Follow up Alright, All You Dashing, Swaggering Bush Pilots

(Corrie) wrote:

You're quite right, Bob. If a person is determined to disbelieve,
then no evidence can possibly change their mind. Their worldview
forces them to either discount or reinterpret every piece of evidence
shown to them. Likewise, it's not possible to convince the informed,
thoughtful believer that they are wrong, because they can answer the
skeptics from within their worldview. (The skeptics may not be
satisfied with the answers, but that's not the point.)

It is quite telling that your disbeliever "discounts or reinterprets
evidence" while your believer is "informed and thoughtful". In
reality, of course, a great many "informed and thoughtful"
disbelievers believe that believers "discount or reinterpret
evidence".

My studies convinced me that Christianity is
coherent, explanative, predicitve, internally consistent, externally
verifiable, and even - like any good scientific hypothesis -
falsifiable.

The faith-based beliefs of any religion, including Christianity, are
not verifiable by definition. Belief in the existence of God, gods,
heaven, or hell is faith-based.

David O -- http:.//www.AirplaneZone.com

The faith-based beliefs of any religion, including Christianity, are
not verifiable by definition. Belief in the existence of God, gods,
heaven, or hell is faith-based.

David O -- http:.//www.AirplaneZone.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The odds of winning an argument against a
theistic zealot... or an atheist are about equal.

How about a controversial binary file instead to fill
the bandwidth wasted on such unwinnable matters?


Barnyard BOb --

Barnyard BOb -- wrote in message . ..

The odds of winning an argument against a theistic zealot... or an atheist are about equal.

I've never thought of myself as a zealot. The flycorvair guy, now
HE'S a zealot. (Have to try to keep homebuilding involved in the
thread somehow, right?) Someone has said, arguing on the Internet is
like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win....you're still
retarded. That's as may be. I've never claimed to be the smartest
guy on this spinning rock. But as a Christian, it's my duty to "be
prepared to give an answer to anyone who asks the reason for the hope"
that I have. (1 Peter 3:15) And somewhere up this thread, someone DID
ask.

How about a controversial binary file instead to fill
the bandwidth wasted on such unwinnable matters?

Because then we'd be booted to a different server, silly! You can
talk all kinds of OT trash, but don't post pics!


Corrie
There are 10 kinds of people in the world - those that understand
binary, and those who don't.

Corrie wrote:

Someone has said, arguing on the Internet is
like running in the Special Olympics.
Even if you win....you're still retarded.

Your living proof of that.

But as a Christian, it's my duty to "be prepared to give an answer
to anyone who asks the reason for the hope" that I have.
(1 Peter 3:15) And somewhere up this thread, someone DID
ask.

And you have been ramming YOUR VERSION OF GODLINESS
down our collective throats ever since.

Barnyard BOb -- wrote:

How about a controversial binary file instead to fill
the bandwidth wasted on such unwinnable matters?


Barnyard BOb --

Advice from you about bandwidth wasted on unwinnable matters? Now
that is funny.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com