Anyone who wants to be taken seriously in their claim that their god is real must be prepared to provide evidence to support their claim.
If I say that I believe in 'Russell's Teapot" - a teapot said to be orbiting the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot - the burden of proof lies with me. I must provide evidence for the existence of this (very unlikely) object. If I can't, you are entitled to suspect I am deluded in my belief.
he same applies to those who claim any god exists. The burden is proof is with you and not with the people who have doubts about your claim.
Citing any book, including the bible, without any further evidence is insufficient evidence.
The argument that
(a) god must exist because the bible says so and
(b) the bible must be accurate and true because it is god's word
is both weak and indefensible.
If I write a book that says that a colony of pink unicorns exists in the centre of Australia's Simpson Desert and I want people to believe me, I'd better have more proof than just my book and better evidence of my infallibility on the subject than merely claiming that I don't tell lies and I don't make mistakes.
The bible is demonstrably full of contradictions, scientific and historical errors. I'm not going to spoonfeed you by pointing you to websites that demonstrate this, EXCEPT for his one (because it's based on fact and it's fun): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk
Grumpy Alice
Images can be deceptive!
No comments:
Post a Comment
I'm not even-handed. And while I believe in 'balance' in viewpoints there are enough god-bothering sites out there for the turgid rants of the rabid. Your comment will be posted only if you mind your manners. And perhaps not even then.