Debate: Billy Carson vs. Christian Wes Huff on Jesus, the Bible, and Christianity

I do return snark for snark. But I’m afraid you’d find “I have come to bring fire to earth and how I wish it were already kindled” a bit harsh on your lady parts.

And for that reason alone I’d probably stand a better chance of convincing you the tooth fairy was real.

 

I suspect you already know that anything you offer up as supposed evidence of the existence of a god wouldn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny, and therefore keep trying to change the subject and insult people… which is on par with similar discussions I’ve had. Nothing new here.

 

I suspect there is a great deal of ‘science’ that doesn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny. And in any case, how would you prove God scientifically ?

 

First off, I didn't say "proof", I said "evidence", a much lower standard. Secondly, I don't know, you tell me, you were one who got upset when I said there was no evidence to back either side of the OP, and they both are just offering unsupported opinions.

 

Unsupported according to whom ?*

*back to evidence being person-relative. According to the Bible, the people of Jesus’ time witnessed his miracles and still did not believe.

 

Anyone using logic, reason, critical thinking, and/or a scientific approach to evaluate ideas.

.... also, as I said before ... telling people what the Bible says isn't evidence that the Bible is true. That is circular logic. It's like saying Fargo is a true story because it says so at the beginning.

 

Similarly, if you swiped this boilerplate from an atheist website, you’re using circular logic.

But we could cut through the fog if you’d simply specify what would account for evidence that Bible-God is real.

Don’t worry! I won’t walk you through the Sinner’s Prayer!

 

Sad part is if you just accept it as metaphor, there really is no issue. It's this insistence that it is factual history that is impossible to buy into in the modern age. And then there are the billions who believe in other religious traditions, many of which aren't even remotely related to the Abrahamic ones. Oh, and while this ancient document is historical fact, it's contemporaries the Iliad and Odyssey are "clearly" fiction. Yeah, that adds up.

 

What does this gobbledygook even mean? It's like you're just randomly throwing words together.

 

I could have just said so’s your uncle again.

 

Again, you were one who took issue with me saying that neither party has evidence on their side ... why don't you explain why you disagree with that and tell me what you think the most convincing evidence is to support the existence of "Bible-God"? If you can't even do something as simple as that, why'd you respond to my post in the first place?

 

What events are you quite certain did not happen so as reduce the Bible to metaphor ? So what if billions are wrong where others are right ? And how did you come to the conclusion that viruses are real (and Bible-God not) without believing based on authority ?

 

Because
I wanted to point out that there is no evidence for the assertion that there is no evidence for God. You have to learn from other people what they regard as evidence without throwing out smokescreens like “logic” and “reason.”

Logic - it may not be true that there is an
Author of Time and Space can raise the dead, but it’s not illogical.

Reason - is everything and the kitchen sick. Again, people disagree.

 

I agree that you can't "prove a negative" ... no one can ever prove there is not a god. That's scientific and follows logic and reason. Don't take that as an agreement with the postion though. I also can't prove that Unicorns don't exist. But that's not what I said. I said there is no evidence to support their position, not that I could prove god doesn't exist. Again, if you disagree, post some evidence that you think is compelling... why are you so afraid to do that? I highlighted the part of your post that you are refusing to do for some reason ...

 

What’s the point when you’ve already ruled out using the Bible as a source based on circularity, logic and reason ?

 

Well sure, I mean, you can't use the book IT to prove that a demonic clown lives in the sewer and eats children simply by quoting the book, right? People might question that approach.

 

Maine is a real place, so it is factually based

 

People who’ve read the Bible from a helicopter might question to tactic of reducing Jesus to the clown in the sewer.

 

Jesus is more factual than Julius Caesar.

Pipe. Smoke.