Jump to content

Rules Of Engagement


Geezer
 Share

Recommended Posts

IMO, If a non-believer willingly enters into a debate with a Christian, involving the interpretation of scripture, they have irreparably damaged their strongest defense.  By debating the meaning of scripture the non-believer has implicitly, all though probably unintentionally, acknowledged the Bible’s legitimacy.

 

The discussion shifts from is any of this stuff actually true or historically accurate to how the words should be understood, interpreted, and applied to a person’s life. That shift in emphasis grants legitimacy to the Bible’s assumed sacredness and that implied admission is a game changer.

 

Unless the bible is literally, historically, and factually accurate it possesses no legitimate standing as a sacred text. It may have some value as a collection of ancient wisdom saying, but that is a far cry from being accepted as some sort of divinely inspired instruction manual.

 

The burden of proof must be placed on the Christian to unambiguously establish the Bible’s sacred status, and that must be done before any discussion commences. The problem for the Christian is that sacredness is a faith issue and faith issues are impossible to authenticate.   

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a very good way of handling Christians. They will never get past the first hurdle. And it cuts

the conversation down to a more reasonable time. But discussions of the bible's multiple

inconsistencies also puts into question its alleged inspiration by god. As you know they are numerous.

 

I'm aware that the intellectually dishonest apologists play word games, false context issues and other literary devices to try to explain the inconsistencies. Nothing can stop them from trying to appear to give an explanation. To the intellectually honest the attempted reconciliations only make the

apologists' position worse because they are so strained. But to the gullible and the intellectually

dishonest, nothing will be enlightening.

 

But that being said, I think your approach is better and less complicated. They can say nothing to show that the Bible was the word of god. Their use of "fulfilled prophecies" is a joke. bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.