License, registration.....and religious status?

[IndyDave1776]

I was referring to his attempt to reconcile the differences between modernist principles and post-modernist beliefs. If you can prove a tangible existence of God, then it’s no longer God, because the existence of God is dependent on faith.

A person of faith would argue that this is not so, in that God's existence is as it is regardless of whether or why anyone believes or doesn't believe.

 

[Destro]

A person of faith would argue that this is not so, in that God's existence is as it is regardless of whether or why anyone believes or doesn't believe.

But if God was here, on earth in human form, then faith and Christianity would be exclusive from each other. You could still be a Christian but your beliefs wouldnt be based on faith.

 

[Route 45]

Two people witness a car accident. One claims that the red car ran the red light. The other claims that the blue car ran the red light. Because the two claims are different, both witnesses must lying?

Does this really pass for logic in the academic world?

Passing along the things that I have seen and experienced makes me a witness. Witness testimony is valid evidence in any court of law. Is it always accurate? Of course not. But it is evidence. And it is not inherently unreasonable to consider that evidence when deciding what world-view you subscribe to.

Eyewitness testimony is absolutely the most unreliable evidence of all forms of evidence. In your car accident scenario, it is obvious that the truth cannot be determined through eyewitness testimony alone, since both accounts cannot be accurate. One must have physical evidence to determine what really happened with any degree of accuracy.

 

[steveh_131]

Eyewitness testimony is absolutely the most unreliable evidence of all forms of evidence. In your car accident scenario, it is obvious that the truth cannot be determined through eyewitness testimony alone, since both accounts cannot be accurate. One must have physical evidence to determine what really happened with any degree of accuracy.

You're missing the point.

The argument made previously is that the existence of conflicting eyewitness testimonies proves that both are false.

That is faulty logic.

 

[indiucky]

You cherry-picked a post.

This is the last time I will engage you in this thread. Honesty matters.

I apologize if you took it that way..I tried to keep it short...It's very tough to deny that the Holy Bible being translated into the common language in the late 16th century had a tremendous impact on the rise of liberty..There is a reason Kings and the Catholic Church tried to keep it out of the hands of the common man and the bloodshed that followed the reformation in Europe shows the effect it had....There is a reason that a slave caught with a copy of the Bible was punished...

You have questioned my honesty...There was no need for that...I may disagree with you but I have never questioned your honesty or integrity...Nor will I now..

Keep studying....I will until the day I die...I read more Atheists books than any other....Even Dawkins' admits he is Agnostic rather than an Atheist and when pressed on the seeding of life on earth he will venture into "Ancient Astronaut" territory...