In reply to your post on another thread:
All you are doing is reiterating the Establishment position, which is not in doubt, but is exactly what I'm saying makes debate here a ridiculous sham. Take any next comment you have to the other thread Ben started, I forget what it's called.
If you consider debate here to be a "sham," then I suggest you go someplace else, where everyone accepts the Bible to be literally true regardless of any evidencce.
Of course, debating
there would be pointless for anyone interested in evidence.
Honeslty, Faith, if you don't like the requiremnt of evidence, if you don't like the basic philosophy of science in which
everything is falsifiable by observed evidence, you should just leave. You've debated here for a long time, and many of the debates have even been interesting (when you didn't hit the "teh Bible is teh word of GOD! I WIN!" button and leave the discussion in a huff). But if you are unwilling to
debate in good faith as per the rules (by allowing an opposing argument to even
exist, of all things) then I humble submit that this is not the place for you.
Faith, you're a very well-read individual with excellent writing skills. I have enjoyed many of your posts (even though I very rarely agreed with you). But every debate requires that
both sides be prepared to admit defeat if proven wrong, even if neither debator
believes they are wrong. Your insistance that non-literallists take the Biblie's infallibility as a given is like telling us to admit that black is white, or us telling you to admit that there is no God. It creates a sensation not unlike banging one's head against a brick wall repeatedly. If we cannot all proceed from a mutually falsifiable position, we are doomed to perpetual frustration, and nobody wants that.
Would it be so hard to say "I conceed because I cannot refute your points at this time, but this in no way alters my personal position. I believe the Bible trumps all, but I cannot provide outside evidence at this time to refute your position. Should I uncover further evidence in my favor in the future, I will return to the debate." ?
Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.