Instant win in debate against christianity

[Lacus]

You've probably thought of this before, known of this before but haven't really much payed attention to it but i believe this is the best statement to bring up when you are arguing against christianity


If it is backed by evidence, it is logical.

If it is not backed up by evidence, it is illogical.

The bible is not backed up by evidence so therefore it illogical.

Christians believe in the bible, thus they believe that if it is not backed up by evidence, it is logical.

Christians are illogical.

When i mean evidence, i mean a group of evidence that consists of actual archeological proof and other considerably firm evidence. NOT just evidence which is few and extremely subtle when supporting something in the bible.

I believe this is the best.
You can constantly argue on small details in the bible and support it with verses on topics that prove the christian lord hates homosexuals or he is evil and invented sin, but yet it all comes back to this.

 

[Smoke]

Welcome to RF.

I don't know how many Christians you've known, but many of them believe the Bible itself is evidence. In fact, it's not just evidence, it's the best possible evidence.

In addition, many Christians believe that archaeology and history support the Bible.

Yeah, I know. It's crazy. But that's religion for you.

 

[Lacus]

Oh, thanks.

If bible=evidence that it exists, then myth,fairytales=evidence that it also exists
so i dont consider the bible to be evidence

Everyone around me is a mega christian actually.
And theres barely any evidence characters and events in the bible existed.

 

[JustWondering]

Everyone around me is a mega christian actually.

Sorry to hear that. Luckily I don't have that problem. In fact there are a few people I work with who are outspoken atheists. They are also from a younger generation. With television, cell phones and the inter-webs the youth of today are exposed to more ideas, concepts, and knowledge about the world then past generations. Which I believe makes it harder for them to mindlessly except the fantastical supernatural beliefs of their parents and grandparents. I predict a steady growth in the number of athiests and agnostics in the US.

 

[sandandfoam]

You're missing out on the apparent fact that to ourselves we all seem logical.

 

[Lacus]

Can you argue debate against my statement though?

 

[linwood]

You've probably thought of this before, known of this before but haven't really much payed attention to it but i believe this is the best statement to bring up when you are arguing against christianity


If it is backed by evidence, it is logical.

If it is not backed up by evidence, it is illogical.

The bible is not backed up by evidence so therefore it illogical.

Christians believe in the bible, thus they believe that if it is not backed up by evidence, it is logical.

Christians are illogical.

Actually no.
You should substitute the word "rational" for the word "logical" as technically a concept can be perfectly logical while at the same time being impossible.

 

[thedope]

The bible is not backed up by evidence so therefore it illogical.

The bible is a book. It does not process information.

 

[Lacus]

Actually no.
You should substitute the word "rational" for the word "logical" as technically a concept can be perfectly logical while at the same time being impossible.

I was actually thinking of using the words impossible or possible or other types of words to replace the world 'logical'. But doesnt 'rational' and 'logical' have the same meaning? I imply the word 'logical' here in this situation meaning that if it has evidence, it is completely understandable and make sense. If there is no evidence, it is the opposite.
Evidence implied in this situation=evidence that is accurate and firm

 

[Politesse]

If it is backed by evidence, it is logical.

Not necessarily.

If it is not backed up by evidence, it is illogical.

Again, not necessarily. Logic doesn't necessarily bear a direct relation to evidence, though it can help one determine what certain types of evidence might mean. Evidence itself can make a solution seem more likely, but it cannot make it "logical" or "illogical". Indeed, evidence does not speak to logic at all. A clever murderer who has left no evidence behind has still committed murder. The evidence proving geocentrism prior to Copernicus was immense, yet that theory was quite wrong. And it would have been entirely logically valid to believe either position on both those theoretical issues. Logical, but not necessarily correct, or likely.

So the rest of your proof is based on a flawed premise from the outset. You're using logical and illogical inappropriately as categories, and crediting the wrong factors for what makes a thing logically valid or invalid. Note that although you provided no evidence for any of your assumptions, the flawed premise is the reason your argument does not follow logically- the lack of evidence makes it less convincing, but not less logically valid or invalid.

And no, logic and rationality are by no means synonyms.

 

[Gloone]

If it is backed by evidence, it is logical.

If it is back by evidence then it would be factual. Logic is something totally different.
Example is: you have a math problem - 2(x) = 8
We don’t know if that is true or false. That is where logic comes in and you have to apply some type of understanding to the problem before you can provide evidence for that statement being valid.

The bible is not backed up by evidence so therefore it illogical.

If logic is understanding, then the bible is backed up by all of the evidence it needs to people that understand it. So no, it isn’t illogical.

When i mean evidence, i mean a group of evidence that consists of actual archeological proof and other considerably firm evidence.

Like someone else already said, to some the bible is all the proof that is needed unless people want to further understand it and feel there is an actual need to provide “evidence”. There are some scienctist that are so tolerant of their religion that they actually say science helps confirm their beliefs. You can open up the bible and look into the lives of people that once lived. Get some type of understanding of what life was like for them back then because it was actually “written down and documented.” One example I can think of is the Dead Sea Scrolls, some were written 500 years before the coming of Christ, stored away in caves and were recently found. They are scrolls containing some of the first few chapters / sections of the bible.

Wiki page on DSS: Dead Sea Scrolls - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Another page on DSS: Educational Site: Dead Sea Scrolls

 

[ChristineES]

I think illogical to keep having threads like this all the time. I think we got how you guys feel about us the first time.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Welcome to RF.

I don't know how many Christians you've known, but many of them believe the Bible itself is evidence. In fact, it's not just evidence, it's the best possible evidence.

Evidence of what?

In addition, many Christians believe that archaeology and history support the Bible.

Many do. Does it need to?

Yeah, I know. It's crazy. But that's religion for you.

That's your view of religion, at any rate.

 

[JustWondering]

If logic is understanding, then the bible is backed up by all of the evidence it needs to people that understand it. So no, it isn’t illogical.

The bible has everything: talking snakes, magic, hate speech, misdiagnosis of mental illness as demonic possesion, people being tortured in a lake of fire for daring not to blindly except the bibles claims through faith. How could anyone who adheres to such beliefs POSSIBLY be considered illogical, irrational, delusional, or just plain crazy by non-believers? Its inconcievable!

 

[Beaudreaux]

You've probably thought of this before, known of this before but haven't really much payed attention to it but i believe this is the best statement to bring up when you are arguing against christianity


If it is backed by evidence, it is logical.

If it is not backed up by evidence, it is illogical.

The bible is not backed up by evidence so therefore it illogical.

Christians believe in the bible, thus they believe that if it is not backed up by evidence, it is logical.

Christians are illogical.

When i mean evidence, i mean a group of evidence that consists of actual archeological proof and other considerably firm evidence. NOT just evidence which is few and extremely subtle when supporting something in the bible.

I believe this is the best.
You can constantly argue on small details in the bible and support it with verses on topics that prove the christian lord hates homosexuals or he is evil and invented sin, but yet it all comes back to this.

Evidence is not required for something to be logical. Deductive reasoning is based on premises that lead to a conclusion.

 

[Gloone]

The bible has everything: talking snakes, magic, hate speech, misdiagnosis of mental illness as demonic possesion, people being tortured in a lake of fire for daring not to blindly except the bibles claims through faith. How could anyone who adheres to such beliefs POSSIBLY be considered illogical, irrational, delusional, or just plain crazy by non-believers? Its inconcievable!

So my dog tells me when it is hungry and wants some food. The other one will let me know when it wants to go outside and play. Do you think dogs and other animals are not capable of communicating with us, human beings?

 

[JustWondering]

So my dog tells me when it is hungry and wants some food. The other one will let me know when it wants to go outside and play. Do you think dogs and other animals are not capable of communicating with us, human beings?

Have you ever held an intelligent conversation with a snake? Come on now.

 

[Gloone]

Have you ever held an intelligent conversation with a snake? Come on now.

Well are you trying to relate this to the bible or real life? I mean I can think of some cases, like where I seen this little rattle snake try to poke its chest out at my dog, and my dog just looked like, “what the hell is up with this thing”? So I had to break them up and take the little snake to a place where it didn’t think it owned my backyard.

The bible can have several different meanings for a talking serpent though. Why would you read the bible like it is nursery book anyway?

 

[JustWondering]

Well are you trying to relate this to the bible or real life? I mean I can think of some cases, like where I seen this little rattle snake try to poke its chest out at my dog, and my dog just looked like, “what the hell is up with this thing”? So I had to break them up and take the little snake to a place where it didn’t think it owned my backyard.

The bible can have several different meanings for a talking serpent though. Why would you read the bible like it is nursery book anyway?

If the bible does not relate to the real world it is nothing more than a twisted nursery book. Alternately, believing that the bible is an accurate account/describtion of the universe we live in is absurd, IMO.

 

[Gloone]

If the bible does not relate to the real world it is nothing more than a twisted nursery book. Alternately, believing that the bible is an accurate account/describtion of the universe we live in is absurd, IMO.

You think the bible is nothing more than a twisted nursery book and you live in a world full of reality that you can’t escape? What is it like to live in that world? Tell me more about it.