What is the single strongest reason that supports your belief in Christianity?
How could we determine if that reason is reliable or unreliable?
Note: Discovering you have an unreliable reason would NOT mean your belief is false; only that you require a more reliable reason to justify a high degree of confidence in the validity of the belief.
What is your strongest reason for believing in Christianity?
Moderator: Moderators
-
bluegreenearth
- Guru
- Posts: 1917
- Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:06 pm
- Location: Manassas, VA
- Has thanked: 681 times
- Been thanked: 470 times
-
bluegreenearth
- Guru
- Posts: 1917
- Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:06 pm
- Location: Manassas, VA
- Has thanked: 681 times
- Been thanked: 470 times
Post #151
For everyone else who has been monitoring my exchange with Realworldjack,
I am providing you all with this brief exposition in order that my next public correspondence with Realworldjack not be perceived as self-contradictory. Most of you probably read my last response to Realworldjack in this thread where I expressed my concerns regarding his difficult behavior and my intent to discontinue further dialogue with him as a result. I had previously given Realworldjack multiple opportunities to appropriately respond to my posts with relevant counterpoints, but all he kept giving me was the impression that he wasn't interested in properly understanding or representing my perspective. To his credit, I subsequently received a cordial email from Realworldjack where he offered me an explanation for his attitude and expressed his appreciation for our conversations. I am conditionally accepting the "olive branch" he is offering with the understanding that he will try to first steel-man my perspective or at least ask for clarification before constructively criticizing any point I've attempted to convey.
Thank you.
I am providing you all with this brief exposition in order that my next public correspondence with Realworldjack not be perceived as self-contradictory. Most of you probably read my last response to Realworldjack in this thread where I expressed my concerns regarding his difficult behavior and my intent to discontinue further dialogue with him as a result. I had previously given Realworldjack multiple opportunities to appropriately respond to my posts with relevant counterpoints, but all he kept giving me was the impression that he wasn't interested in properly understanding or representing my perspective. To his credit, I subsequently received a cordial email from Realworldjack where he offered me an explanation for his attitude and expressed his appreciation for our conversations. I am conditionally accepting the "olive branch" he is offering with the understanding that he will try to first steel-man my perspective or at least ask for clarification before constructively criticizing any point I've attempted to convey.
Thank you.
Post #152
[Replying to post 148 by Realworldjack]
You would be correct in thinking that your belief in the bible is not a problem for me. You can believe in little green men for all it matters to me.
You say you hope there is no one who will say there is one reason for either their belief or unbelief, well reading the bible certainly is all the reason I need to reject what it says. It's like, make sure you read the terms and conditions before you tick the "I agree " box. In fact, I wouldn't even have to get very far into the OT before I realized that I would not be ticking any "I agree" box.
You may not think that is a very sophisticated argument, but I am an uncomplicated kind of person who during my 73 years has learned that if something looks like a load of bull, sounds like a load of bull, then in all probability, a load of bull is what it is. It works for me!
You would be correct in thinking that your belief in the bible is not a problem for me. You can believe in little green men for all it matters to me.
You say you hope there is no one who will say there is one reason for either their belief or unbelief, well reading the bible certainly is all the reason I need to reject what it says. It's like, make sure you read the terms and conditions before you tick the "I agree " box. In fact, I wouldn't even have to get very far into the OT before I realized that I would not be ticking any "I agree" box.
You may not think that is a very sophisticated argument, but I am an uncomplicated kind of person who during my 73 years has learned that if something looks like a load of bull, sounds like a load of bull, then in all probability, a load of bull is what it is. It works for me!
