(December 27, 2009 at 2:35 am)TruthWorthy Wrote:Quote:fr0d0 Wrote:Occasionally we all make mistakes and sometimes they're bad ones. Occasionally they can be covered up with additional reasoning in order to excuse the mishap.
'it's complex and takes background info'
In light of this, I'd like to ask fr0d0:
Is this 'background info' the same additional reasoning used to make sense of how and why things happened?
Or is it privaleged info, available only to religious congregations?
Id like to know where this background info comes from, and what validity it holds (besides effectively bridging gaps across nonsense). If you hate this "jesus christ" fellow, don't reply!
Don't expect a real answer to that question - The dodge is fr0d0's speciality.
I've asked him time and time again for his methodology for determining what claims in the bible he chooses to believe literally, such as the resurrection, and which he considers allegory so i can take his methodology and see if it works not only on the bible but for any religious text or even supernatural claim yet he never delivers - and it's because he has no such methodology - He cherry picks what he wants to believe based on his own authority, and when you start to do that, to use your own instincts or conformational bias to judge 'the inspired word of god', then what use is any of it?
.
