
Me: Because it's their company, and what we are ultimately trying to do is determine what products they are in fact responsible for creating...remember?
You: How do you know Toyota made your car?
Me: What exactly do you not understand?



The only way you could compare this accurately to God would be more like this...

Me: Who made us?
You: God.
Me: How do you know?
You: He's right there creating more people and universes just like he claimed, you can see him in action and verify the results yourself...
Me: Oh snap! You're right! That's amazing!

Unfortunately, this is not the case. That's what you need to understand and accept. There is a difference between an unfalsifiable claim, and a verifiable and therein, potentially falsifiable claim. This is why this conversation is so frustrating. You don't seem to recognize the differences in the two types of claims, even though its been clearly explained, and you continue to compare them as if they were equally credible.


I do enjoy these types of debates, but it would no be productive to continue if you are not at the least able to concede this difference.