The Bible is the claim, not the evidence

[Duck]

Yes, you are appealing to your senses in order to try and justify your belief that your senses are reliable. That is no different than a Christian using the Bible to justify his belief that the Bible is what it claims to be.

It is totally different. You cannot equate a book and your eyesight. They are not analogous in the slightest. And you can use your other senses to verify what your eyes are telling you. That would leave the only possible fault at your brain. The two are different.

And I operate under the assumption that scripture is the infallible word of God. Fair is fair.

No, again this is a false equality. You can easily operate without the assumption that God exists, as many billions of people do now, and have done in the past. You can certainly operate without believing the content of the bible, and well over half the world's population do so as we speak. You cannot do anything if your senses do not report reality. I go back to my previous; you will fall down stairs all the time and walk into things. Humans would never have got here without reliable senses. How would we find food? How do animals find food? Because our senses are reliable. There is a mountain, absolute mountain, of evidence that our senses are reliable and among them is the fact we are here and find food and water every day. How else do we find food other than through our senses?!?

We’re talking about your senses. If your senses were unreliable there would be no way to know that you were here, walking, and driving your car so that is still begging the question. This is no different than a Christian using the Old Testament to support the New Testament or the writings of Paul to support the writings of Peter.

Again, this is a false equality (and the first bit is complete shit). I think therefore I am, so I know I am here by virtue of the fact that I am thinking. If you are unwilling to grant the assumption that we exist, then neither does the bible (which you are relying on your senses to detect I might add) and it therefore cannot be the word of anyone or thing.

How do you know you read the textbook? Do you remember doing so? How do you know you took a test? Do you remember doing so? How do you know how many questions you got correct? Do you remember the number? Again, you are appealing to the reliability of your memory to justify your belief that your memory is reliable. It’s no different than saying that the Bible is the word of God because the Bible says it is the word of God.

I know because I think about it. You are being totally absurd here. How do you know that you exist? I am NOT relying on memory. I am relying on a recording, namely what I write down. People with short-term memory loss write everthing down. A list on a bit of paper isn't memory. Again, false equality.

You’re trying to give a logical argument as to why you use logic? Circularity again. We accept the Bible’s axioms.

No, and I'm getting tired of writing the words false equality. The axioms underlying logic are TOTALLY DIFFERENT to the bible. They contain principles, not claims. Such as the principle of non-contradiction. Perhaps you should do some reading, maybe try and understand the subject (sorry, this is not covered in the Bible.)

How do you know that you have not done any of these things? Circularity again.

NO YOU MORON. I am still alive, ipso facto I have not died in a car crash. I am getting really tired of this now.

I appear to reliably interact with my surrounding and perceiving them accurately would seem to be a necessary condition.

How do you know that you accurately interact with your surroundings? You perceive that you do? Circularity again.

Sure they are! You did not provide any actual evidence for believing any of the things above are true. Yet you believe that they are all true.

I have provided evidence, it just doesn't fit with your view of the world so you ignored it.

As is using your senses to justify the reliability of your senses, using your memory to justify the reliability of your memory, making logical arguments to justify your use of logic, appealing to your perception of reality in order to justify the reliability of your ability to perceive reality. Why is it okay for you to use circular reasoning but not for the Christian to?

OK, one more time. Using touch to verify your vision is not circular. Using a written list to verify memory is not circular. These things are in no way analogous to believing a book of crazy shit.

Sure it is, everyone assumes the Bible is the word of God in one way or another.

WHAT???? I don't and HOW THE HELL COULD YOU KNOW IF THIS WAS TRUE???? This is a wild claim even by your standards.

No, when I used the term fair I meant in a rational sense. If you are allowing yourself to engage in something (i.e. circular reasoning) that you do not allow the other side to engage in then you are committing the fallacy of special pleading. I was operating under the assumption that you valued rationality.

I have demonstrated that I am not using circular reasoning. You are displaying a lack of logic, reasonableness and factual basis.

Sure it does, it is the ultimate authority of all people.

Authority of all people? What does that even mean?

You have yet to provide any. [reason to believe in our senses]

I have, you have just ignored it (and ignored the fact that your arguments about the bible RELY TOTALLY UPON THE SENSES)

Sure there is, reality only makes sense if we do so. (question:There is no justification to attach authority to scripture.)

No, scripture makes no sense in the reality we live in.

It is just a sanctimonious pile of self serving BS that has caused pain, misery, suffering and death for 2000 years.

Now who is whining?

Not whining, just disappointed that morons like you continue to have the ability to shape the future of humanity, even in a little way. How many more gay men (or other such 'abominations' according to you) will suffer, how many people will die because of your barbarism?