why this blog
the point of this blog is to discuss my various issues with christianity, from the incoherent beliefs and impossible postulates to the meaningless obscurisms. my main frustration at this point is that, no matter how obviously inconsistent or contradictory some aspect of the christian faith is, the christian apologist can simply plead ignorance, make some reference to how god is bigger than we can understand, and rest his case. i think the first order of business should be to determine when such an argument can legitimately be used, and when it can't.
posted by Robert at
7:40 PM
1 Comments:
i guess i never saw it that way. if you believe that there are inconsistancies you don't have faith in the inviolate nature of God. this is possible because language is up to multiple interpretations and faith leads us to interpret the bible the way God intended it. the belief in Him being inviolate forces the intreptation that creates consistancy.
i realize that this is circular reasoning but faith/religion is not based on reason that is why they call it faith.
Phil Blaetz
By
Anonymous, at 10:58 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home