Do you feel a valid point has ever been made to you that you feel you do not have an answer to? by listing and discussing such subjects together those with a better answer can help arm those sat on the fence or helping those sat on the fence. Please research out new blog via You Tube : Revelation Be Damned www.revelationbedamned@outlook.com Try https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9PYtNQdKe8&t=12s or on a lighter notehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqTjk_j3CzM&t=90s just started up so any support or even discourse would be much appreciated its time to converse openly and evict the elephant in the room. Together was can round up each argument made by a capricious and dangerous work of fiction and make easy work of putting them to rest.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Dun know we had ads.
I can't be bothered with the campaign against theism at large. I hold to my persuasion and when the mood and material are aligned I give to it what any self respecting atheist has to give. Beyond that, I'm a sleeper.
Regarding the question itself, no, there's no valid argument for biblical truth in the presence of the archeological record dismissing its claims out of hand. The argument isn't about that, though. It's about accepting the historicity of man as the only truth and that lies outside, and fully in contention with the biblical claim. Accepting man's historicity, from the theist perspective, must include the bible and the part of the psyche that holds it to be the truth. To accept the biblical claim as truth man's historicity must be rejected, wholesale, and deflected as the theist psyche's devil's work. Therein lies the argument. Which one can be accepted as man's true path?
I have no energy to promote the secular reality to a populace anticipating immortality from exposure to centuries of indoctrination. You cannot penetrate that defense in the span of several generations, much less one.
The tools of a scientific debunking only serve to entrench belief systems ever-more-strongly into the cores of people's psyches. They take on a fearful defense against their fellow man as the enemy of their souls and therefore of the god they hold to be real. They have no outwardly definable, no logical defense against that so they introvert and remain stoically guarded. Drive past the houses of worship on holy days and you will see their numbers. They might appear to be dwindling but I'm guessing many people no longer make an overt display of their theism and remain home for fear of being ridiculed for their beliefs.
Anecdotal - This very phenomena transpired recently in the latest US presidential election where conservatives, deflecting public ridicule for their opinions, told the pollsters what the opposition wanted to hear. The polls, in turn, reflected overwhelming support of the candidate who ultimately lost. She still held the popular vote but nowhere near the representation the pre-election polls gave her. The polls became suspect and have since been tagged as unreliable at best and fake news at worst. Factors leading to that judgement now include the ridicule factor one group accosts the other with, meaning, the polls can be tainted and rendered unreliable by certain human factors extant at the time, place and through the method they are taken. In the religious context, an outwardly appearing diminishing of open theism is not necessarily what it seems.
Point of the foregoing? You might as well be knocking your heads against a wall of your own choosing.
If you have a topic to discuss fine. I think that self-promotion is a violation. I have never come across a point or an argument made in favor of a god that isn't easily refuted. I have no need of a campaign for support.
I've yet to hear a convincing argument from a theist that has made me think otherwise.
The usual modes of debate are,
-Philosophy
-Logical Argument
-NDE
-OBE
-Infinite regress argument
With nothing to support the claims that makes one need to really think.
Just to add to your excellent list:
Hi, Lucy! Just a question, I can't find what OBE means... And I guess you weren't referring to the Order of the British Empire, were you? xD
@Angiebot: "I can't find what OBE means"
An OBE is either an oil bath and enema, which was a medical procedure traditionally used to prepare pregnant women for childbirth, or an out of body experience, a kind of hallucination that credulous people see as evidence of a soul or god.
Thanks, Algebe!
This violates the forum rules about No advertising or self-promoting.
No. DO you have a good argument for the existence of gods or a god
Nope
is there a religious argument. of course not