51 comments posted · 1 followers · following 0
the book of mormon does not.
If you said the bible teaches us to kill buddhists and you use a verse about killing false worshipers of idols like marduk, baal, molech etc during the time of the Israaelite theocracy, and I use verses to prove you wrong about loving enemies and preaching repentence and faith this is not circular reasoning. If the atheist says "You cant use the bible to defend this!" then he is committing the fallacy chad is talking about.
Of course another photograph missing trotsky would not be good evidence. This is not the point of what we are talking about. The bible is not a photograph and contains a lot of information written down.
What you are doing is making smoke screens. Now answer the question about Chad's article.
Can you give an example of Chad's article where reductio ad absurdem goes against what Chad calls a fallacy?
and not answering the question about using the Bible.
If someone attacks THE BIBLE by using a verse from the bible and I counter argue it by using another verse to prove them wrong is that legitimate argumentation? Why or why not? This is not saying that the verses teach opposite things, but that obviously the atheist randomly pulled a verse out of context to make a point thats not true with the bible.
If the bible does not at all contradict itself and someone uses something in the bible to attack it and I use the bible to defend his attacl then I am doing legitimate argumentation. The bible does not contradict itself or contain any errors so my argumentation is legit. You are wrong.
If someone attacks THE BIBLE by using a verse from the bible and I counter argue it by using another verse to prove them wrong that is legitimate argumentation on my part.
In the Bible Cain had a wife and had children. His wife was NOT Eve because Eve was with Adam and their geneology is listed as well.
Cain had to have a wife from someone else. So obvious it had to be a sister. This is logic man. Get a clue. You are the true mental walrus. I am done wasting time with you.
So you are saying if you claim Chad's idea that someone cannot argue a point about the bible using the bible and also reject a persons answer if he uses the bible to answer it; its circular reasoning? Can you give an example of why?
Cause it seems you are just saying random stuff and trying to sound smart.
Is Chad's content about an atheist using the Bible to attack someone who believes in the Bible, and when that bible believer uses the Bible back at the atheist to answer his objection, the atheist rejects his answer because he used the bible logical?
So who did Cain have sex with? can you tell me?