Testing The Christian Apologists

What has one got to do with the other? YOU are the one who claims to believe in Jesus, yet YOU are the one who rejects what He supposedly said. Of course I "dare" to point that out. Whatever I believe is totally irrelevant to the inconsistency of what YOU claim to believe. Authority has nothing to do with it. As I said, I have no evidence at all that He existed and neither do you. How is that "insufficient"? I don't use atheist authors for my arguments. You know that.(And that's a pretty childish attempt at an insult, by the way.) Bring your "debunking" here. No they don't.

That has nothing to do with anything in the post you're replying to. i specifically said, "I don't use atheist authors for my arguments."

The thing is, there was no reason to insult atheists at large in the first place. It was childish.

He clearly intended to insult atheists. That's a logical fallacy right there. Even if all atheists are pansies, that doesn't strengthen his argument.

What has that got to do with anything? I'm trying to get you to address the issues, not the personalities. I have no idea who that is. See above.

I also don't care who it is. I wish you'd just address what I post.

You really haven't presented anything so far. I have clarified. I want to see the argument for something like the snake lying and I want to see the justification for contradicting what the Bible says. In this context, that will do. An "evidenced fact" would be a Biblical reason for contradicting the Bible.

So bring us the argument that they use. Bring us the scriptures that explain the doctrine. Yes, you've made it clear that you don't care about the truth. That's exactly what I'm doing. And you haven't put up any defense. You sure do, if you want to be taken seriously here. You're reinforcing that claim by not putting up any counter-argument. An appeal to popularity is worthless. (And I'll remind you again that the appeal to popularity fails anyway: Christianity is a minority religion.) No.It's time for you to make a substantive response to it.Stop claiming matter-of-factly that the snake lied. Stop saying that it's "stupid" to claim the snake told the truth. Say something intelligent about it instead.

Romans 5:12. That's Paul's opinion, not enough to overturn Genesis. Not "in the day that thou eatest thereof" as God said in Genesis 2:17.

Or he was wrong. Chapter and verse? Clearly not - unless you corrupt the word "day" like you corrupt the word "die".

I'm trying to teach you not to swallow everything you were taught without thinking about it. So CHALLENGE it. Give us something substantive instead of just parroting.

Of course. The Bible (the canon that we're used to, anyway) is 66 books. Of course they're not 100% consistent, any more than Treasure island and Gone With the Wind and The Catcher in the Rye are 100% consistent with each other. Exactly. Any yahoo can point out where the apologists are clearly lying. Belief is entirely irrelevant. On every one of your watches.

They really don't though. You don't have to go pat Genesis 1 and 2 to find major disagreements.

It is.In fact, even if it wasn't there would be no way to tell that it wasn't. You can't use the book to back up the book. If there is a Satan, he's the pied piper of Christians.

quote:

---

Matthew 24:23-24 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

---

It's the "elect" (or those who think they are) who will be deceived, not the ones who don't believe in Christ at all. See above. The arrogance doesn't suit you.

You don't need to walk away. You need to think.