Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sperry
I think Khail's point was that in a religious discussion, referencing the Bible as a way to prove a point isn't logically sound because both sides of the argument haven't agreed that it's fact.
You can't say "God exists because the Bible says so", followed by "the Bible is fact because it's the Word of God". The big problem w/ the Bible is that it's a single source of information. That's why ancillary evidence that corroborates the Bible is so important... things like the Dead Sea Scrolls and other historical documents from 2000 years ago that haven't been constantly rewritten and retranslated over the years.
Edit: this reply made more sense before NevadaSTi edited his post while I was replying.
|
Sorry Sperry,
I posted it and then read what I wrote. I wasn't impressed with the way it sounded. I have to admit, I am not the best writer. Sometimes my point can be a little too pointed. So, thats why I edited it. I don't know you all well enough to be preaching to the choir.
Oh yeah, a little background on me. My Father was a preacher as I was growing up, and Ill leave it at that.
One thing I will agree to, religion sure does bring up some intellegent and sometimes emotional conversations.