RE: Stump the Christian?
June 11, 2015 at 3:31 pm
(This post was last modified: June 11, 2015 at 3:33 pm by SteveII.)
(June 11, 2015 at 3:02 pm)SteveII Wrote:(June 11, 2015 at 2:56 pm)abaris Wrote: Convenient, isn't it. While I agree that you can't prove a negative, it's totally up to faith to believe in that one particular god and not in all the other ones being invented over time.
Also, while moving the goal posts once more, you said something about history. I'm still waiting for your historical evidence. And no, bible proves bible doesn't do.
How about 27 books/letters and other historical references describing actual events (see, no Bible proves Bible).
You can stomp your feet all you want demanding proof. If I (and 2.2 billion others) want to believe the 1900+ year old content of the NT, I don't see why we are being unreasonable. I think for the belief to be unreasonable, you would have to prove that it is not what it claims to be. Are you denying that the first century Christians did not believe the way they said they did (and history shows the results)? I think the burden of proof does shift when there is no good reason not to believe the testimony of so many people.
Of course you will go to the miracles do not happen. You have to prove that they can't possibility have happened so you would have to prove that God does not exists--which you cannot, so...where is the unreasonableness (flaw in logic)?
