| If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can’t be taken on its own merits. |
|
|
|
Asked 44 days ago
by plawler  United States |
|
About
According to BlackOrchid, I am never wrong!
|
9 Points
|
The most powerful nation on earth has millions of literate, educated citizens who actually believe a talking snake tempted a woman to eat a magic apple that caused her to be ashamed of her genitals? What chance do we have of talking sense to these people?
Well... not precisely. I think most literate educated citizens take many of the Bible stories as figurative and metaphorical, not literal. Jondough and his ilk are exception to the Christian "norm."
I don't think they are. Statistics vary, but a very large percentage of the US population actually disbelieve in the theory of evolution.
What's it supposed to be a metaphor for, anyway? Don't let your "snake" make your decisions for you, you'll be embarrassed in the morning? I guess there's some wisdom in that, but hardly worth basing a religion on...
That's not what the religion is "based" on. Many religions have creation myths. That doesn't make them the basis of the religion.
That's China for you...
I freely admit that the basis of my faith wouldn't stand up in court, or in front of a scientific panel.
But then again, you won't find me trying to convert you to my beliefs, either, at least not at the level many of you complain about.
I assume that you are not a Christian (or a Muslim) then. Because both Christians and Muslims are commanded to convert others to their beliefs.
The ONLY way that statement can be true is that you believe that nothing we can't observe and measure has value.
Love and music can't be taken on their own merits? I don't think so.
Love and music are not assertions. Nobody said things we cannot observe have no value.
Geez, JW. I feel like a lit match in a straw man factory. ;o)
I feel like a fire extinguisher!
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
So, you do or don't agree that love or music is valuable. My point was that I could assert that music is valuable, but can not prove it. I can assert that love is valuable, but can not prove it. I do assert that religion is valuable, but can not prove it. I don't see anyone demanding evidence of the value of music or love, just religion. It shows more about your bias against religion than your use of knowledge or facts.
This is a straw man. I never asserted that religion, love or music had no value. YOU are the one who insisted that my statement could only be true if I believed that. That is patently false.
Assertions of fact have nothing to do with the value of love, music or religion.