Questions for theists

[Neo-Scholastic]

Why are you not listing your questions on a Christian forum?

Most christian forums will black ball and try to ban when a non christian starts asking questions that are uncomfortable.

That's very insightful of you. I think you are right. I do think it is a matter of picking the right forum. The UCC has a pretty lenient policy and good discussions. But you must use your real name and own your opinions.

[Mister Agenda]

Questions for theists:

Why is your bible correct?

Loaded strawman.

Sigh. A strawman is a misrepresentation of someone's position. If you don't think the Bible is correct, or only partly correct, you can just say so. There's nothing in the question that constrains your response, so it's not loaded. Watch this hypothetical answer:

"I don't think the Bible IS entirely correct! I think much of it is made-up or mistranslated and hardly any of it is inspired by God. When I read it though, I detect an undercurrent of the divine that convinces me that at least some of it wisdom beyond conventional human understanding, and I can't say it's from God but it's valuable and I cherish it. "

The OP could be improved, but none of your criticisms of it are valid. You're not stupid, you can do better.

---

Why are you not listing your questions on a Christian forum?

Why bother? Christians come to us.

[The Reality Salesman01]

That little debate lesson was free too!

[Lion IRC]

Questions for theists:

Why is your bible correct?

Why is the truth true? Why does 2+2=4?
I don't understand your question. (Hint - epistemology)


Statements of fact in the bible are there for all to see.
If something in the bible is merely an opinion and can be disproven, then the counter-factuals can be presented.

...Why would a benevolent god allow suffering?

A benevolent God punishes those who cause suffering. According to atheism/atheology, there is no afterlife consequence, no eschatology, no happily ever after, no Book of Apocalypse in which the cause of suffering is dealt with.

[ChildOfReason]

Questions for theists:

Why is your bible correct?

Why is the truth true? Why does 2+2=4?
I don't understand your question. (Hint - epistemology)


Statements of fact in the bible are there for all to see.
If something in the bible is merely an opinion and can be disproven, then the counter-factuals can be presented.

...Why would a benevolent god allow suffering?

A benevolent God punishes those who cause suffering. According to atheism/atheology, there is no afterlife consequence, no eschatology, no happily ever after, no Book of Apocalypse in which the cause of suffering is dealt with.

In what way is the bible truth?
Also, it is perfectly possible to be atheist and not cause suffering.

[Lion IRC]

Why is the truth true? Why does 2+2=4?
I don't understand your question. (Hint - epistemology)


Statements of fact in the bible are there for all to see.
If something in the bible is merely an opinion and can be disproven, then the counter-factuals can be presented.


A benevolent God punishes those who cause suffering. According to atheism/atheology, there is no afterlife consequence, no eschatology, no happily ever after, no Book of Apocalypse in which the cause of suffering is dealt with.

In what way is the bible truth?
Also, it is perfectly possible to be atheist and not cause suffering.

True or False?
An atheist parent who deliberately brings a child into a world where suffering is a fact - it is necessary for Darwinian survival - is directly responsible for the suffering of that child who, if they were not born, would not suffer.

[Optimistic Mysanthrope]

True or False?
An atheist parent who deliberately brings a child into a world where suffering is a fact - it is necessary for Darwinian survival - is directly responsible for the suffering of that child who, if they were not born, would not suffer.

I'd say it's true. I think that in a vast majority of cases, procreation is selfish act.

[Esquilax]

True or False?
An atheist parent who deliberately brings a child into a world where suffering is a fact - it is necessary for Darwinian survival - is directly responsible for the suffering of that child who, if they were not born, would not suffer.

Real quick: explain "Darwinian survival."

[The Reality Salesman01]

Statements of fact in the bible are there for all to see.
If something in the bible is merely an opinion and can be disproven, then the counter-factuals can be presented.

Hmm...I guess the stereotype about theists not understanding logic is right after all. It appears you know something that has gone way over my head. Please teach me.

Give an example of a "counter factual" that is presented to refute an opinion.

I'll give you a sample to take aim at.

"Chocolate tastes better than vanilla."

Don't worry...I'll wait.

[Lion IRC]

Statements of fact in the bible are there for all to see.
If something in the bible is merely an opinion and can be disproven, then the counter-factuals can be presented.

Hmm...I guess the stereotype about theists not understanding logic is right after all. It appears you know something that has gone way over my head. Please teach me.

Give an example of a "counter factual" that is presented to refute an opinion.

I'll give you a sample to take aim at.

"Chocolate tastes better than vanilla."

Don't worry...I'll wait.

Sales statistics and market research shows that XXX number of customers prefer the flavour of X better than Y.

---

True or False?
An atheist parent who deliberately brings a child into a world where suffering is a fact - it is necessary for Darwinian survival - is directly responsible for the suffering of that child who, if they were not born, would not suffer.

Real quick: explain "Darwinian survival."

Avoiding extinction.
Doing what is competitively necessary to ensure your (selfish) DNA gets passed on.