Ray Comfort #fundie

Ray Comfort #fundie onthebox.us

“Christians can’t use ‘circular reasoning’ by trying to prove the Bible by quoting from the Bible!”

The “circular reasoning” argument is absurd. That’s like saying you can’t prove that the President lives in the White House by looking into the White House. It is looking into the White House that will provide the necessary proof. The fulfilled prophecies, the amazing consistency, and the many scientific statements of the Bible prove it to be the Word of God. They provide evidence that it is supernatural in origin.

46 comments

old comment by OHP

The White House also isn't a book recounting several thousand year old stories of magic that orders us to believe its every word without trying to prove its truthfulness or else face eternal torture. The White House is a building where some humans reside. Furthermore, the White House is not the one making the claim that the president lives there. The president is the one making that claim. In this situation we would be investigating the presidents claim by looking through the White House for proof of his claim that he lives there. We would also have a wealth of secondary proof. Specifically other people living in other homes just about anywhere we look on the planet. Billions of homes exist and almost all of them have people living in them. When's the last time you saw a demon clawing its way up out of the ground and preachers casting repel evil and flame pillar at it (and before you scoff, we actually do read about this D&D-level shit in the book)? When's the last time you saw the sun held suspended in the sky for several extra hours? When's the last time you saw a prophet parting a sea with but a wave of his hand or turning sticks into snakes? When's the last time you saw the entire earth drowned by a month of nonstop rain due to god opening a hole in the giant crystal sphere that keeps our world separated from the eternal oceans of water that lay beyo-- oh right. I forgot. That one got thrown out once enough people could see for themselves that it was wrong and it started wearing down your book's credibility. Like how you did with geocentrism (my spellcheck doesn't even recognize that one as a word). Can't have those indefensible errors in god's word leading people to doubt the inerrant word of god.

The more extraordinary your claims, the more solid your proof needs to be. You're making some very extraordinary claims and failing to provide even the feeblest evidence to back them.

old comment by CuriousAndMoreCurious

The bible is the claim, we are waiting for the proof outside the bible to prove it is true

To follow your analogy, "I am the president" is the claim. "I live at the whitehouse " is a bit of proof since the president lives at the Whitehouse. It is not good proof, because other people live there, and sometimes the president stays somewhere else.

The prophecies you claim are proof of the bible are only in the bible or are claims that are so vague they are self fullfilling. It is like claiming the Star Wars is true because there is a prophecy in the story that comes true in a later chapter of that story, or that Guardians of the Galaxy is real because at the end it claims they will return and there is going to be a sequel

old comment by

Anon-e-moose

"That’s like saying you can’t prove that the President lives in the White House by looking into the White House"

...and that's the worst imaginable example of an analogy. But here - going by your logic, Ray Cumfart - is an example of a good analogy:

I can prove that Queen Elizabeth II is living in Buckingham Palace by not looking in:

image

As opposed to when she's not in residence:

image

...as the Union Flag is always flown from the flagpole at Buckingham Palace to signify she's not there. And in this case, flown at half mast: to signify the death of not only your 'argument', but your entire way of thinking's justifications for it's continued right to exist. After all:

image

Guess who's buried at the central place of worship that Queen Elizabeth II: By the grace of God, Defender of the Faith, is head of? [/Romans 13:1-5]

Question: Isn't New Zealand a member of the Commonwealth; for which Queen Elizabeth II is head of also, o Ray Cumfart...?!

She - a devout Church of England Protestant Christian - who has approved for circulation banknotes, coins & stamps with Darwin's image on such, would readily acknowledge that the circle of argument stops here. Otherwise, why did she approve of such currency/postage stamp designs, to say nothing of the state religion she is the head of allowing Darwin to be buried in their central place of worship, Westminster Abbey?

Aye, there's the whole 'beliefs'-killing rub, indeed. Thus said Union Flag at half mast, Ray. >:D

old comment by Doubting Thomas

That’s like saying you can’t prove that the President lives in the White House by looking into the White House.

This man must be the president because he's at the White House:

image

If he weren't the president, he wouldn't be at the White House. That's how circular reasoning works.

The fulfilled prophecies, the amazing consistency, and the many scientific statements of the Bible prove it to be the Word of God. They provide evidence that it is supernatural in origin.

Only if you can prove those stories actually happened in the first place, which your lot always says, "Of course they did, the bible is the word of God!" Hence, circular reasoning.

old comment by John

That’s like saying you can’t prove that the President lives in the White House by looking into the White House.

No, circular reasoning is like saying the Bible is true because it says so in the Bible.

If God wrote the prophesies, then they should all be true. A single failure disproves the whole book. "No foot of man shall pass through it [Egypt], nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years" never happened. "No longer will the people of Israel have malicious neighbors who are painful briers and sharp thorns. Then they will know that I am the Sovereign LORD" - yeah, right, like that really happened.

Scientific statements don't prove the Bible. Velikovsky accurately predicted the temperature of Venus, but that didn't validate the rest of his nonsense about a comet flying out of Jupiter and causing the rain of manna when the earth passed through its tail.

old comment by dionysus

Your analogy sucks. By looking inside the White House you are only confirming the president is there. You aren't proving that the president is a supernatural being and built the White House. In the same way, by looking inside the Bible you are only confirming that the words are there. You aren't proving that they are the word of any supernatural entity or that the god described in them is real and built the universe.

The fulfilled prophecies, the amazing consistency, and the many scientific statements of the Bible prove it to be the Word of God

You mean the same way there's "proof" that the president is a Muslim Kenyan communist anti-Christ? Yeah, I've seen the supposed prophecies and scientific statements and found them lacking. And just like the "proof" of Obama being Muslim, I see people seeing what they want to see when they talk about prophecies and science in the Bible.

old comment by dionysus

The fulfilled prophecies, the amazing consistency, and the many scientific statements of the Bible prove it to be the Word of God. They provide evidence that it is supernatural in origin.

Let's say the Bible predicted every single major event until 2014 at least (with more to come) in detail and in such a way that it could not be mistaken for anything else but a perfect prediction. Let's say that quantum physics and string theory are both in the Bible. Let's say we read the Bible and discover how to create teleporters. That still isn't proof that it is the word of God or supernatural. You still haven't eliminated the possibilities of fate, ESP, aliens manipulating events on Earth, time travel, or even collective consciousness. All (with the possible exceptions of fate and ESP) would be natural, not supernatural. And yet you dismiss them out of hand and expect everyone to take your assumption as the only valid one. None of them are valid and only the time travel one is remotely plausible and it would explain why the god changes his mind and seems so much like a human with all the same insecurities and faults. But you can't even say that. The Bible's prophecies aren't perfect (Tyre), it's science isn't advanced (goat offspring being changed by rods), and the Bible is full of contradiction which is why there are 39,000 different interpretations of the Bible. It's not likely to be even a product of a supremely ignorant time traveler. The rules, knowledge, and guesses are those of iron Age Palestinians and is consistent with what they knew. Nothing more, nothing less.

old comment by Big Jilm

No, banana fucker, the FACT that there are serious errors right on the very first fucking page demonstrates it is not of divine origin. Your God doesn't understand how photosynthesis works, for starters ...and that's not even touching on the vile moral lessons of "punish all children for the sins of their parents" right in the firt few pages.

Never mind the fact that two people can come away from the Bible with completely different interpretations.

Any god with half a brain would know anything written can and will be corrupted.

The only thing amazingly consistent is the amount of insanity, double-speak non-answers, and porn levels of gore, torture, and genocide in that book you worship.

Try again.

Ray Comfort #fundie onthebox.us

46 comments

Confused?