Phat writes:
I was just arguing about why you are not a believer. Based on your own criteria, there is no way that you would ever believe without evidence.
What mystifies me is why you claim to be a believeer. About all that you believe in is the club rules and guidelines. You have no God in which to believe. Unless I can get you to admit that you believe without evidence.
Think Phat; really try it. You might like it.
Haven't I and a whole herd of folk repeatedly said that belief is ALWAYS without evidence.
But what you are replying to is in fact evidence and evidence must ALWAYS trump belief.
I was replying to your direct assertion of why I say what I say and I pointed out that you were simply misrepresenting once again my position.
Phat writes:
jars Socratic teachers and critical thinkers convinced him that religion was relative to culture and that there is no essential absolute.
What began this exchange was your silly assertion about
why I hold the positions I express. And it is because there actually is evidence to support those positions; no belief is needed or necessary or relevant.
quote:
The evidence, all of the evidence convinced me that religion was relative to culture and that there is no essential absolute.
Arian Christianity was different than Roman Christianity.
Christianity is different than Judaism.
Judaism is different than Islam.
Shall I go on yet again?
Taoism is different than Confucianism.
Buddhism is different than Hinduism.
Greek Theology is different than Roman Theology or Celtic Theology or Norse Theology.
... {the one line you cherry picked} ...
It is evidence, evidence available to everyone of any faith that convinced me and no one of any faith has ever presented evidence or reasoned argument to refute my position.
Those are ALL facts Phat. Facts that support the conclusion that ALL religion is relative to culture and that there is no essential absolute.
Yes I am a believer. Yes there is NO evidence to support my beliefs. Yes, what I believe is unreasonable, unsupportable and illogical.
But you keep making statements as demonstrated in this exchange where you demonstrate that you cannot address anything that anyone posts. All you can do is spout dogma.
No one doubts that you believe what you believe but as in this exchange, when you are confronted with the evidence that does refute your stated position ether throw you position away or present evidence or reasoned arguments to support your position.
Edited by jar, : add the assertion from Phat that started this exchange.
Edited by jar, : fixed grammur