Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: reasonisfaith
I mean that in order to claim any part of the Bible is untrue, you must necessarily argue from a starting point of secularism.

This statement is certifiably untrue. The Bible describes events which supposedly happened in our world at specific times. They either happened, or they didn't. That's not a "secular point of view" unless by "secular" you mean "reality based." That is not a position you want to try to defend. And in fact, I'm not aware of any Apologist who ever has.

If the Hebrews claim to have wandered around in the desert for forty years but left no trace of their passing found by archaeologists, we have an obligation to regard their claim as untrue unless we can determine some reason why all trace of them would disappear from a particular period in history. That's not a matter of faith.

63 posted on 03/01/2015 12:09:38 AM PST by FredZarguna (Every time you type "LOL" the entire Internet knows you're a dumbass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]


To: FredZarguna

By secularism I mean operating on the premise that God doesn’t exist.

Think of it this way: the Bible is either logically coherent or not. But it is impossible to demonstrate logical incoherence by using extrinsic arguments.

In the case of the Bible, an extrinsic argument is one which operates on the premise that God doesn’t exist. It is circular reasoning and therefore invalid.


68 posted on 03/01/2015 9:11:07 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson