RexRed wrote:How do I know they are right? Because I can come into many debates and not have an internal issue because I am right.
The logic here is not sound. You are right because you do not have an internal issue? What about the Nazis? They too did not have any internal issues, though they were clearly wrong.
You speak to any racist, homophobe or bigot of any creed or colour. They will insist they are right, because they can come to the debate with no internal issues. Are they?
If you do not have an internal issue, proves nothing except that you have not or choose not to see any internal issues. Right or wrong doesn't factor in to it.
Quote:When I base my assumptions on foundational scripture I always end up on top.
On top of what?
When you base your assumptions on foundational scripture, you always end up with assumptions based on foundational scripture. But have you tried to find out whether the foundational scripture itself, particularly the bits you use to prop up your pseudo-scientific beliefs, is actually true?
Are you sure it doesn't prop up your beliefs just because you twist it to mean something it didn't intially mean?
Quote:Standing on solid ground.
Standing on solid ground does not make you right.
Quote:Now if people could reason me into a corner then I would concede but the indication that people have to resort to cheap shots and insult my intelligence only shows they cannot touch the doctrine. If they could I would be the first to admit it.
However, there is a problem. What if you refuse to believe you are in a corner? You have done so many times, not because you weren't in a corner, but because you genuinely did not see it.
We state that your view is unsupportable. Science cannot support it.
You then weasel your way out of that corner by invoking things that have not been proved to exist, things that may not exist and then state that science cannot prove it because it cannot measure everything.
It is true. Science cannot measure everything.
If I make something up and instantly define it in such a way that science cannot measure it, then I have made something that is otu of the realms of science. I can claim it is true and can never be proved wrong. That is disingenious.
Invoking something that cannot be proved wrong because it is defined as something that cannot be falsifiable is a disingenious argument.
I can make up all sorts of imaginary arguments to prop up any idea I come up with. You cannot argue against it, because there is no way to do so.
Yes, you can argue that you did not make up the idea of spirits and souls. That does not change the fact that they are potentially made up and are disingenious.
Quote:I do not understand the basic theoretical materials because I did not use observation of the physical world to learn this. I learned this from the Bible which claims this knowledge was given by "revelation" and not derived from the five senses.
So this information CANNOT be derived from scientific observation of "the universe". It was God who revealed what science could not KNOW.
So, basically, you are saying you are right, because you read it in a book that said it was correct?
Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code says the Priory of Sion existed and was founded in the Middle Ages. The book says it's true. Is it?
You may argue that this is comparing apples to oranges, but how is it? Both are texts, written by fallible human beings. Both claim to be correct. It is impossible to prove that any God was behind either text. Comparing the two is not apples and oranges. It is comparing two texts that both claim to be correct. It is like comparing a Cox apple to a Braeburn.
The Bible is true because it says it is? It says its revelations do not come from the five senses, because it says so? Well, how can you prove the Bible is telling the truth?
Because of my reaction? My reaction cannot prove anything about the Bible. It merely proves that I have a certain disposition towards it, not that the Bible itself is correct.
You see, science itself is not limited to the five senses either.
You cannot touch an electron, you cannot see an electron or taste it or hear it or smell it. Yet science has proved beyond a doubt that such a thing exists.
Yes, it is physical. But what in this world is not physical?
Even thoughts are physical. They are electrical impulses, chemicals and electrons travelling down neurones in the brain. Even vague concepts are in a way physical, because they are held in the mind or written down on pages.
Your argument is a disingenious one.
