(February 26, 2015 at 9:15 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: That sounds like a fair summary. The reason I accept it is because his heuristic remains consistent, which is the opposite of cherry picking.
Since when does 'consistent' equal 'true'?
And yes, I agree, I was wrong in stating that it sounded like cherry picking.
Still doesn't answer why an infallible god waited so long to provide a fallible human to figure out how to understand the Bible? Seems the god should have included that in the Bible.
Sure would have prevented so many sects that disagree on literally every Christian doctrine, wars, torture, etc.
Maybe you believe in a god that is not quite infallible?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
