A Question to the Theists Here

[Violet]

How can any of you theists say you believe in a god but only certain parts of the Holy Book of your chosen religion?

With perfect English?

I don't understand your question...

You either accept it all or use logic and reason and reject it all?

That would be a logical dichotomy... why can there be no middle ground?

If one account is questioned or seems more along the lines of an LSD trip (such as the burning bush), then how you can you logically believe any of it is true?

Some theists believe the burning brush is true, but for the sake of argument: If I disagree with one thing, why must I disagree with the lot of them? Say we have a political party that believes A, B, M, N, and D. Say I agree with A, B, M, and N... but I am vehemently against D. Does my opposition to D preclude my capacity to agree with A, B, M, and N? In the same way one might dissect the Bible (or other religious texts).

You either accept the entire Holy Book for what it is or you reject it.

Unsupported logical dichotomy much...?

You can not pick and choose what you want to follow and still call yourself a member of whatever religion you follow.

Yes you can Religions, as with political parties, social groups, teams, and really any classification can all disagree over trivialities and still be party to a foundation In example... we have the vegetarians, among them is Hitler. While most of the vegetarians are likely to disagree in a large number of circumstances with Hitler: they all remain vegetarians

If you believe I am wrong in that assumption, please visit the nearest devout priest, rabbi, what have you for you will surely be told you will burn in hell if you don't repent for your sins.

I do believe you are wrong in that assumption, for reasons directed above. I would rather prefer to not visit my nearest priests, rabbis, and what have me... I rather expect they would attempt an exorcism upon sighting me

Many people say they believe in religion based on logic.

It can be. : )

By logic I mean they choose to believe merely because of the massive numbers of followers of a religion.

Indeed, argument ad populum.

That is not logic.

Is so. It is fallacious logic : )

If that is the only logic chosen then I suggest you give Pastafarianism a try.

I am a devout eater of spaghetti : ) Other pastas just don't come close...

We include irrefutable proof the almighty FSM (may pasta be on his plate) exists and controls all.

I agree that the FSM exists. I do not agree that the FSM controls all

We even have scientific evidence to support it.

O Rily? Uhuh... right...

Millions, if not thousands, are being converted every year to praise His name and do all that He wishes of us.

So your conversions are reducing in quantity every year, and you are using this as a selling point...?

I honestly doubt your claim that even a single person is a pastafarian (honestly believes there is an FSM).

If any of you wish to pick apart what I have said, and some surely will, then please respond for I like a good challenge and what is religion but the ultimate challenge for a logical mind.

There ya go, Stan

RAmen

You have insulted the IPU for the very last time!