Burden of proof is always on the one making the positive claim. It's not the responsibility of anyone to prove Santa Clause or the tooth fairy exist. Mankind would spend their entire existence on wild goose chases.
The Bible is NOT Error-Free
by FusionTheism 174 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Fisherman
Oh, so you mean to tell me, that just because someone or something claims something is true, it doesn't mean it's necessarily true? Wow!
I did not say that.
This is what I said:
Just because you claim that you have not seen anyone else say it, does not mean that someone else has not, does it?
If I showed you where another poster stated that on another thread would it mean that you are stupid or simply that you did not see it? I will tell you honestly, another poster made the same claim in another thread. Besides that, neither Cofty nor Viv outright denied it. And when I told Cofty that I believed that he was telling me that he was not Viv, Viv posted to the contrary. Hence, the suspicion remains.
-
Fisherman
There is no reasoning with morons. Fisherman is one. He goes round and round no matter how sound the other argument is. It's like having a conversation with a child that keeps stating no it's not even when they know it is because they just can't handle being wrong.
How does that show that the Bible is not inspired?
-
Fisherman
Burden of proof is always on the one making the positive claim. It's not the responsibility of anyone to prove Santa Clause or the tooth fairy exist. Mankind would spend their entire existence on wild goose chases.
No it is not. Now that you looked up the definition you dolt, learn how it applies you dope.
Show me where I asserted that the Bible is inspired. Besides that, any evidence anyone presents in support of the Bible being inspired does not invalidate the Bible from being inspired.
-
_Morpheus
Thats because your a charlatan. Even if they were the same, and i conclusively proved they arnt, that has no bearing on the case they make. Its a diversion from your lack of cohert discourse.... But keep flailing away. Its amusing, in a train wreck/titanic type way. -
azor
Fisherman - Your funny!
-
cappytan
Fisherman: One cannot prove a negative. All that can be done is to report a lack of evidence for the positive.
Either the Bible's being divinely inspired has evidence in favor of it, or it lacks evidence.
If one's position is that it is NOT divinely inspired, they do not have to present evidence. The "evidence" of a negative is by definition a lack of evidence.
Most of us exJW's have read the Bible multiple times and looked for the evidence ourselves.
Your position, unless I am mistaken, is that the Bible is inspired of God.
If so, present the evidence in favor of that assertion.
For something as important and universally impactful as the Bible being the inspired word of God, would you not agree that the evidence must be clear and empirical?
-
Viviane
What does that have to do with the Bible being inspired?
I dunno. You brought the moral code of the Bible into it. If you'd no idea what you were talking about, I can't help you.
No he does not
Cofty routinely destroys your arguments. With ease.
No I have not. AND You have not shown what does that have to do with if the Bible is inspired, you are accountable to God?
Again, you brought up the pro-rape moral code, the one you endorse. How are you planning on linking the two? Are you going to say God is pro-rape? Rape inspires god? Rape inspires people to talk about god?
I just don't know where you are going to take this, but remember, YOU brought up being accountable for morality to God in this thread, YOU endorse the pro-rape moral code. It's not my job to link them together. It's yours.
What does your feelings about me have to do with if the Bible is inspired that you are accountable to the God of the Bible?
I have no feelings about you one way or the others.
-
Fisherman
Thats because your a charlatan.
What does your offending me have anything to do with whether Viv and Cofty are the same?
Even if they were the same, and i conclusively proved they arnt, that has no bearing on the case they make. Its a diversion from your lack of cohert discourse.
If you can read and think, and I doubt it, I never said they were the same, I only posted that I suspected. Cofty response did not outright clearly deny it, so I posted back to Cofty trying to clarify what he meant. Cofty did not post back. But Viv posted back. She did not deny it either but stated that it was possible.
that has no bearing on the case they make.
That is what you think. If you can read, I posted what I thought.
Its a diversion from your lack of cohert discourse.
It is not, and neither does you perception (or lack of it) about my coherency of my post have anything to do with the Bible not being inspired.
... But keep flailing away. Its amusing, in a train wreck/titanic type way.
This remark has nothing to do with my statement that IF the Bible is inspired, there is accountability to God and my "falling away " does not prove or disprove that Bible is inspired. You are drivel.
-
Fisherman
dunno. You brought the moral code of the Bible into it. If you'd no idea what you were talking about, I can't help you.
And what does that have to do with with my statement that if the Bible is inspired, you are accountable to God with your conduct?
Cofty routinely destroys your arguments. With ease.
No, he does not.
Again, you brought up the pro-rape moral code, the one you endorse. How are you planning on linking the two? Are you going to say God is pro-rape? Rape inspires god? Rape inspires people to talk about god?
I just don't know where you are going to take this, but remember, YOU brought up being accountable for morality to God in this thread, YOU endorse the pro-rape moral code. It's not my job to link them together. It's yours.
That is what you say. But again, How does this have anything to do with what I posted that if the Bible is inspired, you are accountable to God.?
have no feelings about you one way or the others.
Good for you But stop remarking about me then and stick to the subject.